It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Patriots Should Prepare For War

page: 11
28
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 10 2018 @ 06:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: underwerks

I dont give a # what you people think anymore.

You people attack free speech, gun rights, and as seen with Justice Kavanaugh, more than willing to throw out due process.

You have no credibility with me.

Now with sitting democrats threatening gun owners with war for noncompliance you wanna try and turn this around on the people who have been on the defensive this whole time.

You're all a bunch of little Hitlers and your time is coming.


LiBeRaLs ArE CaLlInG FoR WaR!!!..

Everyone remind who the violent people are again?


Its Progressives.




posted on Dec, 10 2018 @ 06:33 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar




it was supposed to be military style semis.. 2nd amendment, right to bear ARMS (weapons), so tell me, why are you settling for semis when there's automatics in the world?? oh, because the gov't has already decided that you can't have them?? just like they decided you can't have a nuclear weapon or the deadly germs needed to make a biological weapon???


FYI you can own full automatic weapons if you pass the very lengthy, very thorough and very expensive licensing. It also is very very expensive to buy them.

Again proving you dont know what youre talking about

But by all means, please keep telling former enlisted men and women, many of which carry on a daily basis, exactly what and how the 2nd amendment works.

Especially when it seems you dont even know the definitions for specific types of weapons.

I swear this is like one of the Candy Stripers in our ER telling me how to properly triage.
edit on 10-12-2018 by Whatthedoctorordered because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2018 @ 06:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Whatthedoctorordered
yous are claiming that the congressman wanted a war, when all he was talking about was regulating the availability of semi automatic rifles... it was one of the gun advocates that brought up the topic of war, saying ya, you ban them and we will fight!!
sorry, but I kind of think laterally, what you are saying about the congressman, that he wants a war, I see as similar to saying what you quoted me as saying about charlottesville.
in both cases, it's kind like coercion, like a don't do that or you will be sorry bit!!
dont write a law we don't like or we will turn the US into a warzone, don't take our statue away, or your city will turn into a warzone, don't convice the crazy driver who ran into a bunch of people who what was it??? hold on a minute, have to look it up again....
ya...




violent retribution — “complete and total destruction” by “an army of fanatics” ready to die for their cause.

www.washingtonpost.com...



posted on Dec, 10 2018 @ 06:40 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar




yous are claiming that the congressman wanted a war, when all he was talking about was regulating the availability of semi automatic rifles..


You dont even know what those are , its clear.




it was one of the gun advocates that brought up the topic of war, saying ya, you ban them and we will fight!!


Hes not wrong.




sorry, but I kind of think laterally, what you are saying about the congressman, that he wants a war, I see as similar to saying what you quoted me as saying about charlottesville.


Sorry im not as efficient in mental gymnastics as you are so its impossible for me to come to that conclusion.




in both cases, it's kind like coercion, like a don't do that or you will be sorry bit!! dont write a law we don't like or we will turn the US into a warzone, don't take our statue away, or your city will turn into a warzone, don't convice the crazy driver who ran into a bunch of people who what was it??? hold on a minute, have to look it up again....


Thats why we dont take you seriously, because you literally think its the same thing.

Infringement of the 2nd amendment is no where near removing a statue.

Good god how do you guys function on a regular basis



posted on Dec, 10 2018 @ 06:41 PM
link   
a reply to: mamabeth

I'm mean.

I'll just shoot people regardless.

Civil war?

pfft.





posted on Dec, 10 2018 @ 06:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Whatthedoctorordered




pass the very lengthy, very thorough and very expensive licensing


oh look wouldn't this be regulating them???
you're right, I ain't that gun ho when it comes to guns.
I don't really think I need to be.
if the gov't has the power to enforce lengthy, thorough, and expensive licensing for one type of gun, if they can ban us from having other types of weapons, they most certainly have the power to enforce background checks, restrict the sales of some types of guns, or bare their use to certain groups of people, like the legally blind without running contrary to the constitution if it makes sense to do so.



posted on Dec, 10 2018 @ 06:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: underwerks

www.nbcnews.com...


