• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is it possible to overthrow the US government

Is it possible?


  • Total voters
    39
It's not like the 30 million are all going to be in one giant army. They would be divided among different factions. So it would be easier than you believe.

Decentralized command structures and asymmetric warfare are the most difficult tactics for a conventional force to deal with. There would be nothing easy about clearing mountainous terrain or dense urban areas infested with insurgents.

Our military isn't having a difficult time in either of those places.

Tell that to all the dead and injured Marines and Soldiers.

I don't know why people believe we are when Iraq has been defeated and become a boring place for our soldiers and in Afghanistan the vast majority of fighters come from Pakistan and we are already tightening the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. So really we are not having a difficult time;)

Yea, never mind the fact that it's taken over seven years, cost us trillions of dollars, and injured or killed about 39,000 Americans.
 
Is it possible? Well, almost anything is possible. Is there a realistic chance? No. It would require an uprising of such a large proportion as to be entirely unlikely any time in the foreseeable future.

If you are just talking the military vs civilians, that is another question. Since any large uprising would by it's nature include a large portion of military people, it's an almost impossible scenario, but if you want to talk that scenario, then it's highly unlikely. The military has the equipment, the training, the leadership, the organization, the logistics that the rebel force simple would not.
 
Right, but most military people are proud American's who'd most likely not rebel against the government, instead they would automatically take the side of the government and if there were dissidents among the military it would be too small to actually make a difference before the military wipes all of them out. Even if the rebels were using sleeper cell tactics it would not work, instead sleeper cells would make things easier.

Your understanding of the military is more consistent with GI Joe cartoons than anything. It's painfully obvious you haven't a clue...
 
Decentralized command structures and asymmetric warfare are the most difficult tactics for a conventional force to deal with. There would be nothing easy about clearing mountainous terrain or dense urban areas infested with insurgents.
Well you could just carpet bomb the whole mountain and feel the mountain with landmines.
Tell that to all the dead and injured Marines and Soldiers.
Still nowhere near enough to all the dead enemy combatants.

Yea, never mind the fact that it's taken over seven years, cost us trillions of dollars, and injured or killed about 39,000 Americans.

There has been 172 dead in Iraq and in Afghanistan there has been 1,015 killed.
 
Decentralized command structures and asymmetric warfare are the most difficult tactics for a conventional force to deal with. There would be nothing easy about clearing mountainous terrain or dense urban areas infested with insurgents.



Tell that to all the dead and injured Marines and Soldiers.



Yea, never mind the fact that it's taken over seven years, cost us trillions of dollars, and injured or killed about 39,000 Americans.

I believe most people think "tanks, fighter plans, etc; OMG no way that is possible."
The truth of it is, those things are hindrances to fighting a conventional war with the U.S.
 
Your understanding of the military is more consistent with GI Joe cartoons than anything. It's painfully obvious you haven't a clue...

No. You don't have a clue. You can't back anything up you are talking out of your a$$ it's silly. I am done with you and I am putting you on ignore.
 
Well you could just carpet bomb the whole mountain and feel the mountain with landmines.

The effect of that will be lots of burning/fallen trees and your mining crew dead while being completely exposed laying mines in enemy territory.
You just gave the insurgents a present of improvised explosives.
 
I believe most people think "tanks, fighter plans, etc; OMG no way that is possible."
The truth of it is, those things are hindrances to fighting a conventional war with the U.S.

The sheer size of the rebelling force would make those things at least somewhat effective. Further, those are not the only equipment based advantages that the military would enjoy.
 
The sheer size of the rebelling force would make those things at least somewhat effective. Further, those are not the only equipment based advantages that the military would enjoy.

The local gas station has all that one would need to cause all sorts of mayhem.
Notice that only 1 person needs that equipment.

Insurgent forces don't foolishly attack a military objective head on, they cause death by attrition.
 
The effect of that will be lots of burning/fallen trees and your mining crew dead while being completely exposed laying mines in enemy territory.
You just gave the insurgents a present of improvised explosives.

I wasn't actually being serious.
 
The local gas station has all that one would need to cause all sorts of mayhem.
Notice that only 1 person needs that equipment.

Insurgent forces don't foolishly attack a military objective head on, they cause death by attrition.

You need a lot more than just mayhem to overthrow the government of the US.
 
Well you could just carpet bomb the whole mountain...

Yea, they could just destroy every mountain range in the United States. That's realistic...:roll:

And what happens if the insurgents are inside caves?

...and feel the mountain with landmines.

It's kind of hard to place land mines when you're being shot at.

Still nowhere near enough to all the dead enemy combatants.

Doesn't mean it was easy. Of course, you would have no idea, since you learned about the military from GI Joe and X-Men.

