Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

South Carolina Republican wants to draft all males over 17 in large militia

page: 4
4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join

posted on May, 15 2013 @ 10:29 AM
link   
I will also point out if the USA was or ever were invaded it would not be some reddawn fantasy like some here beleive.

A bunch of untrained, unorganised rednecks which are all armed diffrently wont stand a chance against a well organised army.

You need muster and orgnanisation plans, ammo dumps, intelligant officers to command, spare parts for you equipment, food stores, medics ect

You know why the viet cong and taliban were able to survive? Because of the above. They are not wetsen countrys that are full of spoilt pamperd obese lazy people used to the good life. No these people were born and raised into war, they know nothing but war all around them.

A bunch of lone wolf survivalists wont do anything but be a small nuisance to a invadeing army.

I would take 100 organised men over 1000 disorganised men any day.

This is why I think you founding father wrote the first part into the secound amendment:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State"

Maybe instead of being so focused on the secound bit look at the first bit




posted on May, 15 2013 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by crazyewok



But now days Nukes coupled with a vast Navy and Airforce are what keep invader rather than just the Navy and Airforce.
edit on 15-5-2013 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)


Okay, we are in agreement.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by crazyewok
I will also point out if the USA was or ever were invaded it would not be some reddawn fantasy like some here beleive.

Oh ye of little imagination.
The Red Dawn situation is just one instance of how something can/could happen.
There are many other scenarios as well.
You really need to investigate and read up on Asymmetrical Warfare. There are thousands of different scenarios possible and plausible.




Originally posted by crazyewok
A bunch of untrained, unorganised rednecks which are all armed diffrently wont stand a chance against a well organised army.

Again, trotting around the term "redneck"??? Come on. Thought that was gone.
But, I am a redneck and you really shouldn't count them as dumb or unorganized.
What your imagination is limiting you to is not really your fault.
You do realize that there are groups, clubs and organiazations that are solely comprised of Military vets, Law Enforcement and mixtures of that actively train people every day for certain things.
I think that those types of people, having first hand training and knowledge, would bring hurt to a Military that was here. Be it domestic or foreign.

Originally posted by crazyewok
You need muster and orgnanisation plans, ammo dumps, intelligant officers to command, spare parts for you equipment, food stores, medics ect

There are millions here that have those things set up.


Originally posted by crazyewok
You know why the viet cong and taliban were able to survive? Because of the above. They are not wetsen countrys that are full of spoilt pamperd obese lazy people used to the good life. No these people were born and raised into war, they know nothing but war all around them.

See above, in regards to vets.
Your image of America is that what has been feed to you by the media.
Yes, there is a large population that are soup sandwhich people, that probably couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag. But, there are a large number of us that can, and have.


Originally posted by crazyewok
A bunch of lone wolf survivalists wont do anything but be a small nuisance to a invadeing army.

I agree, but there are more of the orginaized types then lone wolf.


Originally posted by crazyewok
I would take 100 organised men over 1000 disorganised men any day.

I would take 50 organized trained rednecks over any of those, any day.


Originally posted by crazyewok
This is why I think you founding father wrote the first part into the secound amendment:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State"

Maybe instead of being so focused on the secound bit look at the first bit


I agree.
Look at this

Title 10 USC 311. Militia composition and classes. All able-bodied americans from 17 to 45 years of age are members of the Militia. American women who are members of the national guard are members of the Militia. Former members of the U.S.Army, navy, air force and Marine corps are members of the Militia until 64 years of age. (described in 32-313). The national guard and naval militia are called the organized Militia. The unorganized militia is everyone in the militia who is not in the national guard or the naval militia. It's the Law, want to bet most members of congress Don't know the law.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 11:22 AM
link   
reply to post by macman
 


Im not denying you have ex Vets and lawenforcemnet personal that could create a backbone to a good resistance force, And Im not denying there are some out there who are prepared.

But it come down to numbers and would there be enough?

I dont know infact I doubt anyone really would know until it actually happend.

What I can say it wont some fun jolly fight that the USA would win easly hands down.

