It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Armed Revoultion Possible, Not So Difficult

page: 8
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in


posted on May, 12 2009 @ 10:48 PM
reply to post by FX44rice

Im reading these "Bubba Threads" and it raises a few questions.

What if a well meaning group of Bubba's is patrolling and they run into Another group of well meaning Bubba's who don't agree with them Patrolling near
their radius of influence ?

posted on May, 12 2009 @ 10:51 PM
reply to post by dwiggen

That's why one of our founders said we should have a revolution every 10 years or so- that way we never have time to corrupt the system.. I'll do a little research and find out which one said it

posted on May, 12 2009 @ 10:53 PM
reply to post by FX44rice

You are correct. Looters, and roving bands of thugs. We saw these in LA, in Liberty City, even in New Orleans.

And I didn't start nor name the thread.

About those National Guard troops. Have any idea how many will show up, or elect to protect their own families?

Each state doesn't have enough National Guard troops to bring order to their single largest city. And where does that leave everyone else?

The military? They are few.

They are organized to do other things, and a lot would likewise be wanting to be home taking care of things there.

That leaves . . . us! The average and not so average citizen.

With no food stamps, welfare checks, banking facilities open, no transfer of funds, no food, fuel, or supply deliveries, it could get real nasty, real quick.


I could be wrong.

posted on May, 12 2009 @ 10:55 PM
In any confrontation with the threat of force or harm, the prevailing entity will be the one that is organize and prepared. If that force is not met with an equal or higher force, the probabilities of failure are higher.

There is no threat posed to the confronter unless his opponent is organized and prepared.

The crux of the dilemna for We the People. Until power is exhibited through organization and preparedness for resistance, there is no threat to the confronter.

What is needed is hundreds of thousands if not millions to march in protest on Washington DC. IMO our anger must be felt not through violence but through unity and commitment. However, the predicament is how to ensure change, acountability, transparency, etc. when they hold the reins? How do we get "inside" yet still maintain order within our country?

There must be a change of guard in our politico establishment for any real change to be lasting. There are certain facts that we must realized in order for change to occur. These facts have to be discussed openly in public to garner support. And you know where that'll lead with new laws like the Homegrown Terrorist Act and the Patriot Act.

Its a tough battle ahead, but I agree there are ways if we act sooner rather than later. The every man for himself approach will hardly succeed against an organized force of power.

posted on May, 12 2009 @ 10:57 PM
reply to post by joeofthemountain

If you believe that I am against the idea of an armed revolution because of my own well being, you're wrong. I view my own life as being of little importance. I am not afraid of being hurt or killed, I am afraid of the repercussions that a revolution with a mass of untrained, ideologically unsound followers, running strictly on angst and paranoia. I dislike that all these people that want to make outrageous claims about the supposed intentions of the government wielding guns. Who knows what life could find itself in their crossfire. A lot of people die in those situations, undeservingly, and it seems so often the idols walk away unscathed or protected. No life should be taken on account of my own. If you think about the people you're dragging into this thing and decide that you would still like to get your hero on, be my guest, but you'll aquire a new enemy in those of us who don't support your misguided claims and the reckless actions that would follow.

posted on May, 12 2009 @ 11:07 PM
reply to post by dooper

Allright, we are in somewhat agreement that you are speaking of an uprising of civil unrest due to citizens being pushed to the brink most likely due to financial, and economic reasons.

Probably not just because thay can't stand Barney Frank, Pelosi, etc. or the legislation and policies the Govt is executing. Although we probably all would like to cast them out whatever means necessary.

But when stripped financially and no where left to turn, people will get desperate and violent.

I still disagree with this Thread OP that an Organized and Armed Revolution with intent to overthrow the Govt is at all likely.

If it is even attempted by some Militia Groups they would be snuffed out abruptly, and be outcasted as Terrorists to the rest of the population, curtailing any future efforts by other Militias.

posted on May, 12 2009 @ 11:09 PM
i agree with dooper,allclear,and ufotech on many vital points.i must also say my piece on this subject.i have had countless discussions over the past 10 years about this very subject,and the point that my friends and i always come to is: the real problem is not the individuals who are elected and then have (almost) free reign from that point on.the real problem is the lack of a true consensus in this country.what i mean is real,active,informed discussion in a public,non-internet forum on what the american citizens need and are not currently getting: food, shelter,and a living wage; just to start with.i am an avowed anarchist of the old tradition: anarchy being a lack of centralized government in favor of mutual support.if we all work together on the things that we can agree on:that we all need food,shelter,and an opportunity to work and earn our keep without unnecessary regulations and things like the patriot act.a real revolution depends upon self subsistence and mutual cooperation on the aforementioned basics for survival.we can redefine democracy when everyone is fed,clothed and housed properly.

posted on May, 12 2009 @ 11:17 PM
reply to post by sigil23

There are indeed substantial personal changes that need to be made at an individual level. However the Government wants everyone dependent on it so that it can continue to grow and gain more power.