WASHINGTON — A Democratic congressman has proposed outlawing “military-style semiautomatic assault weapons” and forcing existing owners to sell their weapons or face prosecution, a major departure from prior gun control proposals that typically exempt existing firearms.


what context do you speak of?



Good lord, he wasn’t talking about nuking Americans because they have guns. He was being sarcastic about people who think their assault rifles will protect them from the American military. And on that he’s right. It wouldn’t even be a fight.

To take that and try to make it seem like he and the Democrats by extension want to nuke gun owners is well, stupid. If you believe things like that then I have no doubt you could probably be fooled into supporting a war against other Americans.


So your assertion is that the US military couldn't fail against a small, well armed, well organized guerrilla force.

Hahahahaha! Guess we'll just ignore everything from Vietnam on hey?

The US military would not use nukes or any other weapon of the sort on Americans. If they didn't in Iraq, Afghanistan or Vietnam why would they on home soil?

The American people constituting a guerrilla force would be the most highly trained and well armed group the US military would have ever faced outside of WW2.

And unlike the fighters in foreign wars there are plenty of Americans that would be able to operate any piece of machinery they wanted. Unlike Mustafar in Iraq, Jim Bob in Arkansas could jump right into an Apache or an Abrams.

This isnt even taking into account the vast, vast support these guerillas would have inside the American military which foreign fighters do not enjoy.



posted on Dec, 10 2018 @ 06:45 PM
link   
True "Grass-Roots" Globalism is what the "elitities" fear.
They are curling up in a fetal position under their oak desks.
Pissing their diapers in nightmarish sleep.
The good guys always win.
I would be happy to pay a Soros type minimum wage plus tips to shine my shoes.
The inevitable coming "new order" may very well look a lot different than all of those who fear it fear.



posted on Dec, 10 2018 @ 06:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: RadioRobert
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

If a civil war does, heaven forbid, break out, I hope you'll don your red coat and come show all the amateurs how it's done.


It will be too busy praying at the local mosque.



posted on Dec, 10 2018 @ 06:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Whatthedoctorordered
a reply to: dawnstar




it was supposed to be military style semis.. 2nd amendment, right to bear ARMS (weapons), so tell me, why are you settling for semis when there's automatics in the world?? oh, because the gov't has already decided that you can't have them?? just like they decided you can't have a nuclear weapon or the deadly germs needed to make a biological weapon???


FYI you can own full automatic weapons if you pass the very lengthy, very thorough and very expensive licensing. It also is very very expensive to buy them.

Again proving you dont know what youre talking about



For all practical purpose you can own Nukes if you get elected President.

So again the discussion returns to regulating "who" is permitted to own what weapons as we can all agree there should be limits.



posted on Dec, 10 2018 @ 06:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Whatthedoctorordered

your 2nd amendment was infringed on when they placed extreme regulations on buying automatic rifles, it was infringed upon when they decided you couldn't build a biological weapon and slapped regulations on how those little germs could be kept and what kind of security was needed, ect. they can, and have infringed, more than likely in many cased with the full support of gun owners since well, who wants their neighbor setting up a missile launcher aimed at their house.
it's not a second amendment issue, it's an issue of weather or not a restriction or regulation is deemed warranted enough to infringe. and I'm sorry, but having crazies going on shooting sprees at the rate they are kind of adds quite a bit of weight on the side of being warranted. and you guys going on about your civil war like you do is only gonna serve to bring more crazies out of the woodwork. every freedom we have, every right, comes with responsibilities. i am sure that the side that is always preaching about being responsible can understand that, can't they? when enough people don't accept their responsibilities, well, the gov't steps in to keep the peace and protect the citizens and we all lose out.



posted on Dec, 10 2018 @ 07:07 PM
link   
I'll be content just waking up everyday and living my life how I see fit. I'm not going to spend everyday of my life worrying about what someone in the government said. I am my own person. IF said war does for some reason happen I won't be fighting for any side. I'll be doing my own thing like I've always done. I'll protect myself, and if I die - I die free.

