NationStates Jolt Archive

This is a question I want you liberals and radicals to ask yourselves. If, (and that is not a very big if right now) Bush wins the reelection, should we consider the possibility of armed Revolution, in order to prevent the inevitable Dictatorship that would arise?

I know to talk about it is treason, so every post after this is hypothetical.

Our Founding Fathers have clearly stated that if the Govt stops representing the people it is our constitutional DUTY!!! to overthrow it

Our Founding Fathers have clearly stated that if the Govt stops representing the people it is our constitutional DUTY!!! to overthrow it

If he wins the election, he is still representing the people, just not you, but you don't always win in a democracy.

So basically if you don't get your way, you're going to force your way onto everyone else?

Hey, here's a theory: the government framed Mark Hacking and told everyone he confessed in custody. Lori was the first against the wall in Bush's reign of terror!

I am against violence, really. A change to the US's authoritarian culture is what we really need.

i want a revolution in england but it will never happen

( puts red flag and rifle in cupboard )

"that'll be the day"

Considering that if Bush was re-elected, the world would probably be destroyed within the next four years. It is our duty as Americans to either throw his ass out legally or illegally. Quite a few people are interested in a revolution. I won't say that I'm included, because I could die if I said it.

I hate violence just as much as the next liberal, but our enemies (conservatives in office) are willing to use it on us, so think of it as just defending ourselves!

Okay:

November 2, 2004: it is learned Bush has won reelection
November 5, 2004: Bush Administration removed by violent revolution and executed
November 6, 2004: Revolutionaries assume power in authoritarian dictatorship?

No, for many MANY reasons.

1. Bush's term will only be for 4 years. His record is already known world-wide, and he will be kept an eye on.
2. A revolution would cause a bigger mess than anything Bush can do in 4 years.
3. There is a highly likely chance that the Constitution will be changed for the extreme worse
4. It will be a pointless effort, seeing as how the U.S. military is the strongest military in the world, and our citizens are less than capable of defeating it's own military.
5. There is another way of being rid of Bush, a peaceful and democratic way, such as the founding fathers meant it to be. It's called, a recall. California had one not even a year ago. And Grey Davis who was elected fell to Arnold Schw. Proving that just because a man is voted doesn't mean he won't be recalled.
6. It would likely cause another World War, if the government were overthrown. Imagine what countries can do if they discovered that there was no U.S. government (or a strong one at that) stopping them from their wishes.
7. The UN will be even less effective

etc. etc.

England has it pretty bad right now. left-wingers have very little to no power at all. If you help liberate America, we could help liberate England though...

The Constitution says nothing about a recall. Impeachment, yes, but Bush hasn't committed a crime.

The Constitution says nothing about a recall. Impeachment, yes, but Bush hasn't committed a crime.
The Constitution doesn't forbid it now does it?

No. It doesn't work that way. It never solves anything. If you want "Revolution" you can do these things.

1)Shop at environmentally and socially conscious companies.
2)Stop buying oil.
3)Protest.
4)Blog, petition, make a website, debate, get your point out.
5)Join organizations like ACLU.
6)Use your rights of speech and the others to their full extent.

It doesn't have to be Authoritarian. The left hates anyone who abuses their own authority, so they wouldn't have a dictatorship. I can guarantee it.

We would be able to defeat our own military. Our military is either
1. Deployed
2. Centralized on a base
3. A reservist sitting on a couch.

We have an Air Force, but it isn't strong enough at home to do much damage to a Revolution. With so many troops in Iraq, it would be a perfect time for one.

It also doesn't have to be long and drawn out. 5,000 fighters could go into Washington D.C, mount an attack, and disperse into the rest of America long before the government could mobilize the military to stop it.

A revolution would be fucking catastrophic, as Colodia said. I mean, if America had a revolution I doubt that Europe or any other nations would just "wash their hands of it." It would be big and savage likely. Something you cant ignore.

The cons outweigh the pros. Think logically people.

No. It doesn't work that way. It never solves anything. If you want "Revolution" you can do these things.

1)Shop at environmentally and socially conscious companies.
2)Stop buying oil.
3)Protest.
4)Blog, petition, make a website, debate, get your point out.
5)Join organizations like ACLU.
6)Use your rights of speech and the others to their full extent.



Oh yeah, great, what has that done for us so far? You don't get it!!! The people in power don't care that we protest! They don't care that we speak out! They don't care that we ride a bike! It doesn't do us any good anymore to do what we've been doing! We have no effect!

The elite doesn't give a shit about us. We vote for them because we can't vote for anyone else. Anything grassroots has only the tiniest, and fully localized effect! We need to make our own decisions! Not "elect" someone to make them for us!

Well look at it this way. If Bush is reelected, will there be rioting? Will there be domestic terrorism? Of course there will! And will we start being opressed more than we already are? Of course we will! When the US has been pushed so far back into Authoritarianism, will we want to revolt then? I am pretty sure that if we don't want to revolt now, we will then.

Oh yeah, great, what has that done for us so far? You don't get it!!! The people in power don't care that we protest! They don't care that we speak out! They don't care that we ride a bike! It doesn't do us any good anymore to do what we've been doing! We have no effect!

The elite doesn't give a shit about us. We vote for them because we can't vote for anyone else. Anything grassroots has only the tiniest, and fully localized effect! We need to make our own decisions! Not "elect" someone to make them for us!
Well done, that's the EXACT thinking they want you to think. Thing is, we DO have a choice. We DO have a trump card over politicians. Thing is, people don't know enough to care nor act.

Alright, pick one of the following individuals as your new President:

George Bush
Dick Cheney
Dennis Hastert
Ted Stevens
Colin Powell
John Snow
Donald Rumsfeld
John Ashcroft
Gale Norton
Ann Veneman
Don Evans
Elaine Chao
Tommy Thompson
Mel Martinez
Norman Mineta
Spencer Abraham
Rod Paige
Anthony Principi
Tom Ridge

Once you make your choice, you have to kill every person above them on that list.

It doesn't have to be Authoritarian. The left hates anyone who abuses their own authority, so they wouldn't have a dictatorship. I can guarantee it.
Gee, think I can borrow that crystal ball into an alternate reality?

We would be able to defeat our own military. Our military is either
1. Deployed
2. Centralized on a base
3. A reservist sitting on a couch.
Do you know how much military force is within the central homeland? Do you know how many cops have the guns and equipment to stop a revolution? Do you know how fast it is for a base on another country to come over?

We have an Air Force, but it isn't strong enough at home to do much damage to a Revolution. With so many troops in Iraq, it would be a perfect time for one.
Reality check time. You think the Pentagon is so slow to react that they would just let 1/3 of their force in Iraq if there's a Civil War in America? Seriously, do you think that? What do you think is more important to a politician, the safety of a forgein nation, or keeping his job?

It also doesn't have to be long and drawn out. 5,000 fighters could go into Washington D.C, mount an attack, and disperse into the rest of America long before the government could mobilize the military to stop it.
Another reality check time...

Alright, pick one of the following individuals as your new President:

George Bush
Dick Cheney
Dennis Hastert
Ted Stevens
Colin Powell
John Snow
Donald Rumsfeld
John Ashcroft
Gale Norton
Ann Veneman
Don Evans
Elaine Chao
Tommy Thompson
Mel Martinez
Norman Mineta
Spencer Abraham
Rod Paige
Anthony Principi
Tom Ridge

Once you make your choice, you have to kill every person above them on that list.


That's kind of the idea. That's why it is a revolution and not an assassination. Why would we just go after the executive branch anyway? There is still the Congress and the Supreme Court in D.C. They are up for attack too.

A change to the US's authoritarian culture is what we really need.


This has already been debated and decided, the US has NO culture. :D

[QUOTE=Colodia]

Do you know how much military force is within the central homeland? Do you know how many cops have the guns and equipment to stop a revolution? Do you know how fast it is for a base on another country to come over?[QUOTE]


Yeah, I do know how many we have. You have to remember, I'm a military brat dude. I've been on about 15% of the bases in the U.S. The military is centralized here, and the de-mobilization of Iraq would be logistically impossible. Plus, there are more than enough radicals in just my CITY to make up a 5,000 person militia. Logistically, it would be incredibly easy to pull off. They don't even have to mount an attack from outside DC! They could drive right into the Mall plaza (where the White House, Congress, and Supreme Court are) and pull it off from there! Logistically, it would be easier than when the Bolsheviks took St. Petersburg!

REVOLUTION!!!

We could degenerate into minor feifdoms and warlord-held territories. And there would be all kinds of shortages too, oh how fun! And we could run around in nomadic motorized bands ravaging the country side, and ambushing civilians. I can't wait!

in order to prevent the inevitable Dictatorship that would arise?

Thing is tho, if there's a revolution, we may have prevented said Dictatorship, however since we have no hard proof it would exist (please no conspiracies here), the revolution loses its point.

The way I see it is that when a Dictatorship surfaces in a democratic society, one should rebel (Locke believed that if a leader wasn't doing their job well they could be overthrown.)

You still haven't told me what you plan to do after you run into the Mall Plaza plan-less. What will you do with the police force that will come after you after you realize that there are A LOT of police guarding every corner of D.C., especially in this year. And just as much for the President.

Well done, that's the EXACT thinking they want you to think. Thing is, we DO have a choice. We DO have a trump card over politicians. Thing is, people don't know enough to care nor act.


Well, if we had a trump card, we sure have been using it without any success! It is true, people don't know enough to care, or act, and our elite is using this to their advantage. Our press sure isn't helping, but do you want to know the truth? Representative government is designed to have an elite. Have you ever heard that Democracy would be Tyranny of the Majority? Well, they are the minority. And because representative government protects the minority, they are using it to the full of its abilities.

But seriously, isn't it obvious that the system works for that minority? I mean damn, that's what the whole Bush Presidency has been about! Serving the needs of the few.

Why don't any of you Bush-haters assassinate him if you hate him so much?

A word of advice.. we did have some one a couple of months back make threats of terror against a government on Nationstates. The police DID contact us for that users information and we did give it to them. It was probably no doubt some teenager joking around, but I assure you he probably isn't laughing right now. A word to the wise!

Come on children, Bush can't totally rig an election. A large proportion of people will have voted for Dubya so just because you voted against him doesnt mean that he shouldnt be in power.

Although fighting against the army would not be a problem, see the French Revolution. I think that the soldiers will have a problem shooting their own people and their friends and family if the revolution comes.

You still haven't told me what you plan to do after you run into the Mall Plaza plan-less. What will you do with the police force that will come after you after you realize that there are A LOT of police guarding every corner of D.C., especially in this year. And just as much for the President.


Planless? Oh dear me, no! Only a small portion of the force will take part in the actual elimination of the elite. The rest would be either destroying the police infrastructure, or engaging them directly! This year would be a bad year to do it. So, some other year sounds pretty nice. The Shrub definitely has some good SS members to protect him, but they are in a poor defensive position.

WTF are you liberals going to do about it? Republicans have all the guns.

A word of advice.. we did have some one a couple of months back make threats of terror against a government on Nationstates. The police DID contact us for that users information and we did give it to them. It was probably no doubt some teenager joking around, but I assure you he probably isn't laughing right now. A word to the wise!


That is true, you guys do take it seriously. But I do not wish to take part in a revolution. I only bring it up as an option, and I take a stand point that it could be successful. Also, the plans have been thought of before. The NS party of America has debated it, and the Weathermen back in the 70's though about it. This isn't my idea, but I'm just saying that it is workable.

Should there be a Revolution?YEAH !!

OK, I am going to steer the thread back on to main course. The logistics of a revolution, or if it could work are less important, but do you believe that one would be a good idea?

i think there should be a revolution. if a regime isn't perfect it should be changed continually untill it is, it may take hundreds of revolutions to get it right, or it may never be right, but we owe it to the people of the future to try.

If he wins the election, he is still representing the people, just not you, but you don't always win in a democracy.

So basically if you don't get your way, you're going to force your way onto everyone else?
representing the wealthiest one percent doesnt translate into representing the people

True dat. And they don't have to be particularly violent either. Like the civil rights movement. It is quite safe to say that that was a revolution.

The Constitution says nothing about a recall. Impeachment, yes, but Bush hasn't committed a crime.
I guess lying to start an unnecessary war and allowing 3000 people to die to do it is just politics as usual?

representing the wealthiest one percent doesnt translate into representing the people

Fo shizzle, and that is why I said that he makes it more obvious than anyone else that our system works for the elite.

Quite a few Americans have demanded his impeachment. I would like that as an option, but currently, the GOP controls most of the offices in America.

Shows right there how easily Americans can be distracted by shiny objects.

funny how some say its treason to discuss revolution yet thats exactly how America acheieved its freedom

Is it though? I think we have to discuss it. It was one of the principles that our country was founded on.