This is a huge conflict of interest and these two things, that is freedom via self reliance vs. loss of freedom in return for the Government taking care of you can not coexist. Eventually this nation will have to choose which path to follow.

[edit on 12-5-2009 by Anonymous Avatar]

posted on May, 12 2009 @ 11:24 PM
I will just say this to everyone .....

Americans will not stand up for themselves until .... every resemblance of FREEDOM is gone .... Until they have given up all of their FREEDOMS for a FALSE SENSE of SECURITY .... Until they lose BOTH .... and .... then and only then will they take up arms and stand up for their RIGHTS and FIGHT to get their FREEDOMS back.

What most people DO NOT understand, is that it will take BLOOD SHED to bring this about. SACRIFICES must be made to bring about CHANGE. It won't happen until everyone understands and agrees that SACRIFICES must be made. They will have to act in UNISON, in ONE VOICE at the same time in order to bring it about.

It is going to require people taking every single life of those who serve the public trust in order to bring about that change. If you leave any of their ilk behind or alive, they will rise again another day and do the same thing to everyone again. This is the lesson learned from Scripture about the Hebrew people. When the Almighty sent them to kill their enemies, He told them to kill everyone, burn everything, pilfer nothing and all would be well. But NO, they pilfered from their enemies and thus have been having to deal with them to this very day.

You'll notice I said "KILL" and not "MURDER". There are differences between the two and so there is in Scripture as well. The 10 Commandments DO say "Thou Shalt Not Murder" in its original form, not "Thou Shalt Not Kill" as it was rewritten to say.

[edit on 5/12/2009 by Evisscerator]

posted on May, 12 2009 @ 11:25 PM
reply to post by FX44rice

In the event of declared martial law over some incident, all my assumptions are invalid.

That is REALLY going to piss some people off.

And just a few hotheads can kick the whole thing off.

posted on May, 12 2009 @ 11:30 PM
reply to post by dooper

Yeppers, you're right ! LoL

posted on May, 12 2009 @ 11:31 PM
reply to post by Anonymous Avatar

i very much agree with you.i direct everyone currently on this forum to this wiki link: .
it is about a book by Erich Fromm that discusses the meanings of "freedom from" oppression,and the "freedom to" use that freedom in constructive ways.many people are not informed about how to use their freedom constructively,so we get the knee-jerk gun-cockers itching for a civil war.i am not entirely unwilling to fight oppression, but first i would want to make sure that i had exhausted all other options,i.e. protests like the ones in germany and greece but on a much larger scale,blockade of government buildings,or outright peaceful overthrow of our government by our own civilian congresses.but,regardless of what plans can be made by informed individuals,much of the public does not even really know what they would want from a real democratic republican government.a long time ago these two parties were one party.that can happen again if we come to a true consensus of what democracy means to us and what we truly need "government".

posted on May, 12 2009 @ 11:41 PM
reply to post by Evisscerator

i disagree with you on the point that there must be bloodshed to bring about my experience, and in my extensive studies of sociology and world history,violence inspires more violence.even if we killed all of the corrupt politicians,the corporations that raise money to elect those corrupt types would still be in the background,plotting more fascism.until greed and power hunger are shown to be self-destructive and ridiculous,there will always be more to follow in the footsteps of those currently in power.fighting for an ideology just invites the holders of the opposite ideology to take up arms in return.

[edit on 12/5/09 by sigil23]

posted on May, 12 2009 @ 11:52 PM

Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
reply to post by xxpigxx

God, we're so thoroughly screwed if you have people agreeing with this man. I doubt any of you have thought about the logisitics behind an armed revolution in America. Take your beerhats off for a few hours and run it through your head a few times and see if you think it's even slightly feasible in the process of making your life better.

Even if you think this idea of armed resistance isn't feasible because of the logistics involved, you are underestimating the power of a well armed mob.
Next point being, you are underestimating the pent up anger of the average American citizen in the USA.
Next point, you are underestimating the agreement with the idea of resistance ,by millions of Americans. Said in another way, that many people think--" I don't fully agree with what they're doing, but I understand why".
Next point: if you think the local guards are going to shoot their own local citizens, you are dillusional.
None of this resistance talk would ever get out of the beer joints if the government was doing what they were put there for.
Last point: if you think this resistance talk can't possibily lead to reality, you are drinking the same kool-aid as the Obama administration, and the Democratic contriolled Senate. Also, read up on your history, not the sanitized version you get in public school, but do your homework, and find out why our forefathers were willing to fight for what they thought was right.
A lot of this talk about armed resistance might be coming from some drunk good -ole boys--yes they might be drunk, but they haven't lost their memory.

