Obama Will Bring War To The USA In 2013 Using The Backing Of Anti-Gun Advocates to Divide Society.

page: 4
14
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 06:17 PM
link   
reply to post by MrSpad
 


Why do you believe that. Hmm interesting. That is pretty much exaclty what the germans stated before the rise of fascism. "It will never happen in Germany"

Don't be fooled matey, and keep your eyes open.

Please explain your reasoning as to why this is not a possibility.....




posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 06:18 PM
link   
reply to post by kaylaluv
 


No one is trying to take all the guns - just trying to make it harder for the crazy guys to get the guns. That's all.
apparently, you aren't paying attention.
yes, they are ... www.nraila.org...



posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by BSFC123
First off, guns are dumb. Hunters used to hunt with bow and arrows and knifes, and they got along just fine that way for thousands of years. Guns are another example of mankind's amazing technological advances, with which we can kill each other. Awesome. Let's make something that shoots metal pieces at things, woo hoo!

That said.

Guns exist, millions and millions of them, and we can't make them disappear. The adage that if you outlaw guns only outlaws will have them...well, sorry, that is try to a certain extent. The only way I could see any kind of gun ban actually work would be if the government made it automatic life in prison with no parole for anyone killing someone else with a firearm. Most criminals would likely find another way to commit their deeds, but hey, less gun violence.

If the government does atempt to either ban or make it nearly impossible for citizens to own guns, I could see some major backlash...don't know about a civil war, but who knows.


"automatic life sentence", hmm does that include federal employees and government police officers also?
Because i can list plenty of "unarmed" civilians who have been shot by government officials and no one is even charged!

I wouldnt for one instant believe you will be able to live in some Gun free utpoia if citizens are disarmed.



posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn
This thought has come to my mind once or twice. I hope it doesn't come to that. But gun rights, like gun control, isn't about guns.

Gun rights is about self preservation.

Gun Control is about control of the people.

The latter being antithetical to the former, a war may very well be what the anti-gun crowd gets from this.


On the brighter side of things, the anti gunners will eventually become pro gun!
Given the choice of dying like a lamb with your children or picking up a boomstick and defending yourself and the ones you love, I'd certainly take the latter.

More toward the OP now, ANYONE who would try to oppress me by trying to remove my God given rights, is a threat to humanity and should be dealt with accordingly.
This goes for anyone in conjunction with these anti gun bills.
Traitors in time of war, treason.



posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by kaylaluv
 


No one is trying to take all the guns - just trying to make it harder for the crazy guys to get the guns. That's all.
apparently, you aren't paying attention.
yes, they are ... www.nraila.org...


Indeed, also note she states "I have been working with my staff for over a year on this legislation”, well before the Sandy Hook and Theatre shootings. These incidents are the fuel they need to push forward the agenda.



posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 06:38 PM
link   
reply to post by TheMindWar
 


I agree. I just mean that if they are trying to keep criminals from using guns, that would be the only way I could see to even attempt it. If they became illegal at that level, they wouldn't be around for some psycho to grab from his mom and kill kids.

I wonder about palm print technology. Perhaps gun compaines could be forced to fit every weapon with the tech so only the buyer of the gun could use the weapon. Be more expensive, but if the masses want their weapons, might be a way to keep them legal.



posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 06:38 PM
link   
reply to post by BSFC123
 


I agree somewhat with your post. But that was then and this is now, (reality).

When a government becomes the criminal, who keeps them in check? The laws? Bill of rights?

It is common knowledge they already break the laws they impose on themselves. What makes people think they will adhere to laws (The Bill of Rights) that protect you/us?

People put way to much faith in elected officials or governments in general. It would be good to remember Hitler was elected to office.....all down hill or up hill from there.



posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by BSFC123
 


The first time that tech breaks and gets somebody killed that gun company and the palm reader company will be sued into oblivion. Terrible idea. KISS. Keep it simple, Stupid.



posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by murphy22
reply to post by BSFC123
 


I agree somewhat with your post. But that was then and this is now, (reality).

When a government becomes the criminal, who keeps them in check? The laws? Bill of rights?

It is common knowledge they already break the laws they impose on themselves. What makes people think they will adhere to laws (The Bill of Rights) that protect you/us?