We have the belief that if something doesn't go right, and you can't fix it, DESTROY IT!

Oh dear, let's see who has the guns in this world: A bunch of communist douchebags or the United States Military.

Right. That "revolution" would last for all of ten minutes.

Go ahead, start something. I'll be on the sidelines laughing my ass off as you get cut to shreds by 5.56mm ammunition.

Also, you do realize that ECHELON is keeping track of your discussions, correct?

I'll also laugh my ass off when you are carted off to prison for attempting to assassinate the president of the United States.

Oh dear, let's see who has the guns in this world: A bunch of communist douchebags or the United States Military.

Right. That "revolution" would last for all of ten minutes.

Go ahead, start something. I'll be on the sidelines laughing my ass off as you get cut to shreds by 5.56mm ammunition.
oh your one of those pro-life republicans I see :)

Also, you do realize that ECHELON is keeping track of your discussions, correct?

I'll also laugh my ass off when you are carted off to prison for attempting to assassinate the president of the United States.
who said anything about that Mr Facist

We need to do something. The government has killed too many civilians and censored too many episodes of Gundam SEED to be tolerated.

yeah, but I'm suggesting revolt, not considering revolt. And anyway, the Bolsheviks successfully revolted, even in the face of a huge military.

funny how some say its treason to discuss revolution yet thats exactly how America acheieved its freedom
There's a difference between needless combat when there's a clear way to go around it and fighting for your freedom from a bastardly Kingdom an ocean away.

yeah, but I'm suggesting revolt, not considering revolt. And anyway, the Bolsheviks successfully revolted, even in the face of a huge military.
So? The Americans sucessfully defeated the all-mighty British in the American Revolution. Does that mean EVERY country can do it?

Revolution is, and always will be, the last and final option for necessary change. If it comes to that, the entire world should throw their support behind the revolutionaries.

oh your one of those pro-life republicans I see :)

I'm a libertarian, dumbass.

Also, no one could possibly try to stop the U.S Army. You and your whacked out friends represent some oh... 2% of the population?

Let's all watch the videotape from journalists as the Armed Forces go Tiananmen Square on your ass.

So? The Americans sucessfully defeated the all-mighty British in the American Revolution. Does that mean EVERY country can do it?


Well, considering that 200 rebels (including Castro and Guevara) overthrew the cuban dictator, then yeah, anyone who tries revolution can pull it off, as long as they do it right.

I'm a libertarian, dumbass.

Also, no one could possibly try to stop the U.S Army. You and your whacked out friends represent some oh... 2% of the population?

Let's all watch the videotape from journalists as the Armed Forces go Tiananmen Square on your ass.


OH dear god. A libertarian. *makes sour face* Tell you what, I've disproved your species so called "objective reason" more times than I can count. So unless you have something to add, then bug off. I'll just tear you a new one. And that 2% BS? Why have the results for the poll been so good? People are considering revolution. You can't "objectively" disprove facts. And fuck your small government and low taxes. They ruined my poor state.

OH dear god. A libertarian. *makes sour face* Tell you what, I've disproved your species so called "objective reason" more times than I can count. So unless you have something to add, then bug off. I'll just tear you a new one. And that 2% BS? Why have the results for the poll been so good? People are considering revolution. You can't "objectively" disprove facts. And fuck your small government and low taxes. They ruined my poor state.

Let's see what communism has done...

Improved standard of living? Failure.
Improved standard of wages? Failure.
100 Million People Killed? Yes.

Idiot.

Also, just take a look at this chart:

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COM.TAB1.GIF

Every one of those numbers was a person, just like you. And he/she was killed by the evil of collectivism.

This is a question I want you liberals and radicals to ask yourselves. If, (and that is not a very big if right now) Bush wins the reelection, should we consider the possibility of armed Revolution, in order to prevent the inevitable Dictatorship that would arise?I know to talk about it is treason, so every post after this is hypothetical.

Well considering how most of you will not be able to use a gun for ethical reasons, I can not see you using your hearts to win over a heartless group. Good luck though, i'll be in vegas betting against ya (capitalizing!).

Oh dear, let's see who has the guns in this world: A bunch of communist douchebags or the United States Military.

Right. That "revolution" would last for all of ten minutes.

Go ahead, start something. I'll be on the sidelines laughing my ass off as you get cut to shreds by 5.56mm ammunition.

Are we forgetting the NRA? Also let not forget about the deep South! lol.

:gundge: :mp5:

While the militatry may have better guns, we have brute force! I say we should get rid of all of the corrupted leaders in DC!

Let's see what communism has done...

Improved standard of living? Failure.
Improved standard of wages? Failure.
100 Million People Killed? Yes.


What can I say to that? Well...we've seen your capitalism practiced correctly, and it has been a sick social experiment. But, what I'm wondering is, Libertarians supposedly like people to benefit from Capitalism right? Well, the advantage of communism practiced democratically (like it is supposed to be, and I'm a strict Marxist so don't give me that "it's supposed to be authoritarian" bullshit) like it was in Chile or the Congo, is that everyone gets to benefit from capitalism.

Communism is basically capitalism that everyone gets to practice. It rewards hard work, ambition, but rather than a corrupt wage system and profit only going to the Bourgeoise, everyone benefits.

Shared ownership is a nice thing. Why, I would love for every American to go tooling around in a BMW.

Are we forgetting the NRA? Also let not forget about the deep South! lol.

:gundge: :mp5:

While the militatry may have better guns, we have brute force! I say we should get rid of all of the corrupted leaders in DC!


Hey, if it means that conservatives and liberals start working together, I'm all for that man! We would both be fighting the same thing. Just we would have different opinions.

Our Founding Fathers have clearly stated that if the Govt stops representing the people it is our constitutional DUTY!!! to overthrow it


Since when did your 'Founding Fathers' represent the people? They were hypocrites themselves!

England has it pretty bad right now. left-wingers have very little to no power at all. If you help liberate America, we could help liberate England though...


It was wishy-washy-wanky left-wingers like you that kept Labour out of office all those years, and gave us Thatcher!

Since when did your 'Founding Fathers' represent the people? They were hypocrites themselves!
Well considering that they were the backbone of the revolution alongside the thousands of American colonists who overthrew Britain from our homeland, I fail to see your point.

I am so sorry that you had to go through that. Although, there lies definitive proof to all the Libertarians that privatization of services is a bad idea. And I'm not wishy-washy. Shag a nappie. I'm a Marxist.

Hey, if it means that conservatives and liberals start working together, I'm all for that man! We would both be fighting the same thing. Just we would have different opinions.

I don't know. After the end of the revolution, there's going to be quite a lot of conflict.

You all realize that if a revolution takes place, there's gonna be another civil war, reslting in millions of deaths, hell, what if some crazy group got ahold of one of our many nukes? A revolution would kill more people than it would save.

representing the wealthiest one percent doesnt translate into representing the people

Oh, I'm sorry, I thought there were intelligent people here.
Seriously, if Bush only did a job that satisfied 1% of the people in America, then only 1% would vote for him.
While a revolution may have started this country, it was back when there actually a majority supporting it.
If you believe most of the people in America would be willing to kill their fellow Americans to change the current government, tell me what you are smoking and how to get some.

First off, the asanine replies to this thread just proves the hypocrisy of the leftists in America. You have a problem with war, so you propose war. You believe in democracy, so you talk about overthrowing an ELECTED government. What a bunch of morons.

Second, if you're so convinced that you can defeat the greatest army in the world, then go for it! Let the American military give you just exactly what you deserve!

OH dear god. A libertarian. *makes sour face* Tell you what, I've disproved your species so called "objective reason" more times than I can count. So unless you have something to add, then bug off. I'll just tear you a new one. And that 2% BS? Why have the results for the poll been so good? People are considering revolution. You can't "objectively" disprove facts. And fuck your small government and low taxes. They ruined my poor state.

What poll says most of the US is willing to revolt to change administrations?
I bet there's less than 1% willing to revolt, and not one that could stand against the worst trained policeman in the US.
You can objectively disprove BS.
Low taxes ruined your state? How does that happen?

Are we forgetting the NRA? Also let not forget about the deep South! lol.

:gundge: :mp5:

While the militatry may have better guns, we have brute force! I say we should get rid of all of the corrupted leaders in DC!

I do believe the deep South and NRA are mostly pro-Bush. You won't get your supplies for a revolution from that direction.

Viva la Revolution! (sp?)

Besides I'm getting bored and want something new to watch on CNN.

Although I'd advise any liberal extremists from doing so since it would only give the neo-cons an excuse to round you up.

Remember which side all the gun owners and police are on ppl ;)

Well, considering that 200 rebels (including Castro and Guevara) overthrew the cuban dictator, then yeah, anyone who tries revolution can pull it off, as long as they do it right.

I wonder who's support it was that Castro had?
Could it be... the United States of America?
One of the mistakes of the past, but it does disprove your minority overthrow theory.

What poll says most of the US is willing to revolt to change administrations?
I bet there's less than 1% willing to revolt, and not one that could stand against the worst trained policeman in the US.
You can objectively disprove BS.
Low taxes ruined your state? How does that happen?

I bet its the poll for the American communist party or equal. Let alone the average citizen. The only way lower taxs can ruin anything is if the government does something similiar to any American that lives beyond thier means. How can someone act as though a tax payer just has to pay in taxes at whatever rate the government asks for it. Its the people that ask for it, if you voters dont want it (by voting in a libertarian) then you dont get it.

First off, the asanine replies to this thread just proves the hypocrisy of the leftists in America. You have a problem with war, so you propose war. You believe in democracy, so you talk about overthrowing an ELECTED government. What a bunch of morons.


Despiration can make people do things they normally wouldn't do. Of course its not like anyone would rise up upon Bush's re-election.

Personally, I can't wait for Bush to be re-elected and then see what happens.

{QUOTE]
Second, if you're so convinced that you can defeat the greatest army in the world, then go for it! Let the American military give you just exactly what you deserve![/QUOTE]

I hesitate to call america's army the greatest. Israel has the best win record and a low friendly fire count as well (or at least I'm pretty sure). And all of america's wins, if I'm not mistaken were done in coalitions with its traditional allies.

But I will admit...upon an uprising there would be a very efficient crushing of the rebellion by the military like Saddam did the Shia.

What poll says most of the US is willing to revolt to change administrations?
I bet there's less than 1% willing to revolt, and not one that could stand against the worst trained policeman in the US.
You can objectively disprove BS.
Low taxes ruined your state? How does that happen?


I have this one in the bag.

I never said a majority proposed it.
I'm from Oregon, and our large Libertarian population refused taxes so much that we had to take 21 days off of the school year, cut all extra-curricular classes, lay off our teachers and policemen, and then the Libertarians went so far as to offer privatization as an alternative. Uh, god. Did you see what happened when Margaret Thatcher tried privatizing England? Nothing works over there! Trains arrive 15-30 minutes late! Services have been deemed totally ineffective!

Less than 1% willing to revolt? You must be thinking of a different kind of revolt. A number of my fellow leftists have thought of an organized, Bolshevik style revolt if there is no other clear option.

Castro backed by the U.S.? Ha!!! I have read the account by Che Guevara of the revolt, and they, not only had recieved no backing, but were fighting an American installed dictator, who had American Weapons!
Castro pleaded with America for support, but all he got was repayment with the Bay of Pigs

Whoa,

Yeah, Shh, the Feds are listening...though only to hypothetical subversion.

Why is it that the word Revolution is only associated with violent revolutions? And those really do always degenerate into more violence, open handed power grabs, terror, and a dictatorship of something. There have been nonviolent revolutions, but those take a lot more will power to acheive. And for all the talk about throwing a revolution, there's precious little talk going on about what to replace the current system with.

The police probably would crush a small revolutions, especially a violent one; there's no way that a small group could withstand even a fraction of the firepower of the US DoD. But the question becomes, will the soldiers fire on their own people. It made a fairly small number of Russians successful in 91. Of course, if its you and ten friends then you're sol.

But if there's gonna be a hypothetical revolution, let's hope its a constitutional revolution. Flawed it may be, but constitutions don't oppress you, people do.

And yeah, if this white gloved Stalinism keeps up it may become modern civilization's bravest hope.

I bet its the poll for the American communist party or equal. Let alone the average citizen. The only way lower taxs can ruin anything is if the government does something similiar to any American that lives beyond thier means. How can someone act as though a tax payer just has to pay in taxes at whatever rate the government asks for it. Its the people that ask for it, if you voters dont want it (by voting in a libertarian) then you dont get it.


I didn't say one damn thing about a poll. No one has discussed revolution in a poll before! The point I am trying to make to you Conservatives and Libertarians is this. The American left has been galvanized recently. We have been left completely out of any decision making process. Our voices are not heard. Your Capitalist and Moralist voices are heard just fine, but we are fed up with the lack of willing ears.

