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.

 

American Revolution

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 6 2006 @ 04:53 PM
link   
Given the current political status in America at the moment coupled with a deep mistrust of the Goverment by many Americans is there a possiblity of a second revolution. Are the American people up for it or are they seen as materialistic individuals who would sell their souls for a new SUV.

How bad would the situation have to be before people started to form outright and perhaps violent opposition to the Bush Goverment. Would it have to be say the internment of American citizens (meaning all, irrespective of colour, race etc.) or curfews, seizing of assets etc. What would a second revolution mean for America and its people, is such an event long overdue.

Has the country, since the assasination of Kenedy in 63 become more of a dictatorship that see's enemies all around even its own people and has its actions abroad made it and the people more of a target. Or would a second revolution not happen at all due to apathy and indifference, the as long as it does not affect me attitude I'm not bothered.

What would the founding Fathers think of America and the Goverment today?




posted on Oct, 6 2006 @ 05:51 PM
link   
Hey, I'm glad to see this. There's another thread along these lines you may be interested in:

America's Future

Without knowing how it starts, we would be hard pressed to know if any future revolt would succeed. If the insurgency could get off to a quick start, the rebels...whoever they are...might have a chance/ Lots of questions to poinder.



posted on Oct, 6 2006 @ 10:03 PM
link   
Posted by Magicmushroom:



Given the current political status in America at the moment coupled with a deep mistrust of the Goverment by many Americans is there a possiblity of a second revolution. Are the American people up for it or are they seen as materialistic individuals who would sell their souls for a new SUV.


Yes, there is a strong possibility, not that it could occur, but that its is already occuring.

There is a great deal going on that never makes the News, including non-violent (as yet), but disruptive, protests against other and lesser known aspects of the NWO and Pax-America. You will never see these on the News unless and until they become more violent. I think that is only a matter of time. I believe that a goodly number of Americans are beginning to see the Handwriting on the Wall--the ever more obvious Truth that the major danger we face in Terrorism isn't Al Qaeda at all, but the actions of our own Government, and especially the Administration, and their bid to continually use the War on Terror as an excuse to pass Legislation against American Liberty. There are, at this stage, many Americans using the acronym "OMDB" to describe their feelings about the ever greater invasions of Government into their private lives.

Will this develop into armed conflict in the future? That remains to be seen, and I think the telling circumstances will occur next month, and in 2008. Whetever, I can guarantee you that the leanings, and the tension, is mounting.

Thanks, Magic-- it's a darned good thread.


[edit on 6-10-2006 by Ed Littlefox]



posted on Oct, 6 2006 @ 10:25 PM
link   
Technically it would be a second civil war, not a revolution, well
unless the country was going to sperate into seperate nations.



I dont think it's possible for a wide spread revolution or civil war
with the current way people think, it's unfortunate, but most people
are just to ignorant about things, and generally don't care, well
and a majoirty are to fat to fight as well.


But the idea of a war of sorts is plausable, just not for another
generation or two.



posted on Oct, 7 2006 @ 12:00 AM
link   
Sadly, I fear it has already started.

It is clear that there is a tremendous power struggle in the works.

At this point I can not completely rule out a forceable coup if these elections
are compromised into doubt.

If Bush were to declare Martial Law in reponse to civil unrest, things could get very ugly.



posted on Oct, 7 2006 @ 01:59 AM
link   
Here's one possible way that the crisis could start:

Resource

I'm not convincedthe Bush will pull the trigger on this thing. The next President will be in a better position to do so.



posted on Oct, 7 2006 @ 02:15 AM
link   
I can not help but think that Mexico and all of the illeagles are going to play a very big part in this. I just can not understand when everyone postures and says we are America no country can invade us, but the truth is that 15 million or so already have. What if only 10 percent of those were here to take parts of this country back for Mexico? 1.5 million insurgents would be a war. They would already have a infastructure and millions of people who would hide and help them,some just because they do not know any better.
When will it start is to me the only question, or has it already and the media is not reporting the first phase?



posted on Oct, 7 2006 @ 04:23 AM
link   
Most interesting is how the Militia/Rebel movement would be born, what its objectives would be to succeed, and if they succeed, what they plan and intend to do afterwards. Ok, so you've gained support moving through cities, build nerve centers from which you lead your attacks, gained the means to combat your government. But where do you go? How can you defeat a enemy like the US Guardtroops?

Needless to say, any revolution without co-ordination will sometime stop in its tracks. Its meant to be overwhelming.

But i agree with the point that its unfortunately true that the average american seems to lack the lust to fight for what he/she believes in. If it isnt true, enlighten me otherwise.



posted on Oct, 7 2006 @ 05:08 PM
link   
War with Mexico could also mean the start of a civil war here in the United States. It's likely that the Mexican government would back any grass-roots insurgency that started on their side of the border. Imagine dozens of militanat grounds coming to the United States for the expressed purpose of kicking off an insurgency.