A lot of all of you need to take a chill pill. Find something that makes you happy and do that instead of trying to instigate and fearmong. That or have faith in your military. Any single one of you who have actually served know that while there are some gungho mfrs out there with no families or care for the world there are way more military personnel who wouldn't attack their own people. Same goes for the police. If people actually went straight to the source of the problem instead of burning down their own cities I would have more respect for their causes. But all this bitching and infighting isn't doing a damn thing.

You're all cogs spinning against each other and being used by those in power. Yes, fight against each other and have those who rule you laugh about you with their family and friends before sleeping peacefully at night.



posted on Dec, 10 2018 @ 07:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Carcharadon

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: underwerks

www.nbcnews.com...


WASHINGTON — A Democratic congressman has proposed outlawing “military-style semiautomatic assault weapons” and forcing existing owners to sell their weapons or face prosecution, a major departure from prior gun control proposals that typically exempt existing firearms.


what context do you speak of?



Good lord, he wasn’t talking about nuking Americans because they have guns. He was being sarcastic about people who think their assault rifles will protect them from the American military. And on that he’s right. It wouldn’t even be a fight.

To take that and try to make it seem like he and the Democrats by extension want to nuke gun owners is well, stupid. If you believe things like that then I have no doubt you could probably be fooled into supporting a war against other Americans.


So your assertion is that the US military couldn't fail against a small, well armed, well organized guerrilla force.

Hahahahaha! Guess we'll just ignore everything from Vietnam on hey?

The US military would not use nukes or any other weapon of the sort on Americans. If they didn't in Iraq, Afghanistan or Vietnam why would they on home soil?

The American people constituting a guerrilla force would be the most highly trained and well armed group the US military would have ever faced outside of WW2.

And unlike the fighters in foreign wars there are plenty of Americans that would be able to operate any piece of machinery they wanted. Unlike Mustafar in Iraq, Jim Bob in Arkansas could jump right into an Apache or an Abrams.

This isnt even taking into account the vast, vast support these guerillas would have inside the American military which foreign fighters do not enjoy.



Wow. Here is some real fantasy Rambo crap here.

What I think you mean to say is...

The fattest, most out of shape, overly ego'd and completely untrained bunch of people that the military wouldn't even have to fire a single shot against. What a joke this particular excuse for the 2nd is. Vietnam was a long time ago. Things are different. Technology is different. Afghanistan is not under the overarching power and control of the US. The US controls it's utilities. It controls access to information. It controls its airspace. It controls it's transit, commerce and sustenance. At least be smart about it.

Cell phones cut. Internet cut. All utilities cut. Zero communication. Panic ensues. Gas from the air in the night. You. Have. Nothing.

They'd barely have to try.

Or hell, just cause a disturbance that forces this so-call guerilla force to run a 1/2 mile to escape and they'll be panting on the ground clutching their diabetic, heart disease ridden chests. Then just round them up.



posted on Dec, 10 2018 @ 07:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: okrian

originally posted by: Carcharadon

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: underwerks

www.nbcnews.com...


WASHINGTON — A Democratic congressman has proposed outlawing “military-style semiautomatic assault weapons” and forcing existing owners to sell their weapons or face prosecution, a major departure from prior gun control proposals that typically exempt existing firearms.


what context do you speak of?



Good lord, he wasn’t talking about nuking Americans because they have guns. He was being sarcastic about people who think their assault rifles will protect them from the American military. And on that he’s right. It wouldn’t even be a fight.

To take that and try to make it seem like he and the Democrats by extension want to nuke gun owners is well, stupid. If you believe things like that then I have no doubt you could probably be fooled into supporting a war against other Americans.


So your assertion is that the US military couldn't fail against a small, well armed, well organized guerrilla force.