This election is meant to be our chance at getting back the power we had earned. We fear for the world without a liberal voice. We fear a Conservative America. The world does too! So this election is our last hope to change one of the most important parts of American history. If that fails, we will not let our voice cry out for nothing. Their will be rioting. There will be revolt. I can guarantee it.

Whoa,

Yeah, Shh, the Feds are listening...though only to hypothetical subversion.

Why is it that the word Revolution is only associated with violent revolutions? And those really do always degenerate into more violence, open handed power grabs, terror, and a dictatorship of something. There have been nonviolent revolutions, but those take a lot more will power to acheive. And for all the talk about throwing a revolution, there's precious little talk going on about what to replace the current system with.

The police probably would crush a small revolutions, especially a violent one; there's no way that a small group could withstand even a fraction of the firepower of the US DoD. But the question becomes, will the soldiers fire on their own people. It made a fairly small number of Russians successful in 91. Of course, if its you and ten friends then you're sol.

But if there's gonna be a hypothetical revolution, let's hope its a constitutional revolution. Flawed it may be, but constitutions don't oppress you, people do.

And yeah, if this white gloved Stalinism keeps up it may become modern civilization's bravest hope.


I agree. Anything is better than violence. But the problem is, there are no ears turned towards us right now. We can yell, scream, rant, and rave all we want, but the only thing that we will get is the cold shoulder.

If there was a revolt, it wouldn't be small scale. There are more than enough leftists who want change that badly, who would be willing to join in. My city has 1 million people, and I bet 5,000 could easily be found who would participate.

I think the only way I would support a revolution is if there is perfectly clear evidence that shows without a doubt that Bush is becoming a dictator.

Other then that, I'd rather use a recall.

This much is my completely candid and uninfluenced opinion on the matter. Revolution is the only solution and, if we play our cards right, we will be able to win.
The plan is simple. We start by gaining allies. Like minded revolutionaries, sociopathic survivalists, organized crime rings, and whoever else may be willing to join our cause. The crime rings will be difficult to ally, but I'm sure a promise of the influencial and lucrative role as the military hierchy will tempt enough mob bosses.
Next, we take out law enforcement groups in the cities of our criminal allies and whatever small towns we can. The former will be needed as a power base, and the latter for food supplies. This will result in military reprisal, but we will probably have gotten a city with a news station (I always wanted to be on the Today show) so we can express our view of the situation. We will gain a second wave of allies from media coverage along with the mob's ability to assimilate lesser gains with promise of power.
The military reprisal will be artillary initially, so we'll just need to buckle in for that. They'll hit power plants, so we'd need generators like no other, a demand eased by our survivalist cohorts. Next will come either armored divisions or aircraft. Armored divisions can be countered with mob makeshift weapons, but we'll need something to take on the bombers. I suggest cropdusters and civilian aircraft with makeshift weapon mounts. It's risky and potentially suicidal, but unless we can take airbases to defend every major city, it will have to do.
Eventually, they'll send in infantry, and urban warfare will break out. Street gangs equipped with mob quality weapons, combined with the revolutionary militia, will be able to hold a strong position. Gas grenades salvaged from police and SWAT would help exponentially. In any case, we'd hold our own in all the cities at best or go out with our boots on at worst. In either case our message gets across.
Should we withstand the initial military assault, other criminal factions, anarchist sects, terrorist cells, hacker guilds, and anyone else who feels modern America has oppressed them will become our second wave, invigorated by our courage. We coordinate the attack using the hackers' internet underground, pulling off a decisive advantage with gradual offensive gain, presistent defense, and electronic warfare. Sooner or later, their back will break.
Internal fighting will be an issue. Criminal sects fighting for power, terrorist cells trying to wreak havoc, and anything else that can be attributed to anarchy. How we solve that I'm not sure of as of yet, but I'm open to any suggestions to help perfect or correct my hypothetical solution to our problem.

The only way the US could be saved in case of a fascist government taking hold is a plea to the UN for starters.

I must admit I have no idea how it will progress. However, the world must be alerted, and a movement/plight be given international recognition before it is valid. The Anti-Apartheid movment comes to mind. International support helped that one along.

A violent revolution has a good chance of failing. If one does occur it's going to be carried out with covert assassinations on the typical key figures and then worming your way to the top in the power vacuum.

As for police and soldiers firing on people...that's a hard one to call now that everyone is so polarized. One soldier may see a traitor, another may see their brother. So I definitely would not want to use an war-style violent revolution (with 'theatres' and 'fronts'). Terrorism and assassination would be the best route.

And lets face it...if America starts bombing American cities, it may actually create more supporters of a revolt. That's what seems to be going on in Iraq.

This much is my completely candid and uninfluenced opinion on the matter. Revolution is the only solution and, if we play our cards right, we will be able to win.
The plan is simple. We start by gaining allies. Like minded revolutionaries, sociopathic survivalists, organized crime rings, and whoever else may be willing to join our cause. The crime rings will be difficult to ally, but I'm sure a promise of the influencial and lucrative role as the military hierchy will tempt enough mob bosses.
Next, we take out law enforcement groups in the cities of our criminal allies and whatever small towns we can. The former will be needed as a power base, and the latter for food supplies. This will result in military reprisal, but we will probably have gotten a city with a news station (I always wanted to be on the Today show) so we can express our view of the situation. We will gain a second wave of allies from media coverage along with the mob's ability to assimilate lesser gains with promise of power.
The military reprisal will be artillary initially, so we'll just need to buckle in for that. They'll hit power plants, so we'd need generators like no other, a demand eased by our survivalist cohorts. Next will come either armored divisions or aircraft. Armored divisions can be countered with mob makeshift weapons, but we'll need something to take on the bombers. I suggest cropdusters and civilian aircraft with makeshift weapon mounts. It's risky and potentially suicidal, but unless we can take airbases to defend every major city, it will have to do.
Eventually, they'll send in infantry, and urban warfare will break out. Street gangs equipped with mob quality weapons, combined with the revolutionary militia, will be able to hold a strong position. Gas grenades salvaged from police and SWAT would help exponentially. In any case, we'd hold our own in all the cities at best or go out with our boots on at worst. In either case our message gets across.
Should we withstand the initial military assault, other criminal factions, anarchist sects, terrorist cells, hacker guilds, and anyone else who feels modern America has oppressed them will become our second wave, invigorated by our courage. We coordinate the attack using the hackers' internet underground, pulling off a decisive advantage with gradual offensive gain, presistent defense, and electronic warfare. Sooner or later, their back will break.
Internal fighting will be an issue. Criminal sects fighting for power, terrorist cells trying to wreak havoc, and anything else that can be attributed to anarchy. How we solve that I'm not sure of as of yet, but I'm open to any suggestions to help perfect or correct my hypothetical solution to our problem.


That is a great way to gain support. Although one other works, for weapons, just go to Bulgaria to get crates of new AK-47's for $100 each? Let's see, only $100 an AK? Sounds like a person could save up for two weeks, and have more than enough.

That is a great way to gain support. Although one other works, for weapons, just go to Bulgaria to get crates of new AK-47's for $100 each? Let's see, only $100 an AK? Sounds like a person could save up for two weeks, and have more than enough.

Sounds like fun. Let me know when its going down so I can set my VCR.

The only way the US could be saved in case of a fascist government taking hold is a plea to the UN for starters.

I must admit I have no idea how it will progress. However, the world must be alerted, and a movement/plight be given international recognition before it is valid. The Anti-Apartheid movment comes to mind. International support helped that one along.

A violent revolution has a good chance of failing. If one does occur it's going to be carried out with covert assassinations on the typical key figures and then worming your way to the top in the power vacuum.

As for police and soldiers firing on people...that's a hard one to call now that everyone is so polarized. One soldier may see a traitor, another may see their brother. So I definitely would not want to use an war-style violent revolution (with 'theatres' and 'fronts'). Terrorism and assassination would be the best route.

And lets face it...if America starts bombing American cities, it may actually create more supporters of a revolt. That's what seems to be going on in Iraq.



That works, but assassinations are generally considered very cowardly. So is terrorism. There is no way to elicit support for either of those. What will have to be conducted is raids. Guerilla style raids that accomplish the same thing as the assassinations. They will at least be able to elicit some support, as they are quite a bit braver.

I didn't say one damn thing about a poll. No one has discussed revolution in a poll before! The point I am trying to make to you Conservatives and Libertarians is this. The American left has been galvanized recently. We have been left completely out of any decision making process. Our voices are not heard. Your Capitalist and Moralist voices are heard just fine, but we are fed up with the lack of willing ears. This election is meant to be our chance at getting back the power we had earned. We fear for the world without a liberal voice. We fear a Conservative America. The world does too! So this election is our last hope to change one of the most important parts of American history. If that fails, we will not let our voice cry out for nothing. Their will be rioting. There will be revolt. I can guarantee it.

You have been completly left out in the dark because of the issues you choose to fight for and against. If Americans dont vote you in, then Americans dont want you in it. That is why you should be embracing states rights because if you look at how many states were for Bush (or when every republican runs) you would realize there is no chance at changing policy at the National level when both the house and senate are ran by Conservatives. Think about it the Conservtives now run the House. Senate, Presidency and majority on the Supreme court.....Now the only people to blame for all of this is yourselves.

If you would stray away from areas that attack alot of democrats and republicans favorite things (owning land with less zoning laws, Having legal guns of thier choice to be safe with, and the big one embracing less taxes or maintaining a steady level instead of always more, more, more. You may have a shot at winning. You should know being from Oregon and most Democrats and libertairians and Republicans dont want more taxes here, they want tax reform and taxes cut. If you would cut out the stupid ass school administrators that make 6 digit incomes for micro managing our teachers who already had a good figure head 'Principles' in place.

Look at you guys just tacked on another 5% increase tax on cellphones in portland. You guys are tax hungry for the peoples money and it shows....( why do you think all tax issues fail, you can blame it on the tax payers because its thier money, and they see you guys as to hungry) stray away from trying to control peoples money and other tools (guns, suv's ect... and you may have a shot)

That is a great way to gain support. Although one other works, for weapons, just go to Bulgaria to get crates of new AK-47's for $100 each? Let's see, only $100 an AK? Sounds like a person could save up for two weeks, and have more than enough.Mass purchases of AK-47s. Even Bush would see the red flag. Unless, of course, we used our mob allies to smuggle in the weapons...
There's still the issue of key cities. Chicago is a must due to the Today Show, as is New York from sheer recruitment power. Most likely Bush will go to the same place he went in 9-11: Offutt Air Force Base. This makes Omaha Nebraska essential if we do plan to hit their power base. Good place to recruit, too: it's the crossroads of the drug industry, after all. It's the busiest point north of the border that gets run through by Interstate 80. San Francisco would be good, for whatever criminals it harbors and global access via airports. Imagine converting passenger planes into heavy bombers!
We're going to need foreign allies. The Muslims will naturally love us for aiding them in the moralistic aspect of their cause: bringing down the opressive American regime. Every country in the Americas would be thrilled by immigration opportunities, new trade opporunities, and the leveling of the playing field. Africa would be royally screwed until Europe comes to their rescue, keeping the major source of foreign retribution sedated. North Korea will become estatic and, hopefully, begin disarming once it feels the old America is kaput. This will help garner foreign support from other nations and help ease foreign tensions.
Again, my hypothetical concepts are not perfect, and are open for suggestion.

Summary: AKs are good if smuggled in, list of key cities and why, and foreign reactions are looking good!

Oh, and Faithfull. Democracy ceases to be a democracy when the people's opinions are swayed not by the charisma or reason of a candidate, but by fear of a shadowpuppet crafted by the hand of the current President. Example: shortly after the DNC, a terror threat was found. It was later found to be obsolete, but it did what was needed for: it killed the support mustered during the DNC.

I'm a libertarian, dumbass.

Also, no one could possibly try to stop the U.S Army. You and your whacked out friends represent some oh... 2% of the population?

Let's all watch the videotape from journalists as the Armed Forces go Tiananmen Square on your ass.
of course you sided with the Chi-coms at Tianenem square--afterall thast who your clay idol Poppa Bush sided with

Since when did your 'Founding Fathers' represent the people? They were hypocrites themselves!
well they were advanced for their times I guess...but they did say alotta cool revolutionary stuff

First off, the asanine replies to this thread just proves the hypocrisy of the leftists in America. You have a problem with war, so you propose war. You believe in democracy, so you talk about overthrowing an ELECTED government. What a bunch of morons.

Second, if you're so convinced that you can defeat the greatest army in the world, then go for it! Let the American military give you just exactly what you deserve!
talk about morons--the govt cant use US troops against the people cause thats an unconstitutional violation of posse comitatus

The first thing I want to know is;

Why do most of you have to in some way, shape or form insult or flame someone for expressing their belifs? O.K., so you think the idea of a revolution is stupid and we'd never win, why go around in this forum knocking someone else's beliefs just because you don't agree?

