quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

Since you mention Cuba, I seem to recall reading that, in the Battle of Santa Clara, Che Guevara was outnumbered 10:1 with a ragtag band of revolutionaries against a real army. How do you explain that?

Perhaps if you were to read the after action reports you would understand.

The result speaks for itself.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

You're talking about military actions in Asia, not in America. Big difference. If their hearts and minds are oriented to unit, corp, and country, then it should be noted that America is THEIR country and Americans are their countrymen.

I am talking about how marines do business. They do that business where ever they are.
I have first hand knowledge of one such action in oxford miss. when james meridith went to old miss over the objections of ross barnet the gov of miss.
There were three in the hospital and one in the morgue...none were marines.

quote:

Some of the most revolutionary people I've known were ex-military.

Yet you question my service

quote:


I was not suggesting that marines were robots. I am convinced that they would fire on insurgents just as the army (national guard) fired on the students at kent state.
If it had been marines at kent state there would have been no bloodshed...marines know the meaning of fire discipline.
Had the students at kent state been armed insurgents seeking the violent overthrow of the u.s. govt. then there would have been bloodshed.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

You're talking about military actions in Asia, not in America. Big difference. If their hearts and minds are oriented to unit, corp, and country, then it should be noted that America is THEIR country and Americans are their countrymen.

I am talking about how marines do business. They do that business where ever they are.
I have first hand knowledge of one such action in oxford miss. when james meridith went to old miss over the objections of ross barnet the gov of miss.
There were three in the hospital and one in the morgue...none were marines.

quote:

Some of the most revolutionary people I've known were ex-military.

Yet you question my service

That's because none of them were Stalinists. The one thing they had in common is that they loved America deeply, whereas I don't really get that from you. You seem to love Communist Russia more than America, so that's why I have my doubts.

quote:


I was not suggesting that marines were robots. I am convinced that they would fire on insurgents just as the army (national guard) fired on the students at kent state.
If it had been marines at kent state there would have been no bloodshed...marines know the meaning of fire discipline.
Had the students at kent state been armed insurgents seeking the violent overthrow of the u.s. govt. then there would have been bloodshed.

Whenever government uses deadly force against its own citizens, whether a cop shooting someone on the street or the National Guard shooting students, it's a very, very serious matter. It's not something that's taken lightly by the populace, and if martial law is declared and Marines go around shooting people, then I seriously doubt that will engender more support for the government. Massacres and other atrocities tend to leave a bad taste in people's mouths, and could push the fence-sitters and moderates (including even those within the military itself) over to the other side, even if they didn't previously support any revolution.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mupainurpleasure

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

You're talking about military actions in Asia, not in America. Big difference. If their hearts and minds are oriented to unit, corp, and country, then it should be noted that America is THEIR country and Americans are their countrymen.

I am talking about how marines do business. They do that business where ever they are.
I have first hand knowledge of one such action in oxford miss. when james meridith went to old miss over the objections of ross barnet the gov of miss.
There were three in the hospital and one in the morgue...none were marines.

quote:

Some of the most revolutionary people I've known were ex-military.

Yet you question my service

That's because none of them were Stalinists. The one thing they had in common is that they loved America deeply, whereas I don't really get that from you. You seem to love Communist Russia more than America, so that's why I have my doubts.

quote:


I was not suggesting that marines were robots. I am convinced that they would fire on insurgents just as the army (national guard) fired on the students at kent state.
If it had been marines at kent state there would have been no bloodshed...marines know the meaning of fire discipline.
Had the students at kent state been armed insurgents seeking the violent overthrow of the u.s. govt. then there would have been bloodshed.

Whenever government uses deadly force against its own citizens, whether a cop shooting someone on the street or the National Guard shooting students, it's a very, very serious matter. It's not something that's taken lightly by the populace, and if martial law is declared and Marines go around shooting people, then I seriously doubt that will engender more support for the government. Massacres and other atrocities tend to leave a bad taste in people's mouths, and could push the fence-sitters and moderates (including even those within the military itself) over to the other side, even if they didn't previously support any revolution.

we are talking about the armed insurrection of the right being put down right? You think people will have a problem putting down american terrorists trying to overthrow the republic. You think we would of been upset if Mcveigh got shot before he got his van to the federal buildign?

quote:

That's what and insurrection looks like a ttacks on federal instalations. the response would be deadly and swift and for myself I hope it would be as merciless as you imagine a firefight wth islamic extremsits here would be. I could care who is trying to overthrow and destroy our democraticv institutions beyond wanting them to be the example tat tgave the next group that thought a free and faoir election ws grounds for revoloution

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mupainurpleasure

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

You're talking about military actions in Asia, not in America. Big difference. If their hearts and minds are oriented to unit, corp, and country, then it should be noted that America is THEIR country and Americans are their countrymen.

I am talking about how marines do business. They do that business where ever they are.
I have first hand knowledge of one such action in oxford miss. when james meridith went to old miss over the objections of ross barnet the gov of miss.
There were three in the hospital and one in the morgue...none were marines.

quote:

Some of the most revolutionary people I've known were ex-military.

