You're a traitor
School is in session. Take the "Progressive" blinders off, Allen and pay attention.
The Founding Fathers were reluctant with the thought of a government with ALL the power. They wrote the Constitution to severely limit the powers of government and the level of control it could exert over its citizens. Even with the protections of the Constitution, the Founding Fathers knew they had to have a final method of restoring government. Hence, the Second Amendment was born.
If Clifton had READ the Federalist Papers and other writings of the Founding Fathers, he would have learned that the Founding Fathers WANTED the people to have the ability to overthrow a tyrannical Administration and restore the government. They do NOT say "overthrow" as that infers putting in another style of government. Restore means removing the rot from the political system, installing NEW politicians who can clean up the mess left by their incompetent/tyrannical predecessors.
Why else would they put the key words "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" in the Bill of Rights? Those four vital words do NOT appear anywhere else in the Bill of Rights.
Meaning the government had better not try taking guns.
Enough said.
Now to move onto Clifton's next statement.
"Has anyone ever heard of the Civil War? How did armed citizens fare against the federal government in the late-1800′s? You know, back when citizens and the military were much more evenly armed, and our military was much less powerful."
Clifton conveniently chooses to ignores fact that weaken his position. This is normal of the left-wing "Political Science" crowd, but ignoring facts when making a military plan will get you and your men killed every time.
The Civil War is another name for the "War between the States." CIVIL WAR is usually two or more groups of citizens fighting for control of the government.
If Clifton had READ the Federalist Papers and other writings of the Founding Fathers, he would have learned that the Founding Fathers WANTED the people to have the ability to overthrow a tyrannical Administration and restore the government. They do NOT say "overthrow" as that infers putting in another style of government. Restore means removing the rot from the political system, installing NEW politicians who can clean up the mess left by their incompetent/tyrannical predecessors.
Why else would they put the key words "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" in the Bill of Rights? Those four vital words do NOT appear anywhere else in the Bill of Rights.
Meaning the government had better not try taking guns.
Enough said.
Now to move onto Clifton's next statement.
"Has anyone ever heard of the Civil War? How did armed citizens fare against the federal government in the late-1800′s? You know, back when citizens and the military were much more evenly armed, and our military was much less powerful."
Clifton conveniently chooses to ignores fact that weaken his position. This is normal of the left-wing "Political Science" crowd, but ignoring facts when making a military plan will get you and your men killed every time.
The Civil War is another name for the "War between the States." CIVIL WAR is usually two or more groups of citizens fighting for control of the government.
The Conferderacy had seceeded from the Union and formed its own sovereign nation. This is a major factor for the war. The Confederacy was at a significant disadvantage for the following reasons:
1. Lack of industry. The Confederacy was an agricultural powerhouse, not an industrial one. If they had more arms factories and fewer fields of cotton, the "Civil War" could have gone the other way.
2. Lack of credible military resources. The Confederacy had to build up an army and navy from scratch. The Union had a navy and retained most of the equipment for the Army. The Union Navy blockaded the South and cut off their supplies of manufactured goods (primarily weapons) with great effect. The Confederate States Army had to organize and train. In the initial stages of the war, the CSA was a far cry from an "organized army." Yet it became good enough to outfight the Union until superior numbers, equipment and leadership came into play.
3. Lack of time to build those factories and develop a credible military. If the South had waited ONE YEAR before firing on Fort Sumter, they would have had those factories and better equipped and trained armed forces. Still, given they started from scratch, the Confederates fought with daring, skill, determination and honor. They were NOT pushovers. They went down fighting.
Oh, SNAP! Clifton's ignorance of military matters just got him a bitch-slap from me.
Pay attention, Clifton. School is still in session!
Let's look at his next quote.
"These people really think things would go better against the modern United States military? Also known as the most powerful war machine that’s ever existed.And the ironic part is most of those who believe in a possible “armed revolt against the United States government” are the same people who support the party which funnels hundreds of billions of dollars into our military defense budget—which is controlled by the federal government."
Clifton, you don't win a war by fighting the battle the ENEMY wants to fight. Good example is the fall of France in 1940. After World War One, France built a line of fortifications from its border with Switzerland up to its border with Belgium. It was impressive, and ultra-modern. It had everything except brothels. They expected the Germans to just throw themselves against the Maginot Line. The Germans didn't. They said "We're not fighting the last war, or fighting your battle. We'll wait for an opportunity." When the Germans moved into Holland, British and French forces moved forward through Belgium, exposing the northern flank of the Maginot Line. The Germans moved behind, outflanked the Maginot Line and captured France in a matter of weeks. The Germans almost wiped out the British Expeditionary Force. (If not for the "Miracle at Dunkirk, they would have!)