Second is;

Do most of you even realise, though they may not currently be open or up to the idea of revolution, we have several militias (including the infamous Michigan Militia, though I list it only for size purposes) the Government keeps a close eye on due to their size? That means the Government is worried about the potential at least 1 of our militias have to succeed in a revolt - they know that, at least, one of these militias could make things very difficult for the U.S. Military.

Now the rest is just a rant, if you won't be able to tell, but have ANY of you watched the show COPS before. If you have, you can't say that any of these possible revolutionary forces wouldn't have at least one person capable of taking on a police officer. Let's also factor in those people who spent 4 years in the Marines or some form of military and decided it wasn't for them, and support a revolution and/or our militias, or whoever decides to mount a revolution? Or those who went through military training programs for school (and I've only heard of it, but still, enough people claim to have taken the course that it's moderately believable); COTEV is a program that supposedly gets your credits for your diploma rapidly, through PT. And while PT isn't combat training, per se, a lot of the police officers we have working the streets probably couldn't even pass some of the PT courses COTEV (as a program for the military) probably has. Aside from our SWAT, which never seems that great, much of the police we see are, for lack of a better word, "dumbshits."

Also, I live in Oregon as well and I've watched much of these things he speaks of take place. Let's not forget that we're releasing prisoners scott free because of the tax problem; my family has be effected directly by this, as my mom's druggie boyfriend won't stupid harassing us now that they let him out less then a week after catching him, after spending months if not over a year to catch him. And this is no damn joke, either; I've had police officers come to the door just asking about him, like something you might see on Law & Order. So they just wasted who knows how much money to find this guy, only to let him harass us in prison and then let him out completely free, without trial or anything, just to harass us even more (yes, I know they weren't sitting there going "Yeah, we're let this one out just to piss Uradia's family off," but hopefully you all get what I am saying).

And, while I am no expert, I'm pretty sure the constitution states that if our Government exhibits corruption (and I'd say they have, especially with how Bush seems to be stripping away our freedoms in the name of safety), that not only do we have the right to bare arms, as one other on this thread said (forgive me for forgetting your name and being too lazy to go look it up), it is our duty to. We'd most likely need help, as the whole "I don't want to shoot my brother" thing arises, but should we be able to get past these few things, a revolution is completely feasible and should be an option should he be re-elected.

Let's face it, while it's possible we could vote him out of office, it's at the same time not possible (as much as anything can be), considering we've tried to get him out. And nothing is as cut and dry as "Your people voted for him, what's the problem?" Our people aren't mind readers, for one, and no country's "people" are, so no country could forsee a Bush, and with a democracy, it's extremely likely that a President who doesn't support the beliefs of his people could become President. That much should be obvious.

And I firmly support what Commandante said. But it's true that with his re-election, should it come, we'll most likely have double the protests and action taken, even if it is in the form of votes (though I don't see it happening, as I don't see a recall/impeachment being possible as he shouldn't have won in the first place, so any vote/ballet/complaint to congress will just be dismissed). Within a small matter of time we realised the mistake that was Bush the first time (and doesn't anymore remember the ballet-scandal in Florida), and we began protesting... Oregon had quite a few, I remember very distinctly, even if they weren't all against Bush, as I imagine no state would have all-Bush protests (protests against protests, and the like, but how do I know? I didn't go out to protest myself to see, so I couldn't know for sure, but when I drove by there were a lot of anti-Bush stuff).

But who am I, other then a stupid, lazy American? Then again, what do I have to be to use common sense, and see what is right in front of my eyes? Not much.

Can someone direct me to the forum dedicated soley to complimenting the other person?

http://www.jihadunspun.com/

Please be gentle; this is my first ever post on the NationStates forum that I can recall, and I've been playing since only 120,000 nations were recorded. I think it was 120k, I remember it being much smaller then 800k and Jennifer Government was just coming out. Still have my first edition in almost perfect condition... stupid Mom.

Be patient, my disciple.

talk about morons--the govt cant use US troops against the people cause thats an unconstitutional violation of posse comitatus

See? Here's a testament to how lazy, and perhaps dumb (for those who like to insult people), I am. I didn't know that, nor did I have the motivation to go look up anything that might have pointed me in the information's direction.

The first thing I want to know is;

Why do most of you have to in some way, shape or form insult or flame someone for expressing their belifs? O.K., so you think the idea of a revolution is stupid and we'd never win, why go around in this forum knocking someone else's beliefs just because you don't agree?My theory about their hostility is such: they fear change, fear leads to panic, panic leads to hostility, and hostility leads to flaming and such.Second is;

Do most of you even realise, though they may not currently be open or up to the idea of revolution, we have several militias (including the infamous Michigan Militia, though I list it only for size purposes) the Government keeps a close eye on due to their size? That means the Government is worried about the potential at least 1 of our militias have to succeed in a revolt - they know that, at least, one of these militias could make things very difficult for the U.S. Military.Yet they have trouble with organized crime. That is why they are such a critical ally in the plan I posted on the previous page.Now the rest is just a rant, if you won't be able to tell, but have ANY of you watched the show COPS before. If you have, you can't say that any of these possible revolutionary forces wouldn't have at least one person capable of taking on a police officer. Let's also factor in those people who spent 4 years in the Marines or some form of military and decided it wasn't for them, and support a revolution and/or our militias, or whoever decides to mount a revolution? Or those who went through military training programs for school (and I've only heard of it, but still, enough people claim to have taken the course that it's moderately believable); COTEV is a program that supposedly gets your credits for your diploma rapidly, through PT. And while PT isn't combat training, per se, a lot of the police officers we have working the streets probably couldn't even pass some of the PT courses COTEV (as a program for the military) probably has. Aside from our SWAT, which never seems that great, much of the police we see are, for lack of a better word, "dumbshits."Yet another brilliant point. Exactly why I didn't really bother going into detail when dealing with basic law enforcement.Also, I live in Oregon as well and I've watched much of these things he speaks of take place. Let's not forget that we're releasing prisoners scott free because of the tax problem; my family has be effected directly by this, as my mom's druggie boyfriend won't stupid harassing us now that they let him out less then a week after catching him, after spending months if not over a year to catch him. And this is no damn joke, either; I've had police officers come to the door just asking about him, like something you might see on Law & Order. So they just wasted who knows how much money to find this guy, only to let him harass us in prison and then let him out completely free, without trial or anything, just to harass us even more (yes, I know they weren't sitting there going "Yeah, we're let this one out just to piss Uradia's family off," but hopefully you all get what I am saying).Send your story to Michael Moore. He'll eat it like a meter wide donut. In any case, this goes to show how easy pulling off 'Stage One' would be.And, while I am no expert, I'm pretty sure the constitution states that if our Government exhibits corruption (and I'd say they have, especially with how Bush seems to be stripping away our freedoms in the name of safety), that not only do we have the right to bare arms, as one other on this thread said (forgive me for forgetting your name and being too lazy to go look it up), it is our duty to. We'd most likely need help, as the whole "I don't want to shoot my brother" thing arises, but should we be able to get past these few things, a revolution is completely feasible and should be an option should he be re-elected.I believe this was mentioned on page one. As for the brother VS brother, I think that, if you consider people who like each other tend to have similiar views on life, we don't really need to worry about it. I'm not saying people won't lose relatives. I'm just saying they won't need to kill close friends or immediate family.Let's face it, while it's possible we could vote him out of office, it's at the same time not possible (as much as anything can be), considering we've tried to get him out. And nothing is as cut and dry as "Your people voted for him, what's the problem?" Our people aren't mind readers, for one, and no country's "people" are, so no country could forsee a Bush, and with a democracy, it's extremely likely that a President who doesn't support the beliefs of his people could become President. That much should be obvious.Hence, open revolt becomes essential. Bush already has the easily cowed of America pinned with media censorship and fear of attack, the two tools of tyranny.And I firmly support what Commandante said. But it's true that with his re-election, should it come, we'll most likely have double the protests and action taken, even if it is in the form of votes (though I don't see it happening, as I don't see a recall/impeachment being possible as he shouldn't have won in the first place, so any vote/ballet/complaint to congress will just be dismissed). Within a small matter of time we realised the mistake that was Bush the first time (and doesn't anymore remember the ballet-scandal in Florida), and we began protesting... Oregon had quite a few, I remember very distinctly, even if they weren't all against Bush, as I imagine no state would have all-Bush protests (protests against protests, and the like, but how do I know? I didn't go out to protest myself to see, so I couldn't know for sure, but when I drove by there were a lot of anti-Bush stuff).Bush simply has too many connections to remove through nonviolent means. And even when he dies of old age, his regime will live on. He may die, but his regime will not. People do not die if you clip off a fingernail.But who am I, other then a stupid, lazy American? Then again, what do I have to be to use common sense, and see what is right in front of my eyes? Not much.An intelligent poster who has made a fantastic first impression. Welcome to NS Forums.Can someone direct me to the forum dedicated soley to complimenting the other person?

http://www.jihadunspun.com/

Please be gentle; this is my first ever post on the NationStates forum that I can recall, and I've been playing since only 120,000 nations were recorded. I think it was 120k, I remember it being much smaller then 800k and Jennifer Government was just coming out. Still have my first edition in almost perfect condition... stupid Mom.Forum of compliments? Afraid not. May as well look for a blizzard in Texas.

Bush simply has too many connections to remove through nonviolent means. And even when he dies of old age, his regime will live on. He may die, but his regime will not. People do not die if you clip off a fingernail.

Sad but true, even if I think it goes a bit deeper. But then, I may just be spending too much time at jihadunspun.com. Regardless, and despite the fact I'm voting for Kerry, I do think this is going to be a close call.

I don't remember what was said exactly or where it was said, but didn't Bush Senior's own wife say that there's been too many Bush's in office as it is? That she didn't think there'd be another, even this one, because of that fact? Whatever the case, whatever she truly said (as I know it's still along those lines), I felt a sparkle inside.

But here's a thought for you all, and I may just literally be mentally unstable, but I feel an inherent urge to take another human being's life. But I also feel a moral urge to preserve life and all those nice things we hold so dear, at least our society. Thus, I plan to join the Marines, and take as much of an active role in Iraq as I possibly can. I plan to do all I can to save my life and the people around me, while taking the lives of those I see as enemies, or people attempting to take my life or another human being's.

All at the same time I look at myself with disgust, wishing I could see past all of this, wishing I could impart wisdom unto others and let them see the stupidity of EVERYONE'S ways. I'm by far not perfect, I hold standards for myself that I can't even meet, but I can see my errors and I am open to hearing all the opinions in the world on my errors or things people see as an error in my personality.

But no people are a sole entity, no people can collectively be judged, not even the most extremist nations in the world. We all have our black sheep, we all have our Bushes, and our Operation: Iraqi Freedoms and even our own Terror Alert System. This is to say we're all flawed, but we're all human, and we're all beautiful.

But I'll still fight in a revolution, should one happen, and I do feel it is inevitable if regretable and almost the only fesible option. Really, a recall is not feasible, if you think about it and survey all the other "evidence" out there. And don't expect me trying to put my point acrossed will make me any less lazy, because it won't, so you'll have to find the links yourself. I'm sure you could find enough about Bush in Oregon alone.... clear cut to prevent forest fires? My forehead is tingling warmly as I attempt to even comment on that.

The clear solution would be to abolish all the presidential parties. Our President shouldn't be allowed to follow to fervently his beliefs, as they often contradict many of his/her (just to be PC) people's. A President is there for his people, right? So he should embody all of his people's belief's, and by people that means every last person in his nation, and not the beliefs of his party. This isn't to appeal to the strongest side, it's to appeal to every side, right? Not to fix their problems, but to fix everyone's problems.

If he doesn't do that, one way or another, any way, he should be removed and the Government fixed. For the people, and in this case for EVERY person, not just the American people. Bush is a threat to the world.

And off the subject, somewhat;

Send your story to Michael Moore. He'll eat it like a meter wide donut. In any case, this goes to show how easy pulling off 'Stage One' would be.

was one of the funniest comments I've read in a while. Thank you for the laughter. I had to pull my sister in here twice to quote something you said I thought was funny. But, as the pattern goes, I'm too lazy and forgetful to quote the second comment. Sorry. Blizzard in Texas, I think. Still...

And as for the brother against brother thing... I can see your point, but my brother and I fight pretty hard sometimes. He almost broke my nose once. Then again, I was a piece of crap brother, and I used to beat him up all the time. Then around 14 he shot up to 6'2'' or so. But that's beside the point... It's just, I agree with whoever said that our soldiers might have a problem firing at fellow Americans in some cases. Then again, maybe not, but I see it being a problem big enough to possibly botch a mission.