Yet you question my service

That's because none of them were Stalinists. The one thing they had in common is that they loved America deeply, whereas I don't really get that from you. You seem to love Communist Russia more than America, so that's why I have my doubts.

quote:


I was not suggesting that marines were robots. I am convinced that they would fire on insurgents just as the army (national guard) fired on the students at kent state.
If it had been marines at kent state there would have been no bloodshed...marines know the meaning of fire discipline.
Had the students at kent state been armed insurgents seeking the violent overthrow of the u.s. govt. then there would have been bloodshed.

Whenever government uses deadly force against its own citizens, whether a cop shooting someone on the street or the National Guard shooting students, it's a very, very serious matter. It's not something that's taken lightly by the populace, and if martial law is declared and Marines go around shooting people, then I seriously doubt that will engender more support for the government. Massacres and other atrocities tend to leave a bad taste in people's mouths, and could push the fence-sitters and moderates (including even those within the military itself) over to the other side, even if they didn't previously support any revolution.

?

If it was just McVeigh who got shot, then I doubt very many people would be upset. But if innocent bystanders or peaceful protesters get shot, then that would be a completely different matter. Or if something like Abu Ghraib happens on American soil, then that would also be different. Look at how many Americans got upset over that and Guantanamo. You don't think Americans would be even many times more incensed if such things happened to Americans at the hands of their own government?

Consider why McVeigh did what he did. He was upset over the Waco massacre, but if such things start happening with regularity in this country, then we could have hundreds or even thousands of McVeighs running around out there. That's the risk you're running with such a gung ho attitude. It should also be noted that McVeigh was in the military, too.

quote:

That's what and insurrection looks like a ttacks on federal instalations. the response would be deadly and swift and for myself I hope it would be as merciless as you imagine a firefight wth islamic extremsits here would be. I could care who is trying to overthrow and destroy our democraticv institutions beyond wanting them to be the example tat tgave the next group that thought a free and faoir election ws grounds for revoloution

Consider how the single beating of one man (Rodney King) at the hands of the police sparked riots in Los Angeles and other cities. You seriously believe that the government acting "mercilessly" will produce the results you desire?

I believe in compromise, negotiation, and reform, not revolution. I believe that we should keep the lines of communication open, but if the politicians (from both left and right) keep going on with this "my way or the highway" attitude, then I doubt that either side can expect an automatic victory.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mupainurpleasure
i wasnt talking about a protest. I was speaking to a violent coupe with dmestic terorists firtng on federal property and at those protecting it. You think a group of people shooting at a guard unt protecting a Social security office would be mourned? I'm taliking kent state only the stuidents have AKs and they are shooting at the guard...differnent scenario different reaction

quote:

Whenever government uses deadly force against its own citizens, whether a cop shooting someone on the street or the National Guard shooting students, it's a very, very serious matter. It's not something that's taken lightly by the populace, and if martial law is declared and Marines go around shooting people, then I seriously doubt that will engender more support for the government. Massacres and other atrocities tend to leave a bad taste in people's mouths, and could push the fence-sitters and moderates (including even those within the military itself) over to the other side, even if they didn't previously support any revolution.

quote:

That's because none of them were Stalinists. The one thing they had in common is that they loved America deeply, whereas I don't really get that from you. You seem to love Communist Russia more than America, so that's why I have my doubts.

quote:

Consider how the single beating of one man (Rodney King) at the hands of the police sparked riots in Los Angeles and other cities. You seriously believe that the government acting "mercilessly" will produce the results you desire?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mupainurpleasure
i wasnt talking about a protest. I was speaking to a violent coupe with dmestic terorists firtng on federal property and at those protecting it. You think a group of people shooting at a guard unt protecting a Social security office would be mourned? I'm taliking kent state only the stuidents have AKs and they are shooting at the guard...differnent scenario different reaction

quote:

It depends on whether they would be stopping people directly involved in the commission of violent acts - or whether they would take the extra step and go after people merely for their political attitudes, even if they may not be armed revolutionaries. When you talk about a "deadly and swift" response which would be "merciless," it sounds like you advocate that the government should act with reckless impunity in putting down dissent at all costs.

Do you even read what you are responding to?
Notice the part that is bolded.
Yet you ignore his statement and prattle on about things that were not stated...why?
Why are you trying to create a situation different than the question?
Is it because you have no rebuttle so you change the topic?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fightdirecto

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Or because they think the disclaimer covers that. By the way have you denounced Bill Maher because one of his guests said that there would be a race war if Obama losses. No? then i guess you agree with that.

1) I am not a member of Mr. Maher's party organization or his show's staff.

2) Until you wrote this, I was unaware Mr. Maher ever said this - but then, I do not listen to his shows as I do not have cable TV.

Classic False eqivilancy argument/fallacy - have you denounced Reverend Fred Phelps for his sermons at the Westboro Church?

After all, you probably have as much personal or professional connection with Reverend Phelps as I have with Bill Maher.

quote:

Or as any of us have with the Greene County, Virginia Republican Committee.

Case closed. Next?