Clifton believes the revolutionaries will be STUPID enough to fight a battle in open terrain against what truly is the most powerful military on the planet. Clifton forgets there are millions of veterans who know better. No doubt the left-leaning supporters of Clifton will say "France was the exception to the rule. Remember...it was the Germans against the FRENCH, who are so screwed up they have to have a Foreign Legion to protect them" and demand another example.
Here it is:
The Viet Cong learned the hard way when you fight the battle America wanted them to fight, they die in droves. (Tet Offensive, 1968). We killed more than 117,000 Viet Cong and North Vietmamese Army troops. The Viet Cong were finished as a fighting force. The NVA's plans of taking over were set back years. After a thorough ass-kicking, they went back to their prime strategy consisting of, "We don't have to outfight the Americans--just outlast their political will to take casualties."
1. Lack of industry. The Confederacy was an agricultural powerhouse, not an industrial one. If they had more arms factories and fewer fields of cotton, the "Civil War" could have gone the other way.
2. Lack of credible military resources. The Confederacy had to build up an army and navy from scratch. The Union had a navy and retained most of the equipment for the Army. The Union Navy blockaded the South and cut off their supplies of manufactured goods (primarily weapons) with great effect. The Confederate States Army had to organize and train. In the initial stages of the war, the CSA was a far cry from an "organized army." Yet it became good enough to outfight the Union until superior numbers, equipment and leadership came into play.
3. Lack of time to build those factories and develop a credible military. If the South had waited ONE YEAR before firing on Fort Sumter, they would have had those factories and better equipped and trained armed forces. Still, given they started from scratch, the Confederates fought with daring, skill, determination and honor. They were NOT pushovers. They went down fighting.
Oh, SNAP! Clifton's ignorance of military matters just got him a bitch-slap from me.
Pay attention, Clifton. School is still in session!
Let's look at his next quote.
"These people really think things would go better against the modern United States military? Also known as the most powerful war machine that’s ever existed.And the ironic part is most of those who believe in a possible “armed revolt against the United States government” are the same people who support the party which funnels hundreds of billions of dollars into our military defense budget—which is controlled by the federal government."
Clifton, you don't win a war by fighting the battle the ENEMY wants to fight. Good example is the fall of France in 1940. After World War One, France built a line of fortifications from its border with Switzerland up to its border with Belgium. It was impressive, and ultra-modern. It had everything except brothels. They expected the Germans to just throw themselves against the Maginot Line. The Germans didn't. They said "We're not fighting the last war, or fighting your battle. We'll wait for an opportunity." When the Germans moved into Holland, British and French forces moved forward through Belgium, exposing the northern flank of the Maginot Line. The Germans moved behind, outflanked the Maginot Line and captured France in a matter of weeks. The Germans almost wiped out the British Expeditionary Force. (If not for the "Miracle at Dunkirk, they would have!)
Clifton believes the revolutionaries will be STUPID enough to fight a battle in open terrain against what truly is the most powerful military on the planet. Clifton forgets there are millions of veterans who know better. No doubt the left-leaning supporters of Clifton will say "France was the exception to the rule. Remember...it was the Germans against the FRENCH, who are so screwed up they have to have a Foreign Legion to protect them" and demand another example.
Here it is:
The Viet Cong learned the hard way when you fight the battle America wanted them to fight, they die in droves. (Tet Offensive, 1968). We killed more than 117,000 Viet Cong and North Vietmamese Army troops. The Viet Cong were finished as a fighting force. The NVA's plans of taking over were set back years. After a thorough ass-kicking, they went back to their prime strategy consisting of, "We don't have to outfight the Americans--just outlast their political will to take casualties."
Militarily, America won the battles, but lost the war politically because the VC technique was effective. Sort of like what's going on today in Afghanistan.
Clifton deliberately ignores ONE VITAL FACTOR separating the Revolution and Civil War from a potential rebellion against the government today.
The mindset of the people who would fight that war.
"US against THEM."