Still, thank you for making my first post pleasent. I'm starting to think I was too frightened for my own good. I can't help being affraid of forums, though.

See? Here's a testament to how lazy, and perhaps dumb (for those who like to insult people), I am. I didn't know that, nor did I have the motivation to go look up anything that might have pointed me in the information's direction.

Sorry, I haven't read the entire thread. Excuse me if someone's already pointed out that military action against the United States is treason, punishable by death. Take this scenario: you are a member of the Capitol police. An angry, revolutionary, apparently Communist mob is descending upon you. Do you let them overrun you because they're Americans to, or do you take those foo's out with your G36?

If he wins the election, he is still representing the people, just not you, but you don't always win in a democracy.

So basically if you don't get your way, you're going to force your way onto everyone else?
Election ... electoral college election? Popular election? Election of judges election? Maybe specify?

The Constitution says nothing about a recall. Impeachment, yes, but Bush hasn't committed a crime.
wtf>>?! Do you know what "crime" means? What is your measure for use of that word?

It is a republican election, and I do mean that with a lowercase r.

Remember the Supreme Court ruling: under the Fourteenth Amendment, we could not continue recounts in one state without recounts in every state. At the most recent count before the ruling, Bush was the winner.

wtf>>?! Do you know what "crime" means? What is your measure for use of that word?

Violation of the law.

Also, you do realize that ECHELON is keeping track of your discussions, correct?

I'll also laugh my ass off when you are carted off to prison for attempting to assassinate the president of the United States.
And do YOU realize ECHELON is outdated by a decade now? They've moved onto bigger and better PATRIOT II oriented things. Type up MATRIX sometime.

Hey, if some guy deep inside the Pentagon spends 16 hours a day reading the conversations of Communists and terrorists, is some guy deep inside the Pentagon starting to develop a deep hatred of America?

Oh, I'm sorry, I thought there were intelligent people here.
Seriously, if Bush only did a job that satisfied 1% of the people in America, then only 1% would vote for him.
While a revolution may have started this country, it was back when there actually a majority supporting it.
If you believe most of the people in America would be willing to kill their fellow Americans to change the current government, tell me what you are smoking and how to get some.
Seriously, you apparently don't understand the percentage of represented people who actually show up to vote so your 1% comparison isn't particularly valid here. People often vote for the popular guy regardless of how satisfied they are with what the person does. So when the popular guy has his faults exposed in great deal, being popular dissuades otherwise critical thinking individuals to advocate on the part of their wishes and not their better judgement.

Whoa,

Yeah, Shh, the Feds are listening...though only to hypothetical subversion.

Why is it that the word Revolution is only associated with violent revolutions? And those really do always degenerate into more violence, open handed power grabs, terror, and a dictatorship of something. There have been nonviolent revolutions, but those take a lot more will power to acheive. And for all the talk about throwing a revolution, there's precious little talk going on about what to replace the current system with.

The police probably would crush a small revolutions, especially a violent one; there's no way that a small group could withstand even a fraction of the firepower of the US DoD. But the question becomes, will the soldiers fire on their own people. It made a fairly small number of Russians successful in 91. Of course, if its you and ten friends then you're sol.

But if there's gonna be a hypothetical revolution, let's hope its a constitutional revolution. Flawed it may be, but constitutions don't oppress you, people do.

And yeah, if this white gloved Stalinism keeps up it may become modern civilization's bravest hope.
You've had some good posts. In my opinion, it seems the violence in so many propositions reflects a vindication that not only are people pissed and willing to show it off like any other animal that has the same regions of psychological faculty affronted ... bare fangs if ya got em ... but also the fact that the majority of the people who think about it enough probably know the whole point in the first place of letting yourselves be governed is by the idea you're having your best interests taken care of, closest to heart as can be held by a relatively anonymous group of others. It hurts to be betrayed, whether you were stupid and not paying attention or really doing your best and still aiming for something better.

Mass purchases of AK-47s. Even Bush would see the red flag. Unless, of course, we used our mob allies to smuggle in the weapons...
There's still the issue of key cities. Chicago is a must due to the Today Show, as is New York from sheer recruitment power. Most likely Bush will go to the same place he went in 9-11: Offutt Air Force Base. This makes Omaha Nebraska essential if we do plan to hit their power base. Good place to recruit, too: it's the crossroads of the drug industry, after all. It's the busiest point north of the border that gets run through by Interstate 80. San Francisco would be good, for whatever criminals it harbors and global access via airports. Imagine converting passenger planes into heavy bombers!
We're going to need foreign allies. The Muslims will naturally love us for aiding them in the moralistic aspect of their cause: bringing down the opressive American regime. Every country in the Americas would be thrilled by immigration opportunities, new trade opporunities, and the leveling of the playing field. Africa would be royally screwed until Europe comes to their rescue, keeping the major source of foreign retribution sedated. North Korea will become estatic and, hopefully, begin disarming once it feels the old America is kaput. This will help garner foreign support from other nations and help ease foreign tensions.
Again, my hypothetical concepts are not perfect, and are open for suggestion.

Summary: AKs are good if smuggled in, list of key cities and why, and foreign reactions are looking good!

Oh, and Faithfull. Democracy ceases to be a democracy when the people's opinions are swayed not by the charisma or reason of a candidate, but by fear of a shadowpuppet crafted by the hand of the current President. Example: shortly after the DNC, a terror threat was found. It was later found to be obsolete, but it did what was needed for: it killed the support mustered during the DNC.
MK! Either this guy's an ally or a competitor (or both, yeah!) What an interesting bunch of folk turning out for this thread!

Sad but true, even if I think it goes a bit deeper. But then, I may just be spending too much time at jihadunspun.com. Regardless, and despite the fact I'm voting for Kerry, I do think this is going to be a close call.

I don't remember what was said exactly or where it was said, but didn't Bush Senior's own wife say that there's been too many Bush's in office as it is? That she didn't think there'd be another, even this one, because of that fact? Whatever the case, whatever she truly said (as I know it's still along those lines), I felt a sparkle inside.

But here's a thought for you all, and I may just literally be mentally unstable, but I feel an inherent urge to take another human being's life. But I also feel a moral urge to preserve life and all those nice things we hold so dear, at least our society. Thus, I plan to join the Marines, and take as much of an active role in Iraq as I possibly can. I plan to do all I can to save my life and the people around me, while taking the lives of those I see as enemies, or people attempting to take my life or another human being's.

All at the same time I look at myself with disgust, wishing I could see past all of this, wishing I could impart wisdom unto others and let them see the stupidity of EVERYONE'S ways. I'm by far not perfect, I hold standards for myself that I can't even meet, but I can see my errors and I am open to hearing all the opinions in the world on my errors or things people see as an error in my personality.

But no people are a sole entity, no people can collectively be judged, not even the most extremist nations in the world. We all have our black sheep, we all have our Bushes, and our Operation: Iraqi Freedoms and even our own Terror Alert System. This is to say we're all flawed, but we're all human, and we're all beautiful.

But I'll still fight in a revolution, should one happen, and I do feel it is inevitable if regretable and almost the only fesible option. Really, a recall is not feasible, if you think about it and survey all the other "evidence" out there. And don't expect me trying to put my point acrossed will make me any less lazy, because it won't, so you'll have to find the links yourself. I'm sure you could find enough about Bush in Oregon alone.... clear cut to prevent forest fires? My forehead is tingling warmly as I attempt to even comment on that.

The clear solution would be to abolish all the presidential parties. Our President shouldn't be allowed to follow to fervently his beliefs, as they often contradict many of his/her (just to be PC) people's. A President is there for his people, right? So he should embody all of his people's belief's, and by people that means every last person in his nation, and not the beliefs of his party. This isn't to appeal to the strongest side, it's to appeal to every side, right? Not to fix their problems, but to fix everyone's problems.

If he doesn't do that, one way or another, any way, he should be removed and the Government fixed. For the people, and in this case for EVERY person, not just the American people. Bush is a threat to the world.

And off the subject, somewhat;



was one of the funniest comments I've read in a while. Thank you for the laughter. I had to pull my sister in here twice to quote something you said I thought was funny. But, as the pattern goes, I'm too lazy and forgetful to quote the second comment. Sorry. Blizzard in Texas, I think. Still...

And as for the brother against brother thing... I can see your point, but my brother and I fight pretty hard sometimes. He almost broke my nose once. Then again, I was a piece of crap brother, and I used to beat him up all the time. Then around 14 he shot up to 6'2'' or so. But that's beside the point... It's just, I agree with whoever said that our soldiers might have a problem firing at fellow Americans in some cases. Then again, maybe not, but I see it being a problem big enough to possibly botch a mission.

Still, thank you for making my first post pleasent. I'm starting to think I was too frightened for my own good. I can't help being affraid of forums, though.
Humbling. I hope we all may continue to have your wisdom and candor shared, at least a little while ...

Violation of the law.
So when a presiding entity decides to forsake a community of like-concerned individuals and essentially go rogue against a country that HAD NOT attacked that president's country, to the chagrin and concern of all involved, and then by that admin's own hand orders of war crimes and abuses come to light in more than three forms as a result of this brazenness, no one questions it because the law imposed/manipulated by that own president's like minded political party is fine with the whole thing? Executive orders and all? Whose law are you referring to? International law that we have been party and subject to is OWED the arse of Bush and a few of his cabal. Law ... look into how Bush got the money for the presidency in the first place. There's some homework. I've got some paperwork i'd likely post later on it but i'm sure i'm not the only one. And in case you haven't noticed the nature of this thread, it concerns, the CRUX of what the nature and authority of law are, imposed, revoked, implied, deserved.

Sorry, I haven't read the entire thread. Excuse me if someone's already pointed out that military action against the United States is treason, punishable by death. Take this scenario: you are a member of the Capitol police. An angry, revolutionary, apparently Communist mob is descending upon you. Do you let them overrun you because they're Americans to, or do you take those foo's out with your G36?

Well, that's a given, no matter where you are. You're attacked, you attack back, generally.

But, yes, I do think the fact that they are also American would probably have something to do with it. It could have all sorts of effects.

If a group of people you may know, or have seen, or whatever you want to put in this scenario rushed your police station (with the right amount of force, no police station would stand up to anyone with enough brains and shooting ability in force - L.A., people, and that was only 1 or 2 guys), chances are a lot of police would think twice. That probably goes for both sides, but a revolution is a big deal and no militia would go in blindly and not be fully aware of the consequences.

What I'd do I can't say, most likely shoot them before they shot me. But that's just me. And it may just be them, too. But I can garuntee it won't be all of them, not with our society. You'll have one or two, most likely on either side, who just can't do it. Whoever doesn't will have an edge.

Humbling. I hope we all may continue to have your wisdom and candor shared, at least a little while ...

That was funny, and I'll still take the hint.

MK! Either this guy's an ally or a competitor (or both, yeah!) What an interesting bunch of folk turning out for this thread!Ally with the revolution. I'm willing to take up my ax and flamebolter (name for fire shooting supersoaker I made) to kick some ass if somebody goes with my plan. Viva la revolution!

Paxania: Maybe not hatred of America, but enough sympathy for the other side to let the mild comments slip, such as my hypothetical plotting. In any case, it's time for breakfast. French toast for freedom!

Hey, Americanism didn't stop those Korean gun owners from defending their shops during the L.A. riots.

WHy is it that when a planet undergoes a revolution, it revolved. But when a group of people undergo a revolution, they revolted?

I know why they call them revolutions. Because eventually, you always end up where you started. :)

WHy is it that when a planet undergoes a revolution, it revolved. But when a group of people undergo a revolution, they revolted?

I know why they call them revolutions. Because eventually, you always end up where you started. :)Or maybe because they cause a signifigant change. Just a thought from your local provocator of thought.

So when a presiding entity decides to forsake a community of like-concerned individuals and essentially go rogue against a country that HAD NOT attacked that president's country, to the chagrin and concern of all involved, and then by that admin's own hand orders of war crimes and abuses come to light in more than three forms as a result of this brazenness, no one questions it because the law imposed/manipulated by that own president's like minded political party is fine with the whole thing? Executive orders and all? Whose law are you referring to? International law that we have been party and subject to is OWED the arse of Bush and a few of his cabal. Law ... look into how Bush got the money for the presidency in the first place. There's some homework. I've got some paperwork i'd likely post later on it but i'm sure i'm not the only one. And in case you haven't noticed the nature of this thread, it concerns, the CRUX of what the nature and authority of law are, imposed, revoked, implied, deserved.

If you disagree with him, get out and vote. DEMOCRACY WORKS.

If you disagree with him, get out and vote. DEMOCRACY WORKS....Assuming the population is not being manipulated by media control and fear evoked by outdated terror threats the government releases directly after the competition's national convention.