There has been 172 dead in Iraq and in Afghanistan there has been 1,015 killed.

You are so wrong it's not even funny.

Operation Iraqi Freedom: Deaths (total) - 4,320. Wounded in action - 31,460.

Operation Enduring Freedom: Deaths (total) - 759. Wounded in action - 3,442.

Total dead and wounded: 39,981

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32492.pdf

Since it's obvious you have no idea what you're talking about, we can safely assume that your opinion is irrelevant.
 
You need a lot more than just mayhem to overthrow the government of the US.

How hard would it be to selectively assassinate key figures? Or destroy key pieces of infrastructure? You're giving the government way too much credit...
 
Right, but most military people are proud American's who'd most likely not rebel against the government, instead they would automatically take the side of the government and if there were dissidents among the military it would be too small to actually make a difference before the military wipes all of them out. Even if the rebels were using sleeper cell tactics it would not work, instead sleeper cells would make things easier.
The reason most of our young men and women join is to protect what this country stands for, it is not unrealistic to expect defections if our country ever stopped standing for it completely.
 
How hard would it be to selectively assassinate key figures? Or destroy key pieces of infrastructure? You're giving the government way too much credit...

The president, the VP, Congress and so on? Fairly hard. You would then need to keep assassinating until the people you want actually get elected, so again, it's not as easy as it sounds.
 
One of the justifications for a broad interpretation of the second amendment is that it allows citizens the option of overthrowing the government if things get too bad.

In short, since our military has a tanks, missiles, etc, is it even possible?

I think it's possible and I believe one of these days, it's inevitable. The problem will be one of whether or not people will have the motivation to act, instead of sitting around bitching about it all the time.

I believe if things get bad enough and as long as the 2nd amendment stays IN TACT - I think it's possible and eventually, probable.
 
The president, the VP, Congress and so on? Fairly hard. You would then need to keep assassinating until the people you want actually get elected, so again, it's not as easy as it sounds.

The thing with an insurgent war is that you don't go around trying to blow up tanks, take on soldiers directly, try to kill every high ranking office holder etc.
That's conventional war.

An insurgent war is 90% psychology.
Your job is to scare the **** out of the authority, to make them irrationally angry so they do stupid stuff, to have citizens lose confidence in the authority.

Acts of violence are specific, designed to cause mayhem and disruption.
 
I think it's possible and I believe one of these days, it's inevitable. The problem will be one of whether or not people will have the motivation to act, instead of sitting around bitching about it all the time.

I believe if things get bad enough and as long as the 2nd amendment stays IN TACT - I think it's possible and eventually, probable.

Not to take away from your point,... but.

The right to keep and bear arms actually predates the Constitution (where did the founder get their rights to bear arms?),... but I digress.

Infringing upon the right to keep and bear arms is one of the few things that could provoke an armed insurrection.
 
The thing with an insurgent war is that you don't go around trying to blow up tanks, take on soldiers directly, try to kill every high ranking office holder etc.
That's conventional war.

An insurgent war is 90% psychology.
Your job is to scare the **** out of the authority, to make them irrationally angry so they do stupid stuff, to have citizens lose confidence in the authority.

Acts of violence are specific, designed to cause mayhem and disruption.

Yes, but the point I am making is that to be effective, you would need a fairly large number of people. With the resources available to the government, those people will be vulnerable. Military hardware is of some use against terrorists as we have proven. Not as much as in a conventional ground war, but that does not make them useless.
 
Yes, but the point I am making is that to be effective, you would need a fairly large number of people. With the resources available to the government, those people will be vulnerable. Military hardware is of some use against terrorists as we have proven. Not as much as in a conventional ground war, but that does not make them useless.

I'm not saying that, there are some definite uses of conventional weapons.

I'm not sure I'd agree with how large you'd think it would need to be but maybe.
 
I'm not saying that, there are some definite uses of conventional weapons.

I'm not sure I'd agree with how large you'd think it would need to be but maybe.

I think to achieve the goal of a revolution(government change) would require a sizable force. You would have to control the governmental infrastructure to do it, which is not a small undertaking.
 
There are over 300 million Americans. If only ten percent of them revolted that would be 30 million insurgents spread across one of the largest and most diverse land masses on the planet. There is no way the government could defeat such a force.

libs think you would have to beat the army

that is not true, You merely cut the head off the beast.

For example if 300 congressmen and 60 senators voted to make gun ownership a capital offense, you would only have to kill 360 people to put an end to such tyranny
 
Yes, actually much easier then imagined all it would take is a small well armed and highly disciplined force.

and the right social conditions or the population would never support it, plus you'd need some of the defence force on the side of the revolting people, or at the very least neutral
 
Back
Top Bottom