It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
They could take us down with less than 100 people and a couple billion dollars for the nukes, scuds and freighters. Easy Peasy.
Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by beezzer
Consider this...if there was a large scale attack it could cause economic collapse. We could see banks closed, 50+% unemployment, desperation, food shortages, gas shortages, violence, looting, etc because our supply chains are strained. We'd quickly have a Martial Law situation.
I don't know why you think they need 20million people to pull it off. All they need to do is declare it, stop providing vital services, and then stand back and watch everything crumble.
Originally posted by jlm912
The Bill of Rights are being rendered null and void, yet to overturn the legislation, the rest of the constitution is being held against us in diminishing any time-efficient change towards the better. Just how quickly can we really count on peaceful change of the corruption established, as opposed to destroying to completely rebuild... I'm not for jumping to violence, mind you. Negotiations for changing status quo are generally through three options:
I believe they should be handled in that exact order, but I also see the distinct possibility of the elite turning to violence if either of the first two aren't going in their favor.
No, it won't. Mussolini was correct when he said that many were tired of freedom. You see, freedom requires personal responsibility as a prerequisite. The majority prefer the life of a slave where they do not have to make decisions or suffer for those poor decisions they do make.
Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by DarthMuerte
The spirit of freedom would take alot more than a culling to surpress.
The safety net should be the responsibility of the church, the family and the LOCAL community. The government should not be involved in stealing the fruits of one person's labor to give to another. You choose to give your money, that is fine. When YOU choose to give MINE, freedom dies.
Originally posted by Damrod
I am...at my core...a freedom loving person...I consider myself a social libertarian because I want there to be a safety net of help for the weak, elderly, infirm and the downtrodden, so I'll pay some taxes for that. I want our national border defenses to be strong...I'll pay some taxes for that to...but I don't want to pay for a Gestapo enforcement squad...nor do I like seeing so much money getting hosed away in a gluttonous fat bureaucracy that wastes more money than it puts to good use...it makes me agitated.
If you could excise this:
Originally posted by DamrodI want big freedom and small government. I expect them to defend our borders and take care of our roads...and I expect them to let the states take care of the criminal and social issues and assistance to those that need it. That is why we chose to have states...to decentralize "big"govt....what a loss it has been since they have had their teeth pulled and their arms tied behind their back.
assistance to those that need it.
I absolutely agree here, b ut another problem is when others decide that they know better than I how to distribute the fruits of my labors.
Originally posted by DamrodI could go on and on...I think a part of our problem is allowing the Fed Gov to strip power from the states...this is not how it was supposed to be...but that is only a small part of the problems we are staring at...
Agreed. Liberals/progressives/communists/socialists versus lovers of liberty.
Originally posted by jlm912
reply to post by babybunnies
Label it as you prefer, but I'm positive there are hardcore patriots that happen to be rich. It'll be more like Progressives v. Traditional Patriots if you must have a label. The rich/poor agenda is a plot of divide and conquer to steer us away from the real achievement of success.