The scope and scale of any pro-Mexican guerilla effort would certanly tax the U.S. government's ability to respond. Such a predicament might also tempt many career politicians in D.C. to reach for more power. Then again, we might actually see a war declaration if the President asked for it.

With low-level combat taking place in just about every corner of the country, we might see a circumstance in which a Federal crackdown just isn't enough. Would we see the rise of more pro-U.S. militias? Would be we perhaps see some vigilante activities? Deportations would certainly be out of the question. Could we cope with the needs of mass internment?



posted on Oct, 7 2006 @ 06:10 PM
link   
With regards to interment should it kick off in the US just how real are these stories of camps all over the USA. If they are real then the authorities have a good idea of what may happen and are trying to pre-empt such action by building the camps, is this the reason for Patriot 1/2 and trials by military courts.

As an outsider looking in its seems to me that on the one hand you have the above laws introduced to allegedly combat terrorist activities but for the last 5 years there has been none on American soil, such laws do not seem logical for a perceived terrorist threat. But if the reason is for any potential civilian unrest then the legislation makes more sense especially when you cannot legislate to stop terrorist actions, terrorists dont play by the rules.


df1

posted on Oct, 7 2006 @ 08:02 PM
link   

ATS 2004
Originally posted by Khonsu
For every enemy and every battle there are many ways to secure victory but only one correct one. The most direct and overt often is not the wisest decision, one should move and act unseen and with motives unknown until there is no other choice but direct, open and immediate action, at that time one should strike swiftly without hesitation and with a strength second only to God, this is the way of victory.


My views on this subject correspond to those so eloquently stated above by Khonsu. And Im confident that Im not the only one that shares these sentiments. When the time is right the seemingly docile american citizens will decisively seize victory in this manner.



posted on Oct, 7 2006 @ 08:21 PM
link   
The funny thing is that we now have so many insurgents in our country now that openly state their mission and nobody is paying attention.
www.immigrationwatchdog.com...
www.alpinesurvival.com...



posted on Oct, 7 2006 @ 10:57 PM
link   
For the sake of discussion, I will argue that the insurgency may be slow toget started. If and when the time comes, mamy Americans will hesitate. Tney'll do so for a variety of reasons. Most will pause to see whateveryone else is doing. Others will stumble out of ear. Others will wait to see what the army does. That period of slow start may give the people in government some false hope. they may read the tea leaves wrong, in which case any increase in rebel activity would take them by surprise.

It's true that not all resistence would come from the barrel of a gun. I've met many peole who would be content to pony up goodes, services, or even cash.
For any number ofreasons, they don't have the desire to actually carry a gun. It would take all kinds of things from all kinds of people to actually ignite a revoltuion.



posted on Oct, 8 2006 @ 06:38 AM
link   
If such a scenario did happen, would the American people want/need/welcome foreign help against such a Government? Not help as in from Governments, but much like in the Spanish civil war where people volunteered to fight the facists?

I know you Yanks are an independant lot, but there are many people around the world that like Americans, but hate your Government. Some of you here percieve this as "Anti-Americanism", but in reality, we do care about Americans, just not the "Administration"....



posted on Oct, 8 2006 @ 07:16 AM
link   
The illegal immagrant situation is bad, because it creates a war, within a class war. Those on top, trying to keep everyone out. Instead of spreading the ideals of not just the Founding Fathers and The Union Workmen of yesturday. They make deals, bargins, etc. Then if something goes wrong in those countries, they encourage they blame the cultures clashing, instead of the ecomonic caste systems that are now taking a stronger hold throughout the world.

If a war or Revoultion does eventually happen. It will be my generation most likely causing it and fighting it. Sick and tired of the Bushes, the Foleys, the Paris Hiltons of the world. Sick of the celebrities losing so much touch with this part of reality, the can now harass their fans by the net if they don't comply. Which is very lonely, but depressing. The biggest problem with the US these days, is simply, the rich of Hollywood, Washington DC, and the capitial of NY's rich have to some extent lost touch with their roots, with working, and have promote this idea of slothness and lasiness inadvertly to the lower classes of US society.

When society loses touch with the bottoms, and people become economicly poorer, more isoliated, and the lower classes pay more for everything more and more, more, and more often like the US has, and the elite and rich do as they will, it can cause things. I think if there is a revolution, it will echo the French Revolution and the Mexican-American War more than anything for a number of reasons.



posted on Oct, 9 2006 @ 05:56 AM
link   
Here's one for you. How does the successful bomb test in North Korea change your thinking about the future of any revolution in the United States?


df1

posted on Oct, 9 2006 @ 12:08 PM
link   
Certain words in our language, such as conspiracy, have been manipulated to give them an emotionally charged negative conotation in people's minds that is inconsistent with their dictionary definition. Insurgency and rebel fall into this category of words. They generate images of suicide bombers, fighting in the streets and other things that strike fear in the heart of the common man. The powers that be know that nobody wants to see these types of things in their neighborhood, so they use these damaged words to create fear. This strategy has proven to be quite effective at stifling most discussion about reforming govenment. However silencing public criticism of government does not change what is in the hearts and minds of the public.