Hahahahaha! Guess we'll just ignore everything from Vietnam on hey?

The US military would not use nukes or any other weapon of the sort on Americans. If they didn't in Iraq, Afghanistan or Vietnam why would they on home soil?

The American people constituting a guerrilla force would be the most highly trained and well armed group the US military would have ever faced outside of WW2.

And unlike the fighters in foreign wars there are plenty of Americans that would be able to operate any piece of machinery they wanted. Unlike Mustafar in Iraq, Jim Bob in Arkansas could jump right into an Apache or an Abrams.

This isnt even taking into account the vast, vast support these guerillas would have inside the American military which foreign fighters do not enjoy.



Wow. Here is some real fantasy Rambo crap here.

What I think you mean to say is...

The fattest, most out of shape, overly ego'd and completely untrained bunch of people that the military wouldn't even have to fire a single shot against. What a joke this particular excuse for the 2nd is. Vietnam was a long time ago. Things are different. Technology is different. Afghanistan is not under the overarching power and control of the US. The US controls it's utilities. It controls access to information. It controls its airspace. It controls it's transit, commerce and sustenance. At least be smart about it.

Cell phones cut. Internet cut. All utilities cut. Zero communication. Panic ensues. Gas from the air in the night. You. Have. Nothing.

They'd barely have to try.

Or hell, just cause a disturbance that forces this so-call guerilla force to run a 1/2 mile to escape and they'll be panting on the ground clutching their diabetic, heart disease ridden chests. Then just round them up.


Lol Wow its clear someone here hasnt ever spent any time in the Military.

lol Rambo, I love when armchair generals come onto threads that are full of actual combat vets, and try to tell us how things would go down


Here take this for your efforts



posted on Dec, 10 2018 @ 07:28 PM
link   
Man ATS has really got to get their page loading under control.
edit on 10-12-2018 by Whatthedoctorordered because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2018 @ 07:28 PM
link   
triple mods please fix
edit on 10-12-2018 by Whatthedoctorordered because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2018 @ 07:28 PM
link   
good god quadruple!!!!!! Sorry guys!
edit on 10-12-2018 by Whatthedoctorordered because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2018 @ 07:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: okrian


The fattest, most out of shape, overly ego'd and completely untrained bunch of people . . . . .



Please stop talking about me.


You're making 3 of my chins blush!





posted on Dec, 10 2018 @ 07:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Whatthedoctorordered

originally posted by: okrian

originally posted by: Carcharadon

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: underwerks

www.nbcnews.com...


WASHINGTON — A Democratic congressman has proposed outlawing “military-style semiautomatic assault weapons” and forcing existing owners to sell their weapons or face prosecution, a major departure from prior gun control proposals that typically exempt existing firearms.


what context do you speak of?



Good lord, he wasn’t talking about nuking Americans because they have guns. He was being sarcastic about people who think their assault rifles will protect them from the American military. And on that he’s right. It wouldn’t even be a fight.

To take that and try to make it seem like he and the Democrats by extension want to nuke gun owners is well, stupid. If you believe things like that then I have no doubt you could probably be fooled into supporting a war against other Americans.


So your assertion is that the US military couldn't fail against a small, well armed, well organized guerrilla force.

Hahahahaha! Guess we'll just ignore everything from Vietnam on hey?

The US military would not use nukes or any other weapon of the sort on Americans. If they didn't in Iraq, Afghanistan or Vietnam why would they on home soil?

The American people constituting a guerrilla force would be the most highly trained and well armed group the US military would have ever faced outside of WW2.

And unlike the fighters in foreign wars there are plenty of Americans that would be able to operate any piece of machinery they wanted. Unlike Mustafar in Iraq, Jim Bob in Arkansas could jump right into an Apache or an Abrams.

This isnt even taking into account the vast, vast support these guerillas would have inside the American military which foreign fighters do not enjoy.



Wow. Here is some real fantasy Rambo crap here.