It would be a long drawn out bloody war with hundreds or thousands to millions of causlities that could go either war and the after effects would last for years.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 11:22 AM
link   
reply to post by macman
 


Im not denying you have ex Vets and lawenforcemnet personal that could create a backbone to a good resistance force, And Im not denying there are some out there who are prepared.

But it come down to numbers and would there be enough?

I dont know infact I doubt anyone really would know until it actually happend.

What I can say it wont some fun jolly fight that the USA would win easly hands down.

It would be a long drawn out bloody war with hundreds or thousands to millions of causlities that could go either war and the after effects would last for years.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 11:27 AM
link   
everyone microscoping my statement about "enemy troops on us soil" are in fact right and i know of all the times we have been invaded on what is technically "us soil" but since i have to draw a picture..

i meant.. a kinda "battle los angeles" situation only instead of extraterrestrials i mean "enemy troops, enemy nations" invading north america, a red dawn scenario.

i know i should have specified but i assumed everyone would realize what i meant but i know people look for a "crack" and like to pick at it til there's a gaping hole.
you guy's and my wife should get together and have lunch.


anyway.. i ain't mad a'cha.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 11:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by crazyewok

Im not denying you have ex Vets and lawenforcemnet personal that could create a backbone to a good resistance force, And Im not denying there are some out there who are prepared.

But it come down to numbers and would there be enough?

Just as in the Revolutionary War, training by those that have been there, was key for those that were new to the idea of warfare. It can be done, as it has been done many times over in the past.



Originally posted by crazyewok
I dont know infact I doubt anyone really would know until it actually happend.

I pray, like most, that it doesn't. But fear that it will.


Originally posted by crazyewok
What I can say it wont some fun jolly fight that the USA would win easly hands down.
It would be a long drawn out bloody war with hundreds or thousands to millions of causlities that could go either war and the after effects would last for years.

The idea is this style of battle, is not really to outright win, but, like in guerrilla warfare, you make it painful and expensive for the enemy to fight you. You don't need to win battles, strike and run has worked very will over the course of human history. Stand and fight is not the only way to fight.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 11:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Phoenix267
 


I really do want to say i think is a great idea myself. in theory IMHO or what have you. i could see a good system as in turn say 25-35 If you want to join pass all tests to have firearm then pass the concealed carry permit. This should force you into a training certification on your weapon. The age set at 17 is way to low kids are still making bad choices at that age. I would push age up to 30 but i know 30 would be pushing the physical body for any type of militia. min age at 25 would be the only way i would agree to that.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 11:49 AM
link   
reply to post by macman
 


Well unless Kim Jong un or Ahmadinejad can pull aircraft carriers and 5th gen fighter planes out there arses (and no doubt Kim Jong un has told his people he can
) I doubt the USA has to fear a foreign invasion. Even China and Russia who COULD build a projection force dont for the time being have any imperialistc ambitions regarding the USA.

Your main threat is Civil war mark II.
edit on 15-5-2013 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)
edit on 15-5-2013 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by crazyewok
reply to post by macman
 


Well unless Kim Jong un or Ahmadinejad can pull aircraft carriers and 5th gen fighter planes out there arses (and no doubt Kim Jong un has told his people he can
) I doubt the USA has to fear a foreign invasion. Even China and Russia who COULD build a projection force dont for the time being have any imperialistc ambitions regarding the USA.

Your main threat is Civil war mark II.
edit on 15-5-2013 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)
edit on 15-5-2013 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)


I think the bigger threat is a dirty nuke.
But, what do I know. I am just a redneck


I do believe that a land invasion is highly unlikely.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 03:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by macman


I think the bigger threat is a dirty nuke.

Yup that a big threat.

Dunno what the best counter there is to that except more powers to FBI, CIA and NSA but then that option sucks.....



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by crazyewok

Originally posted by macman


I think the bigger threat is a dirty nuke.

Yup that a big threat.

Dunno what the best counter there is to that except more powers to FBI, CIA and NSA but then that option sucks.....


Personally I would suck it up, instead of giving up even more freedoms to the corrupt federal govt.

Other ways that we are being hit is with small terrorists actions, like the Boston marathon bombing.
It inflicts mass damage, while being operated by what, 2-4 guys?



posted on May, 16 2013 @ 08:08 AM
link   
reply to post by macman
 


Yup in some cases espeicaly small scale attacks like boston we do need to suck it up. The UK managed to do it it the 80's and early 90's with the IRA no reason we cant do it again and no reason the USA cant suck it up and take it.