People put way to much faith in elected officials or governments in general. It would be good to remember Hitler was elected to office.....all down hill or up hill from there.


^^This^^

Whats more people who voted for Hilter didnt belive he was capable of starting world war 2. "it will never happen in Germany" was the consensus. We have hsitory repeating itself IMO, "it will never happen in the USA, lol, yeah right".

Sometimes its important to protect people from themselves, even the "Obama Phone Lady".
edit on 30-12-2012 by TheMindWar because: Added comment



posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 06:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Rezlooper
 


You can do a google search on McCain about wanting to attack Russia over Georgia. Or you can find a lot of info on wikipedia.
en.wikipedia.org...

And the Bush mini nukes you can find a lot of the information in the wikileaks congressional leaks. I put it together at one time and posted it in a thread but it was a lot of work to gather it all.

www.armscontrol.org...



posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 06:54 PM
link   
reply to post by TheMindWar
 

Feinstein has been "working on this" since she got her permit in the 70s

heck, the anti-gun platform has been touted by her since her VP consideration, way back then.
(for those who aren't aware - she was the 1st woman to be 'considered' for Vice President)
bio
it's ok for her, just not the "little ppl"
all of this has been 'written' before, read about it ... Behold, A Pale Horse / Cooper ... book review

oh, and try not to forget,

endgamenow.com...
Cooper was killed in a suspicious 2001 police shootout in his Arizona home.



posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by netwarrior
 


This thread contains references to American civil war, US citizens fighting in guerilla warfare, 1/4 of the population being killed....and you are talking about a lawsuit for broken tech and saying keep it simple?

Stupid?

edit on 30-12-2012 by BSFC123 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 06:59 PM
link   
Also, I do not support a gun ban. If anything I am ready to give every citizen a concealed weapon as a deterrent. I hate guns but I have a 3 year old, and I understand reality. If we are in a mall and some nutball opens fire, I would love to be able to protect my kid.



posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 07:01 PM
link   
reply to post by TheMindWar
 


History IS repeating itself. There is a good reason they don't teach real history in public school. If the average American actually knew history, they would all be a rifleman and we wouldn't have socialist running our country.

Today we have sheep. The Shepard and the Wolf are in each other pocket. There has to be a wolf or the
shepards would loose their jobs. The government knows this. If anyone thinks TPTB are worried about your health or safety, your fooling yourself. What they really want is to castrate and put a bell on you, "for your safety".



posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 07:05 PM
link   
reply to post by BSFC123
 

we wouldn't be discussing it at all if folks like Feinstein and her gerbils would nibble at some other piece of paper ... they've nibbled at this one long enough


there should be NO anti-gun lobby in the US, period.
those who are activists for such should be detained or used for target practice.
they are the traitors, always have been and always will be.

i'm beginning to wonder what about the McArthyism years worked because as much as i dislike the era, the US sure came out of it on an upswing ... kentuckysip.homestead.com...



posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 07:08 PM
link   
I wonder how much of this is real fear due to Mary Lou Sapone being uncovered as a mole for the NRA? I guess that really changes things when you don't have control over what the outcome can be. Seems for years they controlled both sides of the debate and in effect the out come in the end.

www.motherjones.com...



posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by JBA2848
You do know there are restrictions on knives right. Folding knives can only be so long switch blades are banned.


Really, depends on where you live doesn't it. I can and do carry a 6" hunting knife on a regular basis along with a pair of fence pliers’. These are not national laws nor should they be they are local and State laws.


Originally posted by JBA2848
You do know there are restrictions on fertilizer to right. And the general public can't buy the kind to make bombs.


Anyone can buy fertilizer - I own a farm and buy it all the time. I was an Engineer Sergeant in SF when enlisted. I can make an improvised explosive from many types of fertilizer and other components readily sold at Home Depot. So can anyone with access to the internet and the desire to do so. Again the laws are not federal but State level and differ widely. A farmer here can buy a certain amount of black powder and dynamite f(for clearing rocks/stumps) or personal use on an annual basis with zero checks other than a photo ID and a LLC as farmer.


Originally posted by JBA2848

And a insurgency only works when they are well armed by a foreign government that feeds them a constant supply of weapons right.