What I think you mean to say is...

The fattest, most out of shape, overly ego'd and completely untrained bunch of people that the military wouldn't even have to fire a single shot against. What a joke this particular excuse for the 2nd is. Vietnam was a long time ago. Things are different. Technology is different. Afghanistan is not under the overarching power and control of the US. The US controls it's utilities. It controls access to information. It controls its airspace. It controls it's transit, commerce and sustenance. At least be smart about it.

Cell phones cut. Internet cut. All utilities cut. Zero communication. Panic ensues. Gas from the air in the night. You. Have. Nothing.

They'd barely have to try.

Or hell, just cause a disturbance that forces this so-call guerilla force to run a 1/2 mile to escape and they'll be panting on the ground clutching their diabetic, heart disease ridden chests. Then just round them up.


Lol Wow its clear someone here hasnt ever spent any time in the Military.

lol Rambo, I love when armchair generals come onto threads that are full of actual combat vets, and try to tell us how things would go down


:


That's the very reason I have no respect for cadet bonespurs and never will.

www.independent.co.uk... 71536.html
edit on 10-12-2018 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2018 @ 07:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: olaru12

originally posted by: Whatthedoctorordered

originally posted by: okrian

originally posted by: Carcharadon

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: underwerks

www.nbcnews.com...


WASHINGTON — A Democratic congressman has proposed outlawing “military-style semiautomatic assault weapons” and forcing existing owners to sell their weapons or face prosecution, a major departure from prior gun control proposals that typically exempt existing firearms.


what context do you speak of?



Good lord, he wasn’t talking about nuking Americans because they have guns. He was being sarcastic about people who think their assault rifles will protect them from the American military. And on that he’s right. It wouldn’t even be a fight.

To take that and try to make it seem like he and the Democrats by extension want to nuke gun owners is well, stupid. If you believe things like that then I have no doubt you could probably be fooled into supporting a war against other Americans.


So your assertion is that the US military couldn't fail against a small, well armed, well organized guerrilla force.

Hahahahaha! Guess we'll just ignore everything from Vietnam on hey?

The US military would not use nukes or any other weapon of the sort on Americans. If they didn't in Iraq, Afghanistan or Vietnam why would they on home soil?

The American people constituting a guerrilla force would be the most highly trained and well armed group the US military would have ever faced outside of WW2.

And unlike the fighters in foreign wars there are plenty of Americans that would be able to operate any piece of machinery they wanted. Unlike Mustafar in Iraq, Jim Bob in Arkansas could jump right into an Apache or an Abrams.

This isnt even taking into account the vast, vast support these guerillas would have inside the American military which foreign fighters do not enjoy.



Wow. Here is some real fantasy Rambo crap here.

What I think you mean to say is...

The fattest, most out of shape, overly ego'd and completely untrained bunch of people that the military wouldn't even have to fire a single shot against. What a joke this particular excuse for the 2nd is. Vietnam was a long time ago. Things are different. Technology is different. Afghanistan is not under the overarching power and control of the US. The US controls it's utilities. It controls access to information. It controls its airspace. It controls it's transit, commerce and sustenance. At least be smart about it.

Cell phones cut. Internet cut. All utilities cut. Zero communication. Panic ensues. Gas from the air in the night. You. Have. Nothing.

They'd barely have to try.

Or hell, just cause a disturbance that forces this so-call guerilla force to run a 1/2 mile to escape and they'll be panting on the ground clutching their diabetic, heart disease ridden chests. Then just round them up.


Lol Wow its clear someone here hasnt ever spent any time in the Military.

lol Rambo, I love when armchair generals come onto threads that are full of actual combat vets, and try to tell us how things would go down


:


That's the very reason I have no respect for cadet bonespurs and never will.

www.independent.co.uk... 71536.html


Cool but I wasnt talking about Trump, why does it always go back to him with some of you guys, we cant even have a conversation about the topic.







 
28
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join