You think the vast majority of Americans are stupid and naturally criminal.

You all make me miserable. Bush is no bloody dictator, and Kerry is no better than he is. They are both just puny politicians that no one really likes but figure that they need to pick the lesser evil. If you seriously like any of these guys, you need some serious education to go along with your issues.

Armed rebellion should only be an option when the government decides to institute a secret police (rendered impossible by our massively liberal media), military rule (gee, wonder how long that would last), massive reduction in liberties without concent (with a democratic Congress?) and if a cartoon character is elected to office (Mickey Mouse 2004!). Other than that, I'm sure there are a lot of reasons to do it, but you're talking about some really bloody serious stuff. Armed rebellion means you have to take all 50 states of the republic, 2.5 million soldiers, 1 million CIA, FBI and Secret Service agents, as well as probably hundreds of thousands of cops. Get a brain and put down your gun.

Yeash.

-R. S. of UC

You all make me miserable. Bush is no bloody dictator, and Kerry is no better than he is. They are both just puny politicians that no one really likes but figure that they need to pick the lesser evil. If you seriously like any of these guys, you need some serious education to go along with your issues.We don't neccesarily like Kerry. We just think Bush needs to lose, one way or another. Assassination is impossible due to the chain of command and tightened security, so revolution is a must.Armed rebellion should only be an option when the government decides to institute a secret police (rendered impossible by our massively liberal media)If the media can spot it, it isn't really secret police, is it?military ruleRSoUC, meet the Patriot Act. Patriot Act, meet RSoUC.massive reduction in liberties without concentSee above.and if a cartoon character is elected to office (Mickey Mouse 2004!).Logical arguments are the only things that can solicite a logical response. As such, I cannot make a logical response to that. Therefore, WAFFLEBOMBS!Other than that, I'm sure there are a lot of reasons to do it, but you're talking about some really bloody serious stuff. Armed rebellion means you have to take all 50 states of the republicIf everyone was against us, there would be no support for the rebels. There is clearly a fair ammount of people that like the idea.2.5 million soldiersAll around the world and have different opinions about Bush.1 million CIA, FBI and Secret Service agentsA whole million? An organized rebellion across the country couldn't possibly take on one million government agents! The first person shooters say so!as well as probably hundreds of thousands of cops.Read before posting. It was already settled that police officers are incompetent enough to dismiss when facing an uprising on this scale.Get a brain and put down your gun.Read the thread and think before posting.

We don't neccesarily like Kerry. We just think Bush needs to lose, one way or another. Assassination is impossible due to the chain of command and tightened security, so revolution is a must.

First of all, what are you guys smoking? Second please stop smoking it.

Now in order to have a 'revolution' you would first have to have some Constitutional breach and that has not even come close (I have only heard of such an idea from the few in here) . If you look around you can have whatever freedom it is that you want in one of the 50 states.
Also I can not see anyone from here leaving the computer longer than a day or two so stick to being an arm chair warrior in what works best.
Remember work smarter not harder (possibly vote since I do not see you being denied that right, but I still see so many younger guys and gals not voting but with plenty to talk about).

Another thing, is the fact that a revolution was more likely following the 'assualt weapons' ban than anything going on in this country now (millions of Americans own them, quite a big voting block). There was no more illegal criminal acts with guns than normal and neither will there be if Bush wins again this year or Kerry.

Think about it, really it doesn't make a difference who wins between Kerry or Bush because they are both polarizing. Now just because of the possiblity of Bush winning and polarizing 'your side' again doesnt make it anymore right than if Kerry won and pulls his tom foolery on the 'other side'. They both need to go and hopefully for 08 'both sides' put up some more American like canidates that will work for all of America not just our 'own side' within America but as every American is considered our 'own side'.

Wait, are these the same people who think that all workers are Communists?

First of all, what are you guys smoking? Second please stop smoking it.It's a beautiful thing called COMMON SENSE.Now in order to have a 'revolution' you would first have to have some Constitutional breach and that has not even come close (I have only heard of such an idea from the few in here).Didn't I already introduce you to the Patriot Act?If you look around you can have whatever freedom it is that you want in one of the 50 states.Right to privacy? Right to sex once physically capable of reproducing? There are plenty of things we aren't allowed to do, some are just more unreasonable than others. However, there are quite a few valid requests.Also I can not see anyone from here leaving the computer longer than a day or two so stick to being an arm chair warrior in what works best.Read the thread before posting, man. I myself have posted my personal armament.Remember work smarter not harder (possibly vote since I do not see you being denied that right, but I still see so many younger guys and gals not voting but with plenty to talk about).Sometimes working smarter requires working harder. The smart thing to do is seldom the easy one.Another thing, is the fact that a revolution was more likely following the 'assualt weapons' ban than anything going on in this country now (millions of Americans own them, quite a big voting block). There was no more illegal criminal acts with guns than normal and neither will there be if Bush wins again this year or Kerry.Ah yes, the gun ban. May I introduce the Blind Zealot to the Third Amendment?Think about it, really it doesn't make a difference who wins between Kerry or Bush because they are both polarizing. Now just because of the possiblity of Bush winning and polarizing 'your side' again doesnt make it anymore right than if Kerry won and pulls his tom foolery on the 'other side'. They both need to go and hopefully for 08 'both sides' put up some more American like canidates that will work for all of America not just our 'own side' within America but as every American is considered our 'own side'.Hypothetical situation:
Someone is pointing a gun at you and presents two coins. One is normal, the other is two-headed. He says to choose a coin and flip it, and will shoot you if you get heads. I'd say the choice is pretty obvious.
Both candidates are almost identical: inconsistent, unintelligent, unpopular, ugly as hell, and has questionable military records. However, we know Bush's record as a President. We do not know Kerry's. I'll take uncertainity to certain doom.

Oh dear, let's see who has the guns in this world: A bunch of communist douchebags or the United States Military.

Right. That "revolution" would last for all of ten minutes.

Go ahead, start something. I'll be on the sidelines laughing my ass off as you get cut to shreds by 5.56mm ammunition.

Yup.

:confused: :mp5:
:confused: :mp5: :cool:
:confused: :mp5:

It's a beautiful thing called COMMON SENSE.

I bet parchment doesn't taste very good. (http://earlyamerica.com/earlyamerica/milestones/commonsense/text.html)

Right to privacy? Right to sex once physically capable of reproducing? There are plenty of things we aren't allowed to do, some are just more unreasonable than others.

That's your idea of rights? No wonder you're so messed up...

Hypothetical situation:
Someone is pointing a gun at you and presents two coins. One is normal, the other is two-headed. He says to choose a coin and flip it, and will shoot you if you get heads. I'd say the choice is pretty obvious.
Both candidates are almost identical: inconsistent, unintelligent, unpopular, ugly as hell, and has questionable military records. However, we know Bush's record as a President. We do not know Kerry's. I'll take uncertainity to certain doom.

Kerry has a Senate record. It disturbs me...

The trick would simply be to take out the leaders in all major cities, the military is likely to fall into line if you call immediate elections. The only major gliche would be the South.

You know, it's not wise to discuss the practical overthrow of the republic in such a public place...

Why bush should not be re-elected:

Click Here (http://media.ebaumsworld.com/sovereignty.mov)

Didn't I already introduce you to the Patriot Act?

Have you noticed any less freedoms since the patriot act? Has your life been impacted in any way? If so are you laundering money or another area covered by the patriot act?

Right to privacy? Right to sex once physically capable of reproducing? There are plenty of things we aren't allowed to do, some are just more unreasonable than others. However, there are quite a few valid requests.

My privacy hasn't changed one bit, if anything it has become even more prevalent. Now what are you talking about right to sex? Where does our Constitution say anything about 'Americans' have a right to sex (you have to do this on your own, our country dont fund for that yet)? If you are having a hard time meeting people for this type of business then you have to first meet someone and then they must like you in the same manner as you do them. The rest is up to you two. Of course you could always move to Las Vegas and go outside the city limits for some nookie in exchange of the green paper. See states rights solves your problem... move to a community (like the one I am at) that passed a resolution to not recongnize the patriot act as being bound. Find one where you can have all the sex you need (Las Vegas). I need to know what other freedom are you looking for? Most likely one of the 50 states or its thousands of cities and towns will have what your looking for.

Read the thread before posting, man. I myself have posted my personal armament.

Having a seawiz doesn't mean you are an expert in camoflauge and concealment, defensive and offensive tactics all it means is you have a seawiz. Armaments wont do chit if you dont know chit. Besides dont you want the assualt weapons ban in place, why would you do such an unethical, hypocritical thing? Thats like you banning free speech and going on the stern show to give yourself a plug.

Sometimes working smarter requires working harder. The smart thing to do is seldom the easy one.

Yes sometimes working smarter requires more work. Working smarter not harder has nothing to do with whats easy (have you not heard of this saying before?). Its about doing the most efficient and effective job possible

Ah yes, the gun ban. May I introduce the Blind Zealot to the Third Amendment?

Could I introduce you to the fourth ammendment? You are still as safe as you ever were are you not?

Hypothetical situation:
Someone is pointing a gun at you and presents two coins. One is normal, the other is two-headed. He says to choose a coin and flip it, and will shoot you if you get heads. I'd say the choice is pretty obvious.
Both candidates are almost identical: inconsistent, unintelligent, unpopular, ugly as hell, and has questionable military records. However, we know Bush's record as a President. We do not know Kerry's. I'll take uncertainity to certain doom.

The flipside of that coin is that we know what Kerry is like as a Senator And we now know what Bush is like as President. Make your decision like the rest of the voting public. Or be brushed away into a jail cell for talking about killing our President and taking up arms against your fellow countrymen.

What one of my favorite magazines had to say this month: "The good news is one of these guys will lose, the bad news is one will win".

Are you guys serious? we have more rights then nearly any other people IN HISTORY and you want to throw that away? Bush has gone to far, I agree with that, but so far there hasnt been any irreparable long term damage

Any of you wanna study your history and see what happened the last time a super power turned in on itself? If we stage a revolution, whats to stop a conservitive counter revolution? And I guaruntee they're better armed then we are.

Another note on history; this too will pass. Historically the US has swong from left to right pretty reguarly and predictably, and this is no exception, so unless bush starts trying to entrench himself or his cronies, your best option by far is to weight it out. (BTW, on a side note, can anyone come up with ANY revolutions that markedly increased the standing?)

we need a cultural revolution then--people should fuck on top of cars on the street--every electronic billboard should show every sex act imaginable-restaurants should have feely rooms-and every chair we sit on must be designed to masterbate us

This much is my completely candid and uninfluenced opinion on the matter. Revolution is the only solution and, if we play our cards right, we will be able to win.
Ah, to be young and foolish again...

The plan is simple. We start by gaining allies. Like minded revolutionaries, sociopathic survivalists, organized crime rings, and whoever else may be willing to join our cause.
Well, there's another couple hundred at most. Yup, real army you have going there.

The crime rings will be difficult to ally, but I'm sure a promise of the influencial and lucrative role as the military hierchy will tempt enough mob bosses.
LOL, I can see it now...
"Hello, Mr. Mafioso? We'd like you to help us overthrow the American government in a violent revolution that could throw the country into chaos and cause you to lose tons of business in the upheaval. But if there's a country left afterwards, we'll let you form our new military. No we won't mind if you use that to your advantage. We were discussing the details with one of your aids, a Mr. "Two-Face" Snitch, he seemed really eager to help spread the idea to a few of his friends in the nation's capital..."

Next, we take out law enforcement groups in the cities of our criminal allies and whatever small towns we can. The former will be needed as a power base, and the latter for food supplies. This will result in military reprisal, but we will probably have gotten a city with a news station (I always wanted to be on the Today show) so we can express our view of the situation. We will gain a second wave of allies from media coverage along with the mob's ability to assimilate lesser gains with promise of power.
Oh yes, I'm sure that targeting the police for execution is really going to bring lots of people over to your side. "They're actually evil stooges for Bush, who'se also evil, never mind that wholle To Protect and Serve lie, vive le revolution!" That and if the news stations are stupid enough to actually let you on (or that you really are stupid enough to want to go on, after having been responsible for the muder of hundreds of police officers FBI would be all over you before you get through the front door). Never mind the obvious fact of how you're going to organize these mass Policeman hunts without being discovered before hand or picked up/killed off as you commit mass murder.

The military reprisal will be artillary initially,
Law enforcemnt will be more then enough, the military has better things to do with its time.

