|
Post by Deleted on Mar 25, 2017 23:51:07 GMT
How many of those citizens are elderly, handicapped in some way, or simply children? And out of the able-bodied, how many have any sort of training? Out of the ones that have training, how many are trained to the same level of the military? Your 300 million number just got infinitely smaller I'm afraid. Any other theories? oh yeah.. because i literally meant all 300 million usa citizens will participate in the over throw what a moron You're the one that said "300 million" with no qualifier. Anyway, carry on
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 25, 2017 23:52:29 GMT
oh yeah? and the fact that most of the military are stationed over seas was left ignored anyway so what
|
|
|
Post by MilesEdgeworth on Mar 25, 2017 23:53:26 GMT
Why does nobody here like to back up things they say? It's kind of annoying honestly. Everyone in an entire city could gang up on a single Abrams tank and not do a thing to it. And the military has thousands of them. It's "easier than it sounds" huh? Well, I'm intrigued, please walk me through the process. So back up what you say. Also, pretty funny the implication that an abrahms couldn't get stopped by an entire cities worth of bodies seeing as they get stuck in fucking puddles of mud. What you say is true, though a useless nitpick of a hyperbolic statement. Bodies on concrete is nowhere near the same as wet sand/dirt. Anyway, I await your well reasoned response.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 25, 2017 23:53:36 GMT
usa toys lol.. they still use humvees which they conveniently left for isis
|
|
|
Post by senpaidesu on Mar 25, 2017 23:58:40 GMT
Your argument is literally just "because I said so" so either formulate it or mine will remain "because I said so". I think you're being ambiguous because you don't actually have a well thought out argument for why they'd lose. I'll restate my position again though, and spell out the obvious. Assuming the base line we're operating from is that the armed forces would engage US citizens the following is true: - Overall, they're better trained than many of the "best case scenario" fighters you could hope for
- Overall the military will be mostly fractured. Those better trained experts will be fighting on the side of the people as well.
- They have far superior gear and access to gear
- As do the innevitable percentage that will cut and run with some of that gear.
- They have experience
- As do the ones will will fracture off. As do all the ones not currently in service (who outnumber those that are). As do many citizens.
- They have far superior intelligence gathering capacity
- Woopidy doo. All it takes is one disenfrachised hacker to end all that. Ever heard of Snowden? Think there aren't men like him still on the inside?
- They have control of the air
- Pointless unless you concede that they start bombing out cities, which they most likely wont' because it will only feed the rebellion against them.
- They have control of the sea
- How the hell does this even really matter? Fighting for the country is not fleeing the country.
- Even police grade vehicles outperform the consumer grade stuff, let alone the military's toys
- The police by and large will defect more so then the military. The majority of that gear will end up in the hands of the citizens.
I'm sure this list could be much larger, but this should serve as a good starting point.
I'm sure you also fail to realize how many other countries would jump at the oppurtunity to militarily help the citizens overthrow the US Government.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2017 0:04:17 GMT
an overthrow might not go as planned and can turn into a modern civil war which is possible
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2017 0:08:49 GMT
dude is acting like the us military is unstoppable or something.. which war did usa win exactly? vietnam? nah we left ww2? maybe was a win but that was a world war gulf war? nope iraq? nah
|
|
|
Post by senpaidesu on Mar 26, 2017 0:09:27 GMT
an overthrow might not go as planned and can turn into a modern civil war which is possible Well, taking out the extremists on the left along with the corrupt government would be ideal.
|
|
|
Post by MilesEdgeworth on Mar 26, 2017 0:16:08 GMT
So, your position essentially boils down to conjecture. I mean, what makes you assume "better trained experts" would be fighting on the side of the people? And your "inevitable percentage" What about it? A useless statement without numbers behind it. Even if it was some outrageous number like, let's be generous and say 30%. They'd have no way to adequately repair or reproduce that gear once it was seriously worn or broken.
I'm not saying the idea behind some of those statements are inherently wrong, but for them to be meaningful, we'd need actual numbers. Or some general idea.
Your argument hinges heavily on numbers of people. Which are irrelevant in and of themselves without access to any significant power. I hate to break it to you, but veterans don't get to take their tanks and helicopters home. It's also erroneous to assume air superiority is merely the equivalent to just bombing things.
I'm sure there are people like Snowden still around. But also like Snowden, they'd be exiled or worse the second they did anything. But I wasn't even talking about just computers when I said that. Everything from drones to satellites is encompassed under the "intelligence gathering" umbrella. Though, your "one disenfranchised hacker" "ending all that" is pretty funny. I think you've been watching too many movies. The systems I'm describing aren't all controlled by the same system in the same area. You're talking layers of security that have only gotten tighter after Snowden. There's no killswitch virus to just shut down everything. This isn't Die Hard.
It's also pretty funny that you don't consider the waters to be an important part of a military operation. I'm sure nobody would ever think of running supplies up and down the coastline. Yes, they could safely ignore that, nobody transports goods using ships.
As far as other countries getting involved goes, we weren't talking about that. But even if we do bring in that variable, that would depend on too many factors to be useful. You'd have to get into why and when the uprising started in the first place, which is outside of the scope of this hypothetical scenario.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2017 0:19:11 GMT
running supplies up and down the coastline? youre talking about a civil war now not an over throw
|
|