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

Whenever government uses deadly force against its own citizens, whether a cop shooting someone on the street or the National Guard shooting students, it's a very, very serious matter. It's not something that's taken lightly by the populace, and if martial law is declared and Marines go around shooting people, then I seriously doubt that will engender more support for the government. Massacres and other atrocities tend to leave a bad taste in people's mouths, and could push the fence-sitters and moderates (including even those within the military itself) over to the other side, even if they didn't previously support any revolution.

Where was the public outcry you describe after ruby ridge or wacco?

quote:

quote:

That's because none of them were Stalinists. The one thing they had in common is that they loved America deeply, whereas I don't really get that from you. You seem to love Communist Russia more than America, so that's why I have my doubts.

I know the anatomy of russian history and you lable me a stalinist.

quote:


If I know about female anatomy would you then lable me a woman?

quote:


Where have I expressed any admiration for stalin?

quote:


Because I wont parrot cold war rhetoric you want to play "tail gunner joe mcarthy" and call me a stalinist and a hater of america.

quote:


Yet your friend the seabee by your own admission talked shit about america and it's leaders.

quote:


I do not talk shit I point out historical facts...all you seem to be able to do is attempt character assassination since you have no facts to refute my position.

quote:


Whats next spelling and grammar complaints?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

Well, if we're guessing here, then I would guess that some of those 10,000 insurrectionists could conceivably be ex-military who could train the others in military tactics.

Most knowledgible military folks will agree that it takes a minimum of two years to train a rifleman. Considerably more for command staff. For an officer to attend the "war college" or "staff college" requires about ten or twelve years from comissioning.
If you are familiar with the "bay of pigs" invasion, the training (done clandestinly in mexico)took more than two years. They hit the beach with the best of the best amphibious assault vehicles available at the time. They were led by a marine corp lt col. and had hundreds of veterans as part of the assault force. They never got off the beach. They never had a prayer against a real army. Just as the colonist never had a prayer against the britts but for the professional help they got from folks like mercer,lafayette etal. The artillery supplied by spain through the neherlands. And of course their greatest ally was the britt preoccupation with europe.

Since you mention Cuba, I seem to recall reading that, in the Battle of Santa Clara, Che Guevara was outnumbered 10:1 with a ragtag band of revolutionaries against a real army. How do you explain that?

quote:

quote:

Guessing even further, it's conceivable that some of those Marines might have friends or family members among the insurrectionists, so they might have divided loyalties and sympathies.

Perhaps you could tell us how many times since their inception in 1798 the marines have mutnied?

I don't think any of the military services have ever mutinied, although quite a few of their members joined the Confederacy during the Civil War.

quote:

quote:

Military people are not robots. They have hearts and minds, too.

Might want to check into a place called cam ne...or better yet samar. Their hearts and minds are oriented to unit,corp, country, everything else is a target of opportunity.

quote:

I label you a Stalinist because you previously cited an obscure source by a Stalinist apologist who denied the Ukrainian famine and other atrocities of Stalin. Reputable scholars dismissed that source as hate literature, and yet you cited it as your only source to support your denials of Stalinist atrocities

quote:

Actually, there was quite a bit of public outcry after those events, which led to congressional investigations under pressure because the public was demanding an explanation from their government. That can have the effect of minimizing public outrage, as well as the fact that they were isolated incidents and not something that happens every day.

But by the same token, where was there any threat or sense of urgency on the part of the government that prompted them to launch the raids on Ruby Ridge or Waco in the first place?

quote:

Yes, he did, as do I. And yet, you advocate the Marines shooting Americans because they dare to dissent against their government. That sounds rather Stalinist as well. My friend never advocated anything like that.

quote:

And you don't even point out historical facts, not really. Most of what you do is question others while offering very little substance of your own.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

You're talking about military actions in Asia, not in America. Big difference. If their hearts and minds are oriented to unit, corp, and country, then it should be noted that America is THEIR country and Americans are their countrymen.

I am talking about how marines do business. They do that business where ever they are.
I have first hand knowledge of one such action in oxford miss. when james meridith went to old miss over the objections of ross barnet the gov of miss.
There were three in the hospital and one in the morgue...none were marines.

quote:

Some of the most revolutionary people I've known were ex-military.

Yet you question my service

That's because none of them were Stalinists. The one thing they had in common is that they loved America deeply, whereas I don't really get that from you. You seem to love Communist Russia more than America, so that's why I have my doubts.

quote:

I was not suggesting that marines were robots. I am convinced that they would fire on insurgents just as the army (national guard) fired on the students at kent state...

quote:

Whenever government uses deadly force against its own citizens, whether a cop shooting someone on the street or the National Guard shooting students, it's a very, very serious matter. It's not something that's taken lightly by the populace, and if martial law is declared and Marines go around shooting people, then I seriously doubt that will engender more support for the government. Massacres and other atrocities tend to leave a bad taste in people's mouths, and could push the fence-sitters and moderates (including even those within the military itself) over to the other side, even if they didn't previously support any revolution.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
Do you even read what you are responding to?
Notice the part that is bolded.
Yet you ignore his statement and prattle on about things that were not stated...why?
Why are you trying to create a situation different than the question?
Is it because you have no rebuttle so you change the topic?