During the Revolution, the Colonists were "US" and those freedom-stealing British were "THEM." The British had no problem fighting and killing Colonists, who they considered the lowest of the low due to their hit and run tactics. They didn't care how many Colonists they killed. The three percent of the colonists who initially fought the revolution did not like those dirty Redcoats much either. While they did not win the war at the outset--they did not lose. They bought time to train and influence France to lend a hand.
During the Civil War, it wasn't American vs. American. It was America versus the Confederacy that had seceeded and formed a completely separate, sovereign nation. That distinction is often ignored.
Clifton deliberately ignores ONE VITAL FACTOR separating the Revolution and Civil War from a potential rebellion against the government today.
The mindset of the people who would fight that war.
"US against THEM."
During the Revolution, the Colonists were "US" and those freedom-stealing British were "THEM." The British had no problem fighting and killing Colonists, who they considered the lowest of the low due to their hit and run tactics. They didn't care how many Colonists they killed. The three percent of the colonists who initially fought the revolution did not like those dirty Redcoats much either. While they did not win the war at the outset--they did not lose. They bought time to train and influence France to lend a hand.
During the Civil War, it wasn't American vs. American. It was America versus the Confederacy that had seceeded and formed a completely separate, sovereign nation. That distinction is often ignored.
The Union forces despised "Billy Reb" as much as the Confederacy despised "Johnny Yank." The combatants did not see each other as "brothers on separate sides." There is much written about "someone knowing someone on the other side." That feeling of fellowship or sorrow did not translate to the battlefield. There was no pity, though both sides did TRY to fight honorably, as the concept was known then. Again, it was an "US versus THEM" type fight.
The "revolution" Clifton worries about will be comprised of "US versus US." Neither the military nor the growing militia movement want to fight each other, not out of cowardice, but out of commonality. Both groups are devoted to protecting America and the Constitution. They do NOT see each other as the enemy.
The "revolution" Clifton worries about will be comprised of "US versus US." Neither the military nor the growing militia movement want to fight each other, not out of cowardice, but out of commonality. Both groups are devoted to protecting America and the Constitution. They do NOT see each other as the enemy.
Contrary to Clifton's veiled inferences, the military is not comprised of mindless, unemployable robots who fight "at Obama's behest." They are amongst the brightest citizens in America, I kid you not. Clifton thinks the very second people start waving guns and screaming "Revolution," the mind-numbed killing machines who fight at Obama's behest will instantly spring into action, launch a $50,000 Hellfire missile on them, machinegun the corpses then call in a tank to run over the pieces.
This is why Clifton might have a degree in Political Science, but he doesn't know shit about the military. He forgot to read the small print.
This is why Clifton might have a degree in Political Science, but he doesn't know shit about the military. He forgot to read the small print.
"I, ________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God" (which can be omitted if that clashes with a personal belief).
That is the oath of enlistment taken by everyone in the Armed Forces. The military is VERY well-schooled on this.
The first and foremost priority is the CONSTITUTION. They are REQUIRED to bear true faith and allegiance to it. Period. Not a "If I want to" kinda thing, but REQUIRED TO.
"That I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me."
What is inferred in these words, but explained to the servicemember is that LAWFUL orders are required to be obeyed. For instance, Obama decides its time to grab guns and orders the military to start grabbing guns.
The Constitution states plainly "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Confiscation is clearly infringing, no matter how you couch it in legalese. Therefore if Obama was to give the order to confiscate guns, the military would give him a hearty FUCK YOU and there would NOTHING he could do about it.
"Just following orders" is NOT a valid legal defense. The Nuremburg Trials proved that. My Lai proved that again. Every servicemember is EXPECTED TO DISOBEY unlawful, unConstitutional orders. EXPECTED TO. Following an illegal order WILL get servicemembers a court-martial. Period.
That is the oath of enlistment taken by everyone in the Armed Forces. The military is VERY well-schooled on this.
The first and foremost priority is the CONSTITUTION. They are REQUIRED to bear true faith and allegiance to it. Period. Not a "If I want to" kinda thing, but REQUIRED TO.
"That I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me."
What is inferred in these words, but explained to the servicemember is that LAWFUL orders are required to be obeyed. For instance, Obama decides its time to grab guns and orders the military to start grabbing guns.
The Constitution states plainly "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Confiscation is clearly infringing, no matter how you couch it in legalese. Therefore if Obama was to give the order to confiscate guns, the military would give him a hearty FUCK YOU and there would NOTHING he could do about it.
