The U.S. Military vs. the Militias: Who Would Really Win?

reply to post by starwarsisreal


Who would win in a fight that was, essentially, the people vs the US military depends how you fought the war, and whom and how many you could get to defect from the side of the US military.

In outright man to man combat, the people would lose, fast. In a long sustained guerrilla type war, with substantial focus on winning over the hearts and minds of our own people being used to oppress us, the people stand a chance.

IF, that is, our government was not using chemical or biological weapons against us.

If they were willing to go biological, its already game over for the people.

We have many Territories who would rather come in and shoot Americans....than lose their free welfare.

Obama also could call on the Thai Military, South Korea, Japan....they'd all LOVE to come in and get to shoot and kill Americans.

We could never end the 4th Reich. The ONLY way the 4th Reich will be ended is if Russia and China and the rest of the world start lobbing nuclear weapons.

Militia's couldn't do squat on US soil.......then again the Mexican Drug Cartels with a foreign countries support could seize control of the US.....they have Mexican Military Ordinance, machine guns, C-4, rocket propelled grenades, surface to air missiles, helicopters, jets, tanks....we don't have that.

Originally posted by seabhac-rua
Please explain how 'Afghanistan, Vietnam and Iraq are limited wars', especially how the Vietnamese conflict was? Do you mean because they didn't use nukes or something, the US fought for 10 years in south-east Asia and lost 35,000 people, how is that a limited war? Are the US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan not using every available resource(bar nukes) at their disposal? I'm not a military expert so maybe you can elaborate on what a 'limited war' actually is.

edit on 2-7-2011 by seabhac-rua because: (no reason given)

Limited warfare is warfare in which the objective is less than the total destruction of the enemy and a breaking of the will to fight in enemy populations and government.

Afghanistan/Iraq are limited wars as infrastructure is not being actively attacked, cities are not strategically bombed, mosques are inviolate against either searches or direct actions on, women are inviolate against search by combat troops, insurgents/fighters are not pursued across borders into Pakistan (largely) Syria or Iran, the sources of enemy supply are not being disrupted for political reasons... I can go on and on for days with examples. US forces are not, in any way shape or form, utilizing every available resource at their disposal- not by a long shot.

As for Vietnam the same applies. NVA forces were not pursued into neighboring countries by regular military units, strategic bombing was limited by political leaders, mining of harbors was not allowed and the goal was not to destroy North Vietnam but simply to maintain the status quo- the same as in Korea.

Limited war has NOTHING to do with how many people were casualties. It has nothing to do with troop commitments. It has to do with the endgame, which is why prosecution of limited warfare has never been successful against an enemy prosecuting total warfare (like the North Vietnamese and North Koreans).

Capice?

reply to post by SFA437


Ok. Thanks for that.

Let me put it this way, the will of the people will always trump the will to follow pointless and needless orders.

It would be a massacre, the military has all the technology. What are guns going to do against spy satellites, tanks, missiles, bio weapons and god knows what else they have. And that's not even counting if they decided to unleash the products of the black op programs that trillions of dollars and decades of research has produced. If it ever comes to the American people mounting a revolution, we would be obliterated.

Originally posted by OMsk3ptic
It would be a massacre, the military has all the technology. What are guns going to do against spy satellites, tanks, missiles, bio weapons and god knows what else they have. And that's not even counting if they decided to unleash the products of the black op programs that trillions of dollars and decades of research has produced. If it ever comes to the American people mounting a revolution, we would be obliterated.

That's a common misconception. Let me put it this way, what has been a challenge to the military forces? Deffinately not other military forces. It's always been the men in Black Pajama's that's tested our military might. So therefore, if North America had turned into a conflict zone and insurgent groups were on the rise in all sectors in the national region, then with all the training and even equipment, from arms to field gear, it would be even more of an formitable fighting force that would truly push the nature of the military. Also, the military would be going against it's own citizens and once again, a common misconception, not all soldiers will follow blind orders.

others hate what americs is and stands for.
others would love to help stop what america has become.
as for all the high tec!
what good has it been in other wars?
who do you think the milita is made of?
ex'army they know how all the toys work.
and how to best them!

Originally posted by Pervius
We have many Territories who would rather come in and shoot Americans....than lose their free welfare.

Obama also could call on the Thai Military, South Korea, Japan....they'd all LOVE to come in and get to shoot and kill Americans.

We could never end the 4th Reich. The ONLY way the 4th Reich will be ended is if Russia and China and the rest of the world start lobbing nuclear weapons.

Militia's couldn't do squat on US soil.......then again the Mexican Drug Cartels with a foreign countries support could seize control of the US.....they have Mexican Military Ordinance, machine guns, C-4, rocket propelled grenades, surface to air missiles, helicopters, jets, tanks....we don't have that.

Originally posted by Pervius
We have many Territories who would rather come in and shoot Americans....than lose their free welfare.

Obama also could call on the Thai Military, South Korea, Japan....they'd all LOVE to come in and get to shoot and kill Americans.

And that my friend is what Privitized Military Contractors are for. America, has the biggest number of PMC organizations. Hence, the use of Xe (Blackwater) PMCs during the Hurricane Katrina crisis. For they don't answer to the constitution or the human rights, the answer to the Paycheque and the Contract at hand.

Originally posted by Subbam
And that my friend is what Privitized Military Contractors are for. America, has the biggest number of PMC organizations. Hence, the use of Xe (Blackwater) PMCs during the Hurricane Katrina crisis. For they don't answer to the constitution or the human rights, the answer to the Paycheque and the Contract at hand.

Actually sir-

Per capita based on home country population the leader is the UK followed by South Africa then the US.

The concept was also founded by a South African company called Executive Outcomes which became Sandline International (based in London). Sandline folded however many of it's employees simply switched shirts and went to work for Aegis and Erinys.

As for Blackwater in NOLA- every BW guy was a sworn police officer from the United States if they were armed. Were they pompous buttholes? Yes they were- very much so. (The vast majority of them that I had personal experience with didn't need to be there or back home on the job.) Were they "military contractors" or functioning as a "private military company"? No they were not. During their time in NOLA they were acting under modified peace officer status (Louisiana's terminology not mine).

As for BW in Iraq I can say that I was shot at more by BW in al-Hilla and on Irish than I was by haji. Aegis came in second BTW. Haji was 3rd.