Imho the insurrection has already started.


Originally posted by Justin Oldham
Here's one for you. How does the successful bomb test in North Korea change your thinking about the future of any revolution in the United States?

The only thing involving a foreign government that would stir the american people to revolt would be the use of foreign troops on US soil. It would not matter whether these troops were sanctioned by the US government or not, all hell would break loose. Imho the government will read "the tea leaves" wrong after elements of the military refuse to obey orders and will then attempt to use either UN or Nato troops on american civilians. Even the most mild and meek american will take up arms when this occurs.

Off with their heads...
.



posted on Oct, 9 2006 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
Here's one for you. How does the successful bomb test in North Korea change your thinking about the future of any revolution in the United States?


This test, with the media spin, may scare the people, so they would vote Bush to this mid-term election because the government would be able to protect them from the big ugly monster in the closet.

The consequences of another Bush win in the mid-term elections for the free speech and civil liberties are big. We'll see the effect in the coming months after the elections, and the way the Bush administration will continue to abuse their power and even expand it further.

The relation between this event and the revolution will only be existant if the Bush administration keep their power in the house, expand it and abuse it.



posted on Oct, 9 2006 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by magicmushroom
Given the current political status in America at the moment coupled with a deep mistrust of the Goverment by many Americans is there a possiblity of a second revolution.

Abusrd. There is no reason for a revolution and people aren't likely to give up their lives for some revolution these days.


How bad would the situation have to be before people started to form outright and perhaps violent opposition to the Bush Goverment.

Anyone raising arms against the government is a traitor and should be locked up and executed for treason.


Would it have to be say the internment of American citizens (meaning all, irrespective of colour, race etc.) or curfews, seizing of assets etc.

What are you going to do when bush's term expires and there is an election and a new president and none of this stuff comes to fruitition???


Or would a second revolution not happen at all due to apathy and indifference, the as long as it does not affect me attitude I'm not bothered.

A second revolution wouldn't happen today because the suggestion is absurd. THere is no need for a violent revolution against the state.


What would the founding Fathers think of America and the Goverment today?

They'd be upset that their slaves are free? Hell, the founders passed the Alien and Sedition Act, which was far far worse than anything the Bush administration has done.

As an outsider looking in its seems to me that on the one hand you have the above laws introduced to allegedly combat terrorist activities but for the last 5 years there has been none on American soil, such laws do not seem logical for a perceived terrorist threat.

?
We have laws the are intended to prevent terror attacks, there haven't been attacks since we put them in place, and you think that that means there's no reason to have those laws???

But if the reason is for any potential civilian unrest then the legislation makes more sense especially when you cannot legislate to stop terrorist actions, terrorists dont play by the rules.

These laws permit the governement to monitor possible terrorist organizations and make arrests. It doesn't combat terrorism by fiat. I don't know where you get that impression.

I know you Yanks are an independant lot

Considering that we had help from the french and germans for the first revolution, I can't see how anyone can argue agianst it a second time around.

but much like in the Spanish civil war where people volunteered to fight the facists?

A Lincoln Brigade for the land of Lincoln eh?


Honestly though, the idea is abusrd. When the US fought its first revolution, it wasn't against a particular administration, it wasn't against the rule of one particular prime minister or party in parliament, it was against the entire idea of being a colony. What are we supposed to fight against now? Bush? Why? He's a two term president, out in a short while. What is anyone going to start killing people over? The original founders wouldn't have fought the revolution if there had been a way to redress their problems in parliament. If there was a vote in the colonies, there'd've voted in the policies they wanted. If there aren't enough people to make a voting block for change now, then there's definitly not enough people to fight a phsyical revolt against the government. And even people that are completely opposed to bush and all his policies, some of them are going to be shooting at the so called revolutionaries, in defense of the country, rather than with them.



Also, lets consider, the militias that are out there are generally favourable to bush, they're far right republicans. Do you really want to create a situation where those guys are installing a new government????



posted on Oct, 9 2006 @ 01:08 PM
link   
Nygdan Goverments should fear the people and not the other way round, why is it absurd that such a scenario could not happen, because you say so. Are you one of the privileged few of America, there is a growing chasm between the haves and have nots in America, I once heard years ago (cannot remember the source) of wealthier US states becoming independant from the poorer ones.

And are you really that naieve to believe that anti terrorist legislation works and the Bush goverment have been preventing such acts. We tried it for 30 years and got nowhere. If anyone wanted to carryout any attacks in America or anywhere else no amount of legislation is going to prevent it. You do not have to invent new laws when existing ones will do the job.

Bush and co have got you all chicken scared of one event, an event of which the perpatrators are still unknown and there is a gathering clamour that the Goverment had something to do with it. So 1 attack, Patriot 1 and 2 impending marshall law and 2 invasions later all this for one event. I would not have fought that a counrty and its people of such power and standing in the world could have so easily cowed by such an event.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join