They'll hit power plants, so we'd need generators like no other, a demand eased by our survivalist cohorts.
No need to hit the power planets, just cut the lines to your individual "strongholds" if they have to

Next will come either armored divisions or aircraft.
You wish

Armored divisions can be countered with mob makeshift weapons,
ROFL, you really have no idea how to fight a war do you kid? What, do you think all it takes is a Molotov to get past an Abram's armor? Not even the RPGs the Iraqis tot around could penetrate without a very close rear shot, and so far they're better armed then you are. About the only thing you could do is somehow dislodge the tracks with either a rocket (which you don't have) or jamming something in there, which would require getting close to the tank without it or its supporting infantry gunning you down.

but we'll need something to take on the bombers. I suggest cropdusters and civilian aircraft with makeshift weapon mounts.
Ok, you're not just foolish, you're stupid. There is no civilian aircraft on the market that can go toe-to-toe with a military aircraft, and there sure as hell is no way you can magically fit weapons on them that won't degrade their performance or simply fall off once the duct tape wears off. You're arguing pretty much that the Wright Brothers' aircraft, with a couple of makeshift bottle rockets and a popgun, is going shoot down a B2 bomber.

It's risky and potentially suicidal,
Your whole plan is suicidal, I surprised you're bringing up this concern now

but unless we can take airbases to defend every major city, it will have to do.
Hell has a better chance of getting snow this year then your pitiful band of rebels will have at taking over an air base.

Eventually, they'll send in infantry, and urban warfare will break out. Street gangs equipped with mob quality weapons, combined with the revolutionary militia, will be able to hold a strong position. Gas grenades salvaged from police and SWAT would help exponentially. In any case, we'd hold our own in all the cities at best or go out with our boots on at worst. In either case our message gets across.
Yes, the message of dangerous suicidal anarchists who are hold up in small pockets across the city, siding themselves with terrorist cells and organized crime in an effort to overthrow a democratically-elected government. A real crowd-winner right there chump.

Should we withstand the initial military assault,
You mean should you avoid getting arrested or shot if you put up a fight

other criminal factions, anarchist sects, terrorist cells, hacker guilds, and anyone else who feels modern America has oppressed them will become our second wave,
Until you realize that all the people who do feel that America is oppressing them have already joined, and most are either dead or arrested.

invigorated by our courage. We coordinate the attack using the hackers' internet underground, pulling off a decisive advantage with gradual offensive gain, presistent defense, and electronic warfare. Sooner or later, their back will break.
Please, it's one thing hacking into a PC, it's another thing hacking into a military supercomputer.

Internal fighting will be an issue. Criminal sects fighting for power, terrorist cells trying to wreak havoc, and anything else that can be attributed to anarchy. How we solve that I'm not sure of as of yet, but I'm open to any suggestions to help perfect or correct my hypothetical solution to our problem.
God, as if your plan wasn't faulty enough.

Listen kid, eventually these strong feelings of yours will pass in time, and you'll realize how foolish it is to talk about rebellions and such. Save the effort for when there really is oppression of our freedoms, and join up with someone who has a clue.

That was funny, and I'll still take the hint.
Believe it or not, i was/am completely serious. The world needs more modest and honest people. I appreciate your posts, as well as the first person who welcomed you to NS.

I don't know if you all know this but if you're an American and plan on overthrowing the government and talk about it, that's illegal. Ever heard of Gitlow vs New York? If not, you may want to look it up and delete all of those posts and stop talking about a revolution. No, this isn't a sarcastic comment. No, I'm not just trying to scare you. I'm serious.

If you disagree with him, get out and vote. DEMOCRACY WORKS.
To a degree it does. I do vote and i will ... i have to wait, like yourself ....
democracy works .... but don't imply with complete confidence however the United States is as much a democracy as you'd like or infer.
Keep track of Diebold, Siemens and AG & G. Do a little research into software bias and who supports whose party, and who is requiring who to have the devices sans paper trails.
And think a little more about the oligarchic obviousness of the electoral college and its more obvious obsolescence.

This is funny, because only liberals would resort to violence and armed revolution in order to force their way on the populace. Conservatives would just buck it out.

Pelleon: Nice ownage.

I wonder if these crazies realize that the majority of Americans are conservative....

This is funny, because only liberals would resort to violence and armed revolution in order to force their way on the populace. Conservatives would just buck it out.
Give it up with that tired "liberal" bilge. Learn some more words and some more accuracy. You need to have a slightly more discerning thinking process here. From the get-go of the thread, you are talking about an inherency within the Constitution itself about the requirement for the populace to bring to a close the failed democratic attempt that is being argued here. Also being discussed here specifically is the pragmatics of such an issue. Maybe you didn't read the whole thread.

move away from the 2 party policy boys then you wont have so many problems

Pelleon: Nice ownage.

I wonder if these crazies realize that the majority of Americans are conservative....

And, coincidentally, the majority of Americans are also redneck bumpkins, who'll follow any schmuck who waves a flag and a cross around.

And, coincidentally, the majority of Americans are also redneck bumpkins, who'll follow any schmuck who waves a flag and a cross around.
And these ignorant blanket statements make you any better...how?

Ah, to be young and foolish again...


Well, there's another couple hundred at most. Yup, real army you have going there.


LOL, I can see it now...
"Hello, Mr. Mafioso? We'd like you to help us overthrow the American government in a violent revolution that could throw the country into chaos and cause you to lose tons of business in the upheaval. But if there's a country left afterwards, we'll let you form our new military. No we won't mind if you use that to your advantage. We were discussing the details with one of your aids, a Mr. "Two-Face" Snitch, he seemed really eager to help spread the idea to a few of his friends in the nation's capital..."


Oh yes, I'm sure that targeting the police for execution is really going to bring lots of people over to your side. "They're actually evil stooges for Bush, who'se also evil, never mind that wholle To Protect and Serve lie, vive le revolution!" That and if the news stations are stupid enough to actually let you on (or that you really are stupid enough to want to go on, after having been responsible for the muder of hundreds of police officers FBI would be all over you before you get through the front door). Never mind the obvious fact of how you're going to organize these mass Policeman hunts without being discovered before hand or picked up/killed off as you commit mass murder.


Law enforcemnt will be more then enough, the military has better things to do with its time.


No need to hit the power planets, just cut the lines to your individual "strongholds" if they have to


You wish


ROFL, you really have no idea how to fight a war do you kid? What, do you think all it takes is a Molotov to get past an Abram's armor? Not even the RPGs the Iraqis tot around could penetrate without a very close rear shot, and so far they're better armed then you are. About the only thing you could do is somehow dislodge the tracks with either a rocket (which you don't have) or jamming something in there, which would require getting close to the tank without it or its supporting infantry gunning you down.


Ok, you're not just foolish, you're stupid. There is no civilian aircraft on the market that can go toe-to-toe with a military aircraft, and there sure as hell is no way you can magically fit weapons on them that won't degrade their performance or simply fall off once the duct tape wears off. You're arguing pretty much that the Wright Brothers' aircraft, with a couple of makeshift bottle rockets and a popgun, is going shoot down a B2 bomber.


Your whole plan is suicidal, I surprised you're bringing up this concern now


Hell has a better chance of getting snow this year then your pitiful band of rebels will have at taking over an air base.


Yes, the message of dangerous suicidal anarchists who are hold up in small pockets across the city, siding themselves with terrorist cells and organized crime in an effort to overthrow a democratically-elected government. A real crowd-winner right there chump.


You mean should you avoid getting arrested or shot if you put up a fight


Until you realize that all the people who do feel that America is oppressing them have already joined, and most are either dead or arrested.


Please, it's one thing hacking into a PC, it's another thing hacking into a military supercomputer.


God, as if your plan wasn't faulty enough.

Listen kid, eventually these strong feelings of yours will pass in time, and you'll realize how foolish it is to talk about rebellions and such. Save the effort for when there really is oppression of our freedoms, and join up with someone who has a clue.Pelleon has a defeatist attatude

The principle behind it is good, but the revolution isn't a good idea.
All that would happen is that you'd be shot, survivors would be executed, and Dubya would use the revolution as an excuse to take away even more rights. You think the Patriot act is bad? If you go ahead you'll end up with a police state.

The majority of people everywhere are conservitive, in the sense that they're afraid of the unknown. Thats not exactly gonna help the cause. Look if you want a model of how a liberal revolution MUCH better planed and excecuted then yours went off, look at the spanish civil war. I rest my case.

yeah, a revolution! I'm all for revolution. Normally I'm a pacifist, but when it comes to revolution, I'm all for it! I'll rebel for any known reason! don't like your bagel with cream cheese? Take out Manhattan! Don't care for your local baseball team's losing record? Bomb the stadium! Fun, fun fun.......

[FONT=Times New Roman]It doesn't matter really if bush wins or looses nothin is going to change, both parties have their own secret deals with each other to maintain the status quo' :sniper:

This is a question I want you liberals and radicals to ask yourselves. If, (and that is not a very big if right now) Bush wins the reelection, should we consider the possibility of armed Revolution, in order to prevent the inevitable Dictatorship that would arise?

I know to talk about it is treason, so every post after this is hypothetical.

Where's the option saying that you're a fucking moron?

Pelleon has a defeatist attatude

MKULTRA is an idiot. But then again, everyone already knew that.

Pelleon has a defeatist attatude
Realistic is more like it. But of course, all you need is a good attitude and you can do ANYTHING, even the impossible :rolleyes:

It's called using reason and logic Mkultra, it's that thing that makes a *woosh* sound as it flies over your head every other day.

If he wins the election, he is still representing the people, just not you, but you don't always win in a democracy.But in response to questions about Bush's legitimacy a lot of the right wingers on here have argued that American presidents are elected by the electoral college, not the people.

It was wishy-washy-wanky left-wingers like you that kept Labour out of office all those years, and gave us Thatcher! Those would be the "wishy-washy-wanky left-wingers" that were calling for a Labour vote "without illusions" for all those years would it? The opposite is true, the left were responsible for propping up the Labour establisment and managing militant working class opposition to make sure it didn't get out of hand. It was people like you who gave us Blair and allowed the BNP to present themselves as a radical opposition.

A number of my fellow leftists have thought of an organized, Bolshevik style revolt if there is no other clear option.
What, a dictatorship run by middle class intellectuals clearly breaking with Marx?

Armed rebellion should only be an option when the government decides to institute a secret police (rendered impossible by our massively liberal media),http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/cointelpro/cointel.htm Does it not sound like the sort of thing the KGB would be proud of the you military rule (gee, wonder how long that would last),Like if the United States was ruled by the commander in chief of the Armed forces? massive reduction in liberties without concent (with a democratic Congress?)Not just the Patriot Act but also the Homeland Security Bill, internment without trial and use of torture. and if a cartoon character is elected to office (Mickey Mouse 2004!)That's a convienient get out clause.

This is funny, because only liberals would resort to violence and armed revolution in order to force their way Have you never heard of the Oklahoma Bombing? Or right wing support for the Contras?

On a general note revolution is unfeasible for now or the foreseeable future, and anyone who thinks otherwise needs to open their eyes. You're dealing with a completely disenfranchised working class, at least in the West. The goal for now has got to be independant working class organisations with an aim of getting working class control in their own communities. Without that you're just posing.

Pelleon: Nice ownage.

I wonder if these crazies realize that the majority of Americans are conservative....

Your wrong most people are registered demcrates. Democrate means Liberal

Like if the United States was ruled by the commander in chief of the Armed forces?
There's a big difference between a civilian in charge of the military and a general in charge of the military.

I was making an honest attempt to read this all, but I only made it a few pages in before giving up. All I read were disheartened people who didn't think it would work (rightfully so), and people who haven't learned enough from history to throw a successful 'revolution.'

First of all, if you want to use the Castro/Che Gueverra model, you must use its key element. Media. Thats right, media/propaganda/thought control. Call it what you like, but no revolution is successful without it. As I recall (my memory isn't perfect though), Castro and Che spent quite a bit of time in the hills using radio to broadcast their message to the populace.

Why do the islamic extremist terrorist acts seem so frightening to us? Because they have failed in regards to using media to express what it is they wish to see changed in the world. However, from the terrorists you could learn that clever use and manipulation of technology can greatly serve your interests (aka the planning they do over the internet in the more secure forms of communication, ie not forums).

So basically, my advice is that you forget the idea of a quick, violent revolution. It won't work, the means does NOT justify the so-called ends, and any revolution you try to do will be followed with a counter-revolution done by the right-wing elements within our society (and I don't even mean the far far rightwing nuts like Aryan Nation or whatever, I mean the commonplace Baptists and pro-gun people who have such a harsh view of the left due to poor use of modern media).

The only way to create a revolution is to manipulate the Mass Media and Marketing techniques that the Rightists have so craftily learned. You can't do this effectively just by jumping up and using force, and you certainly can't do it without a lot of monetary backing, so my further advice is that you spend your time becoming rich.