So what foreign government are you going to team up with? Russia, China, North Korea?


Did you miss the part where I said I was a retired special forces officer? There will be no shortage of outside actors willing to get payback on the US that I’d have my pick of them. I’d use them all and take all I could get. I’d worry about consequences later after we win.

I would do what any insurgent leader does. Take help from whomever would render it, make whatever promises needed to be made to get such assistance walk away will all that I could get keeping them just appeased enough o continue such aid. I'd welcome some Russian Spetznaz operators into my AO gladly, (I speak pretty decent Russian still BTW) with their arms and money I'd fight my part of the war.

Then if or when we win the national level leaders would claim the individual local leaders with whom the outside actors had worked had no authority to make any promises and we'd do as we pleased. Happens every day all over the world.

Happened to the US in Afghanistan when the Mujahedeen were fighting the Russians as a matter of fact...

I would debate you on the possibility/viability/survivability of a US civilian insurgency here or anywhere. I find your lack of knowledge on the topic to be on a little below par with that of the average layman/civilian actually. In sum you haven't got the faintest idea of what you are talking about.

I have a 24 years of experiance in the conduct of warfare almost all of that counterinsurgency/insurgency operations. Cheers.



posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 07:21 PM
link   
reply to post by JBA2848
 

why do you seem surprised ?
this is at every level of government and has been for decades.

that's exactly how "billions" of tax dollars mysteriously disappear on a somewhat regular basis.
flippers are nothing new to politics.



posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 07:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by kaylaluv
 





But that 1/4th will be the pro-gunners, so.... doesn't affect me, as I am anti-gun, so I'm safe


This right here is exactly the attitude I speak of when I described the modern Americans' approach to the rights of others.

It's ok if they are all wiped out because you're anti-gun and they're not?

So not only do you have a selective view of gun rights, but you also have a selective view of the right to life?

Interesting.


Whats more disgusting is You have to go out and risk your life for her rights to think that way.
What the hell has happened to this world......



posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 07:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheMindWar
Whats more people who voted for Hilter didnt belive he was capable of starting world war 2. "it will never happen in Germany" was the consensus. We have hsitory repeating itself IMO, "it will never happen in the USA, lol, yeah right".


WW 3 won’t come about the same way WW2 did in Germany though.

The only open uncontrolled conflict that BO is likely to start is an internal war. If the military sides with the US people, and against the government. The military will possibly fragment for a moment, or at least loose centralized control and cohesion until the people lower in the ranks regroup and exert some control over the armed forces to regain cohesion after rejection of the central controlling authority.

That is the critical time where WW3 is likely to start. The outside world will see what appears to be a crumbling of US military control and power from the inside out. At that point, it will appear that the US authority and security is vulnerable.

That is when the outside force will make it’s power play. Either try to excerpt control of certain regions, attack vulnerable allies, or attack the US when they think the US military is too preoccupied with internal problems to respond.

If they think the command and control structure is too fragmented to actively respond to a nuke attack, then that would be the time to launch one on the US. It may also be a time to launch such attacks on US allies when they think the US military will not have the will to respond.

The problem is the US armed units are designed to be relatively autonomous, and capable of organizing themselves without direct central control like many other militaries need.

It may appear that there is no command and control, but if an outside attack in launched, the US military will still be able to organize a defense against it. They don’t need commands to tell each individual soldier what to do. What the American people will want will be self evident to the people in the field, and that is what they will do. That has been one of the basic tenants of US battle field doctrine. Self sufficient units that you don’t have to actively control every day. Just put them in the field and they will take care of them selves.

That will lead to the key situation that will initiate WW3. The outside force will make it’s move in the apparent power vacuum. Once the outside force is committed to the attack, then the US forces will come back, and clamp down on the whole thing.

There is one of thing with the US armed forces. Usually there isn’t a problem with getting them to attack with enough force. It’s trying to get them to moderate their response to prevent it from getting out of hand.

With no command and control, there will be no moderating force to the regrouped US force command structure. The country that initiated the attack may get hit with such an over response that it will escalate the war to try and stave off what it sees as it’s impending destruction. Once they use nukes to try to drive off the counterattacking US troops, then the US forces will respond in kind. WW3 will have went nuclear.





top topics
 
14
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join