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 12:04 AM
Hello all, I have been reading the ATS forum for a long time. I have never said a word and have been paying attention for years. Some of the suggestions I've recently been reading here are very serious. Please stop for a moment and think about what you are saying folks. There is no anonymity here. Please understand what treason is and understand that some of you could be put into jail right now. Freedom of speech does not extend to threatening to kill public officials.

I understand that many are upset or worried about things that are happening right now. What you must understand is that you have a political process that can be used to hire and fire leadership. Do not be foolish and think you will be able to use violence against an elected official. You will be guilty of treason. Think about your kids and family. If you are so passionate, get out there are make a difference by educating people on the issues you feel are important so that you can influence the next elections.

Heed this warning and take it very serious. Use the process your founding fathers worked so hard for you to have. Understand that when it is gone it is gone for ever. Stop these childish threats of violence before you find yourself in a cell with a real criminal, not someone who just has a big mouth.

In law, treason is the crime that covers some of the more serious acts of disloyalty to one's sovereign or nation. Historically, treason also covered the murder of specific social superiors, such as the murder of a husband by his wife (treason against the king was known as high treason and treason against a lesser superior was petit treason). A person who commits treason is known in law as a traitor.

Godspeed and good luck to the atheist here

[edit on 13-5-2009 by LoyalKnight]

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 12:06 AM
reply to post by LoyalKnight


the new member makes the most sense

welcome m8

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 12:19 AM
i agree with LoyalKnight.these threats of violence do go a little too far.assassination is not democracy,no matter how someone chooses to justify it.who can say that the ones discussing these actions stand on higher moral ground than the ones they would kill? they could just be closet fascists themselves...nothing personal or anything,but i can only go by what i have been reading on this thread.

regardless,though,i would take up arms in a new york minute if people started to be hauled off to the supposed fema concentration camps for being "dissenters".i will not stand by and watch a repeat of the japanese detainment camps of WWII.

[edit on 13/5/09 by sigil23]

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 12:24 AM
reply to post by LoyalKnight

First of all... no one here is saying go kill politicians or making a threat too. This is a "what if" discussion as in what would happen and what would be possible if an armed revolution takes place which I think is quite a valid thought excersize.

I myself have never even thought such a thing possible until very recently.

Secondly as to your discussion of treason, most in the Federal Government are quite guilty of Treason many times over and none of them are getting locked up.

When Government spies on American Citizens: Treason.
When the White House ousts an undercover CIA agent for political revenge: Treason.
When the Government allows our National Sovereignty to be subverted by global coorpate interests: Treason.
When the Government allows our National Security to be put in the hands of a communist nation like China via creating an economic reliance on them via out of control spending: Treason (What no one ever thought of the National Security situation if China cancelled our credit card and we can no longer afford to secure ourselves?)

The list goes on and on and on and on...

If you want to find someone guilty of treason you don't have to look on ATS who are expressing their anger toward the Government at the complete and utter disregard for the citizens they are supposed to work for. They continue to # on the constitution at an ever increasing rate and I am supposed to be worried about expressing myself?

As far as I am concerned they have yet to repeal the First Amendment and an intellectual debate on what a modern day revolution would look like hardly constitutes treason.

Keep your fear mongering to yourself.

[edit on 13-5-2009 by Anonymous Avatar]

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 12:25 AM
reply to post by sigil23

Where has anyone at all advocated assasination in this thread???

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 12:39 AM
reply to post by Anonymous Avatar

i apologize for making an arse out of myself in your eyes.i will not state any names,but this quote seemed to vaguely imply such a thing:"It is going to require people taking every single life of those who serve the public trust in order to bring about that change. If you leave any of their ilk behind or alive, they will rise again another day and do the same thing to everyone again."

i must say,though,that i take no sides in this;and do not desire to start a flame-fest.i am just as willing to fight for freedom as the rest of you.i am reading the thread:"The Push to Revolution" right now;in which you and SGTChas make some very good points.i am not one to rule out swift and decisive action if the feds try to take our farms and right to bear arms,among other things.i damn sure will not give up my family farm without a ancestors' blood,sweat and tears have fallen on that plot of land for many generations.

[edit on 13/5/09 by sigil23]

top topics

<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in