However, once you are rich, you probably won't care near as much about the leftist ideas (unless you are George Soros, haha). So another piece of advice is that you stop worrying about the masses of people and instead work on finding a good group of like-minded friends and working together to do that age-old upper-class art of political manipulation, should that suit your purposes.

My last piece of advice to the left? Recognize that the second amendment in the constitution is there for one key reason. I will give you a hint. It's not hunting. So stop trying to ban firearms, and instead focus on making sure you and your friends have them and know how to use them. Sure, gun proliferation can be linked to violence in schools and such, but if you are truly interested in keeping a dictatorship out of the USA, then recognize that a heavily armed populace is a LOT harder to enforce a dictatorship upon.


Due to spacial constraints, I have only listed the key preliminary point in my own personal plans for long term revolution in the USA: Media. Obviously there are even more aspects you must consider and utilize. However, if you are so bent on using the means of violent revolution, I further recommend you go to some other country. You could probably pull it off in another country if you are sure to cater to the business interests of the US and other western countries.

Hence, open revolt becomes essential. Bush already has the easily cowed of America pinned with media censorship and fear of attack, the two tools of tyranny.

What has been censored? Stop for a damned moment and think...if Bush wanted to censor the press, then Farenheit 9/11 would've never been released, the MoveOn.org ads calling him a Nazi would've landed the contributors in prison and the protestors at the Republican Convention would've all been killed via surgical air strikes, and you would've been shot in the head by the secret service for posting such moronic bull.

What freedoms have you lost to the Patriot Act? How is your life impacted?

So, why don't you type once more about how America is ruined thanks to Republican leadership. Then, I suggest you stand up from your $1000 computer, walk out to your brand new car, and go blow one hundred dollars for a nice dinner for yourself. Then realize that there are other people in the world that won't see as much money in their lifetimes as you blow in a month.

Your wrong most people are registered demcrates. Democrate means Liberal
To many Europeans, the difference between Democrat and Republican is minimal at best.

Ok, don't mind me, I'm just another liberal anti-Bush Canuck coming here to blow steam out of my ass, but, if I'm not mistaken, I believe the American constitution contains a clause that was implemented following the long four-terms of Franklin D Roosevelt that prohibited a president from holding office for more than two terms, or eight years. Now then, in order to change it, doesn't it have to pass through The House of Representatives (Congress) and the Senate and then go onto the president in order to pass?

So, if Bush wanted to hold on to power dictator style, taking tips from the handbooks on how to hold onto and explouit power, of notable and psychotic twentieth century dictators such as Hitler, Stalin, Hussein and Castro, wouldn't he first require that there is no term limit for the presidency of the United States of America.

Now, let's say in theory there is no term limit and Bush's team works their asses off to get hum back in power and then he takes full control, then I can seen a justification for the revolution. However, sicne there is the clause that prevents this, I think impeaching his ass and handing him a one-way ticket to hell is the way to go.

A little international pressure would help...

Your wrong most people are registered demcrates. Democrate means LiberalNo it doesn't- at least not in the classic historical sense of the word.

This is a question I want you liberals and radicals to ask yourselves. If, (and that is not a very big if right now) Bush wins the reelection, should we consider the possibility of armed Revolution, in order to prevent the inevitable Dictatorship that would arise?

I know to talk about it is treason, so every post after this is hypothetical.

Heh....where are liberals going to get guns? :gundge: :headbang:

Heh....where are liberals going to get guns? :gundge: :headbang:
The same place the neo-cons get theirs!!

The same place the neo-cons get theirs!!

Yeah, but don't most liberals blow up or have a siezure or something, if they enter a gun shop?
:p

Ok, don't mind me, I'm just another liberal anti-Bush Canuck coming here to blow steam out of my ass, but, if I'm not mistaken, I believe the American constitution contains a clause that was implemented following the long four-terms of Franklin D Roosevelt that prohibited a president from holding office for more than two terms, or eight years. Now then, in order to change it, doesn't it have to pass through The House of Representatives (Congress) and the Senate and then go onto the president in order to pass?
So, if Bush wanted to hold on to power dictator style, taking tips from the handbooks on how to hold onto and explouit power, of notable and psychotic twentieth century dictators such as Hitler, Stalin, Hussein and Castro, wouldn't he first require that there is no term limit for the presidency of the United States of America. Now, let's say in theory there is no term limit and Bush's team works their asses off to get hum back in power and then he takes full control, then I can seen a justification for the revolution. However, sicne there is the clause that prevents this, I think impeaching his ass and handing him a one-way ticket to hell is the way to go.

Your right if there ever was a president that could possibly change the term limits on our presidency it is Bush. Now how are you going to impeach him when the SCOTUS and House and Senate are all on his side? The side that will wipe out term limits for him after he wins on Nov.2nd. ( I mean I disliked Bush until speaking with a few of the people in here, now I know he is the best choice) Some reason I do not see anything happening that will favor the democrats in the next dozen years at our Federal level. You guys are the only ones to blame. Why the moderate's are in bed with bush, I do not know. But they are and with his RRW coharts and the moderate republicans and democrats like zell miller and that sean bro (sp) I do not see you guys having that shot for at least the next coming decade without change.

My cousen has an old nuke bunker in the scotish highlands that I could lend you as a bace of operations. Its perfect for one reason, no one would ever suspect scotland XD

Hence, open revolt becomes essential. Bush already has the easily cowed of America pinned with media censorship and fear of attack, the two tools of tyranny.

As opposed to the democrats cowing of lower and middle class American with their cries of classwarfare, that the super rich are trying to secretly rule the country through the republican party. That the rich are sending all the middle class jobs over seas to wipe out middle class America.

Your right if there ever was a president that could possibly change the term limits on our presidency it is Bush. Now how are you going to impeach him when the SCOTUS and House and Senate are all on his side? The side that will wipe out term limits for him after he wins on Nov.2nd. ( I mean I disliked Bush until speaking with a few of the people in here, now I know he is the best choice) Some reason I do not see anything happening that will favor the democrats in the next dozen years at our Federal level. You guys are the only ones to blame. Why the moderate's are in bed with bush, I do not know. But they are and with his RRW coharts and the moderate republicans and democrats like zell miller and that sean bro (sp) I do not see you guys having that shot for at least the next coming decade without change.

Last I checked, they actually have to get a constitutional amendment through, for Dubbaya to actually stay in office past his second term. They don't have enough of a majority to get it through Congress.

Last I checked, they actually have to get a constitutional amendment through, for Dubbaya to actually stay in office past his second term. They don't have enough of a majority to get it through Congress.

I agree but what will happen during the next congressional voting? Isnt that in 2006? What if the dems lose 20 more seats in congress? I mean I personally would rather see them lose 20 seats over the republicans but still I would much rather see a balancing act between the two over either one gaining so much.

I agree but what will happen during the next congressional voting? Isnt that in 2006? What if the dems lose 20 more seats in congress? I mean I personally would rather see them lose 20 seats over the republicans but still I would much rather see a balancing act between the two over either one gaining so much.

Are they going to lose more than 10-14 seats in the Senate? Probably not. It has to get through both houses, and isn't there something about states ratifying it, too--like 2/3 or 3/4, for it to go into effect?

Are they going to lose more than 10-14 seats in the Senate? Probably not. It has to get through both houses, and isn't there something about states ratifying it, too--like 2/3 or 3/4, for it to go into effect?

Well considering that we probably will have more terrorist attacks in the future of our lives, and more and more Americans are agreeing with the second Ammendment(after sept 11th we had more new gun owners at one instant than the awb created)and more and more Democrats are losing thier jobs for disagreeing on wanting the awb. I could most defiently see in a couple more years time the Dems losing more than a dozen seats from throughout and around our entire Country.

Did you know that the US House of reps (almost 2 years later)after enacting the awb voted 239 to 173 to repeal it. (including 56 democrats) Those 56 dems saved thier jobs but 20 of the 173 lost thiers all because of a paper law that actually didnt ban anything. Just imagine what will happen in 2006 when the rest of them are up for relection, I do not see the voters forgetting. I wont say that it is likely for Bush to do what I said, But it is possible. When dealing with any zealot from either side I dont like them having something like that possible thats all.

Well considering that we probably will have more terrorist attacks in the future of our lives, and more and more Americans are agreeing with the second Ammendment(after sept 11th we had more new gun owners at one instant than the awb created)and more and more Democrats are losing thier jobs for disagreeing on wanting the awb. I could most defiently see in a couple more years time the Dems losing more than a dozen seats from throughout and around our entire Country.

The Dems aren't necessarily idiots. They'll figure out that gun-grabbing gets themselves kicked out of office, and change their tune, to stay in. That's how it works in politics. Republicans are doing that now, by spending all our money on drug plans and catering to the Baby Boomers. To stay in office.

Did you know that the US House of reps (almost 2 years later)after enacting the awb voted 239 to 173 to repeal it. (including 56 democrats) Those 56 dems saved thier jobs but 20 of the 173 lost thiers all because of a paper law that actually didnt ban anything. Just imagine what will happen in 2006 when the rest of them are up for relection, I do not see the voters forgetting. I wont say that it is likely for Bush to do what I said, But it is possible. When dealing with any zealot from either side I dont like them having something like that possible thats all.

Well, right now it's possible for Ashcroft to come and get us all....

But I know what you're saying. I don't like all the extremism that's being fostered these days, either.

Well, a revolution is possible in any country - just refuse to obey everything they say.

"Freedom is the ability to say 'No.' and accept the consequences."
- Hagbard Celine (fictional character in Illuminatus!)

But alot of people have too much to lose from revolution - and alot of people don't understand that basic principle, viewing rules as solid and concrete.

We shouldn't forget that the world is governed by men, not laws :)

The Dems aren't necessarily idiots. They'll figure out that gun-grabbing gets themselves kicked out of office, and change their tune, to stay in. That's how it works in politics. Republicans are doing that now, by spending all our money on drug plans and catering to the Baby Boomers. To stay in office.

I agree the Dems are just as intelligent as the Repubs when it comes to staying in office. The problem I see with the democratic party is the direction they want to head (along with the republican's own direction). Even Kerry is coming out saying he wants to renew the AWB but he is for the Americans right to own Guns. This will be one of the many reason's why he will have no shot at winning on Nov.2. The nader factor will play as much of a role in his defeat as it did for Al Gore (a significant one in close elections), along with Gores stance with the AWB did in the swing states that he needed (like his own state). I guess I just can not believe how idiotic some of our representatives are even when they are trying to foster votes, its like they enjoy shooting themselves in the foot for the hell of it lol.

I agree the Dems are just as intelligent as the Repubs when it comes to staying in office. The problem I see with the democratic party is the direction they want to head (along with the republican's own direction). Even Kerry is coming out saying he wants to renew the AWB but he is for the Americans right to own Guns. This will be one of the many reason's why he will have no shot at winning on Nov.2. The nader factor will play as much of a role in his defeat as it did for Al Gore (a significant one in close elections), along with Gores stance with the AWB did in the swing states that he needed (like his own state). I guess I just can not believe how idiotic some of our representatives are even when they are trying to foster votes, its like they enjoy shooting themselves in the foot for the hell of it lol.

I think the major issue is no one will take a stand on anything, really. How can someone be for the AWB, and still say they are pro-second amendment? Just putting on some clothes and trying to go on a bird hunt doesn't do it for me. Kerry has always voted against guns.

And GWB saying he's support a renewed ban....dork.

Ah well, that's why I'm voting Badnarik in November.

I think the major issue is no one will take a stand on anything, really. How can someone be for the AWB, and still say they are pro-second amendment? Just putting on some clothes and trying to go on a bird hunt doesn't do it for me. Kerry has always voted against guns. And GWB saying he's support a renewed ban....dork. Ah well, that's why I'm voting Badnarik in November

Completly, its why flip flop has become a favorite word this election season. Because we all know that any change of heart from either canadate is just for show. Like how bush says he was for amnesty for illegals, and he would sign the awb if it made it through congress (well bush is no dummy he knows with his republican friends holding both house and senate, that the awb is a dead issue along with the amnesty crap) just to get a few votes from gullable people. Whats funny is that kerry is saying he is for the awb and for gun owners, but even if he was elected he would not have a shot at renewing the awb because congress don't want it. Politics really is true comedy I tell ya lol.

Completly, its why flip flop has become a favorite word this election season. Because we all know that any change of heart from either canadate is just for show. Like how bush says he was for amnesty for illegals, and he would sign the awb if it made it through congress (well bush is no dummy he knows with his republican friends holding both house and senate, that the awb is a dead issue along with the amnesty crap) just to get a few votes from gullable people. Whats funny is that kerry is saying he is for the awb and for gun owners, but even if he was elected he would not have a shot at renewing the awb because congress don't want it. Politics really is true comedy I tell ya lol.

If only the comedy didn't affect our lives so much.
:mad:

It's getting to be a pain in the ass.