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.
This will probably come as a total shock to most of my Western readers, but at one point, Russia was one of the most heavily armed societies on earth. This was, of course, when we were free under the Tsar. Weapons, from swords and spears to pistols, rifles and shotguns were everywhere, common items. People carried them concealed, they carried them holstered. Fighting knives were a prominent part of many traditional attires and those little tubes criss crossing on the costumes of Cossacks and various Caucasian peoples? Well those are bullet holders for rifles.
Various armies, such as the Poles, during the Смута (Times of Troubles), or Napoleon, or the Germans even as the Tsarist state collapsed under the weight of WW1 and Wall Street monies, found that holding Russian lands was much much harder than taking them and taking was no easy walk in the park but a blood bath all its own. In holding, one faced an extremely well armed and aggressive population Hell bent on exterminating or driving out the aggressor.
This well armed population was what allowed the various White factions to rise up, no matter how disorganized politically and militarily they were in 1918 and wage a savage civil war against the Reds. It should be noted that many of these armies were armed peasants, villagers, farmers and merchants, protecting their own. If it had not been for Washington's clandestine support of and for the Reds, history would have gone quite differently.
No it is about power and a total power over the people. There is a lot of desire to bad mouth the Tsar, particularly by the Communists, who claim he was a tyrant, and yet under him we were armed and under the progressives disarmed. Do not be fooled by a belief that progressives, leftists hate guns. Oh, no, they do not. What they hate is guns in the hands of those who are not marching in lock step of their ideology. They hate guns in the hands of those who think for themselves and do not obey without question. They hate guns in those whom they have slated for a barrel to the back of the ear.
Originally posted by OccamAssassin
Gun-nuts crying because they can't have automatic assault weapons?
awwwwwww diddums.
Originally posted by muse7
Oh and by the way...Hitler never implemented a single gun ban ever in Nazi Germany his most powerful tool in seizing full power was something called Propaganda.
Originally posted by muse7
Just because you have the right to own a gun does not mean you are responsible and stable enough to own a gun.
Oh and by the way...Hitler never implemented a single gun ban ever in Nazi Germany his most powerful tool in seizing full power was something called Propaganda.
Originally posted by jessejamesxx
reply to post by OccamAssassin
Automatic assault weapons (which criminals & organized gangs have and use whether they're illegal or not) are already illegal. There really isn't much difference between what you would consider a legal military semi-automatic and a traditional semi-auto rifle, that isn't on trial here, except for maybe the magazine capacities available. What else about 'military assault weapons' allow people to kill more people than a regular one? A scope or modern sight? The main difference is they're black and scary and don't have a ton of wooden parts. Let's also not forget that only 400 deaths are attributed to rifles, out of the 8 or so thousand. If they're coming after something that causes so few deaths (just sometimes a bunch at once (rare)) when do they start banning handguns and shotguns? Its the next logical step right? We're going down a scary path, and they're using tragedies in the media to get their way. Remember the patriot act?
Originally posted by Mads1987
I would argue that the fact that the Russians had guns is what allowed for a violent revolution and for communism to be established.
In most cases dictators emerge after a violent conflict, either between the military and the state, or the state and it's public - and in both cases it is the access to firearms which allow it. Hitler, Mao, Lenin, Castro... and so on.
Remember, the Tzar was the current establishment. Like Obama is the current now. The public became very dissatisfied, and they killed the Tzar and his family - and then they got a dictatorship.
If Americans ever rise up and overthrow and elected government, you can be sure that what you'll end up with is a facist dictatorship.
The communist influenced the people to revolt against the Tzar, which is obviously only possible if they have weapons.
How would it have been possible without them?
But since we are talking about Americans not giving up their weapons to defend their nation against dictatorship, fascism, communism or something along those lines, I couldn't help but wonder how possible you think it is that we would see such an event in the near future?
So, an Opinion from ONE RUSSIAN has become the Voice of Russia as a Whole, as your title Implies?
Originally posted by hawkiye
A powerful article from a Russian