As for dirty bombs there are abit more of a problem. I dont see a problem radioactive scanners and non invasive survalliance cameras.

But wire tapping, warrentless searches, full body scanning banning of things that have legal uses ect mean the terroists are winning as its destroying our way of life.



posted on May, 16 2013 @ 01:16 PM
link   
this is a great idea i hope it passes good south carolina



posted on May, 16 2013 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by n3mesis
 


ill go look for the source but if i remember it correctly the Japanese invaded near Alaska and then for some strange reason promptly invaded Canada.....en.wikipedia.org...

so they did invade us once but not the lower 48 (think they hit the lower 48 with various balloon bombs(japan) and submarine shelling of the east coast(zee Germans)

www.cracked.com...


The biggest Japanese attack on U.S. soil, however, was an actual, honest-to-God invasion. In fact, for a while it looked like it could have actually become a major battlefront. Its destination was even less expected than the previous ones: The Japanese brought their A-game to the extremely surprised residents of the tiny Alaskan Aleutian Islands. In a legendary feat of thoughtlessness, however, they then proceeded to try to attack Canada. As fighting an enemy while standing on another enemy's soil is referred to in military strategy books as "What? S*** no," Japan soon found itself beaten back by the collective force of the American and Canadian troops. Read more: www.cracked.com...



posted on May, 16 2013 @ 04:18 PM
link   
I could support an idea like this if certain precautions were taken. Every state should have a well-armed militia, because this is the only way the states can ensure their individuality and power against the Federal government. The Founders of this country established our government in a way to allow both the Federal government and the state governments to have certain powers. They actually wanted some give and take between the two, and their system has worked out decently, apart from the Civil War of course.

The problem however is that the government is getting too broad, and is attempting to extend its powers into the business of the states. And no it is not Obama's fault, or any other person's fault. It is the fault of a broken system at this point, and the fault of those who are corrupt and wish to impose their personal beliefs on others. When people like this get into positions of power, you can be assured they will use that power to forward their personal agenda, whether it is right or wrong. And most politicians do not posses a broad enough view of the future to understand the implications of their decisions.

But this makes it sound as if a big Federal government is a bad thing. It does not have to be. For instance, a big Federal government when it comes to regulating businesses and corporations would be a good thing, and could possibly prevent those who operate these companies from making decisions strictly based on profits and costs. That is why the US is losing jobs to India and China, because it saves these businesses a lot of money. They could keep the salaries of most of the workers the same if they produced their products in the US, but this would cut into their profits, and limit the millions of dollars in bonuses that the very wealthy "depend" on for their wealth. THAT is greed if I have ever seen it.

They could still make a few million dollars per year, plenty of money for whatever, but they are not satisfied with that. And it is the people like this who influence our government, who are IN our government, and who make the 1% possible. And although this is unrelated, most of these people are Republicans. THEY are the ones who want the government out of business, and why? Of course so they can continue to do what they are doing now, making MORE MONEY. It is okay for the taxpayers to bail them out when they get in a bind, but they are against "HANDOUTS." THAT is funny.



posted on May, 17 2013 @ 02:13 AM
link   
reply to post by macman
 
I think crazyewok also forgets that a large part of the military would stand down and join in with the militias. The thought of killing one’s own wouldn't fly to well with a lot our service man/women.



posted on May, 17 2013 @ 02:24 AM
link   
How small government of them!

Maybe they are try to wrangle back their slaves



posted on May, 17 2013 @ 02:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by JiggyPotamus
I could support an idea like this if certain precautions were taken. Every state should have a well-armed militia, because this is the only way the states can ensure their individuality and power against the Federal government.


Is this the only way?

I think the states have done good, until they tried to keep slavery and Jim crow alive.



posted on May, 17 2013 @ 05:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Phoenix267
 


There's no need to pass such a law. It already exists. Under federal law, you already fit the definition of unorganized militia if you are a male between the ages of 17 and 45.

www.law.cornell.edu...
edit on 17-5-2013 by vor78 because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join