"Just following orders" is NOT a valid legal defense. The Nuremburg Trials proved that. My Lai proved that again. Every servicemember is EXPECTED TO DISOBEY unlawful, unConstitutional orders. EXPECTED TO. Following an illegal order WILL get servicemembers a court-martial. Period.
Then there is the concept of "immoral" orders. Being told to violate the Oath of Enlistment is immoral. The Armed Forces CAN refuse to obey immoral orders as well.
Thus Clifton's little wet-dream fantasy of millions of mind-numbed zombies fixing bayonets and killing citizens who rise up against his favored Progressive-Communist-Socialist government gets bitch-slapped.
Thus Clifton's little wet-dream fantasy of millions of mind-numbed zombies fixing bayonets and killing citizens who rise up against his favored Progressive-Communist-Socialist government gets bitch-slapped.
The Federal Government certainly controls the troops, BUT they don't own the troops. The troops think for themselves. Obama knows better than to give the military an order they will not obey. The second he orders military intervention, he knows he will instantly anger MILLIONS of citizens, and his presidency WILL end. Period.
There was a poll going around in thye 90's (a study by some Navy Captain for a thesis paper) asking Marines how willing they would be to fire on American citizens and confiscate firearms. One in four said they would do it. The other three wouldn't.
One in four. Does Clifton REALLY believe the other three are going to sit by and watch "the one" follow illegal and immoral orders and violate the Constitution? Reality is that "the one" will catch a bullet from one of the other three.
There was a poll going around in thye 90's (a study by some Navy Captain for a thesis paper) asking Marines how willing they would be to fire on American citizens and confiscate firearms. One in four said they would do it. The other three wouldn't.
One in four. Does Clifton REALLY believe the other three are going to sit by and watch "the one" follow illegal and immoral orders and violate the Constitution? Reality is that "the one" will catch a bullet from one of the other three.
Run along Clifton. Go back to the school you got your degree from and demand a refund. If you want a real education about the Armed Forces, grow a pair and serve, don't just read about it from some lame-brained Progressive/Communist leaning site.
HOW I SEE IT:
In the event of a revolution, I see the Armed Forces of the United States staying out of it. I suspect the Joint Chiefs of Staff will tell Obama that the Armed Forces will stand guard and protect America from foreign threats while the citizens sort the mess out domestically (You can let DHS save you!).
A popular internet meme reads, "When tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty."
The Founding Fathers established the means to remove corrupt, tyrannical or incompetent politicians.
In the event of a revolution, I see the Armed Forces of the United States staying out of it. I suspect the Joint Chiefs of Staff will tell Obama that the Armed Forces will stand guard and protect America from foreign threats while the citizens sort the mess out domestically (You can let DHS save you!).
A popular internet meme reads, "When tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty."
The Founding Fathers established the means to remove corrupt, tyrannical or incompetent politicians.
First and foremost is elections.
When JUSTICE (not revenge) must be served, there is impeachment and removal processes.
But what happens when the guilty parties also control government and the bureaucracy to never-before-seen extremes and impeachment and removal becomes impossible?
Rebellion is the FINAL step of RESTORING government to a functional status. Nobody in their right mind rebels simply because they can. Rebellion is done ONLY when the political and legal processes become so stymied or corrupt that there is no other way to restore the government. (The Founding Fathers even created the Order of Succession in order to prevent removing ALL the government and slowing recovery.)
Martin Luther King said, "Everything Hitler did was legal under German law."
Those who know anything about the period know there were some who actively resisted Hitler. Then, the Resistance were considered and treated as traitorous scum.
Today they are heroes. Their actions are taught to German children.
Allen Clifton calls anyone who thinks the Second Amendment gives us the right to rebel "traitors."
I've proved him wrong.
History will prove him wrong too because the real traitors are in office and the heroes are coming to save the nation!
Martin Luther King said, "Everything Hitler did was legal under German law."
Those who know anything about the period know there were some who actively resisted Hitler. Then, the Resistance were considered and treated as traitorous scum.
Today they are heroes. Their actions are taught to German children.
Allen Clifton calls anyone who thinks the Second Amendment gives us the right to rebel "traitors."
I've proved him wrong.
History will prove him wrong too because the real traitors are in office and the heroes are coming to save the nation!
No comments:
Post a Comment