Armed revolution shouldn't be on any clear thinking, constitutionaly minded person's radar.

State nullification/interposition and utimatley secession sound like such "radical" ideas today. Leftist, statists, nationalist, etc. have turned these "founding" principles into radical principles for their own political reasons.

But these ideals, along with local government and federalism, were for the most part intended...besides the obvious, individual freedom and liberty...to be a way to "avoid" armed revolution. A "gentlemanly" way to resolve political conflicts. And if those conflicts could not be resolved, we the people, acting through our natural polities, the States, could go our separate ways.

"resolved, That the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government . . . . and that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force. . . . that the government created by this compact [the Constitution for the United States] was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; . . . . that this would be to surrender the form of government we have chosen, and live under one deriving its powers from its own will, and not from our authority"

So certain people will cry racist whenever "States Rights" are mentioned, but the truth is that these ideals are connected to our very founding. These were to be peaceful ways to resolve our differences. Our state governments acting as a defender of our individual rights from the central government through nullification/interposition. That was the "mainstream" way to fight the central government. Secession was the legal, but "radical" response when no other course was left. And we had the natural right to defend ourselves from federal tyranny. Thomas Jefferson said on several occassions to colleagues who were ready for "radical" solutions, that the time has not "yet" come....

So, I'll say again, armed revolution should not even be on anyone's radar. We first have to re-learn what the founding generation gave us as mechanisms to fight central government usurpations of power. Then implement those mechanisms...nullification...interposition.

Of course the founding generation didn't trust the central government to abide by the compact of the Constitution...see the 2nd Amendment.
I only wish to point out that Bill Bridgewater completely misstates the latter portion of the war in Viet Nam. After the Tet offensive, the VC were destroyed as a coherent military force. By late 1970, they couldn't mount attacks beyond the platoon size force. Giap supplemented them with NVA regulars, sometimes in uniform and sometimes in VC garb. Even they were defeated until 1973. It was a regular force that seized Quan Tri. Even then, South Vietnamese forces forced them north of the DMZ.

It was only after Nixon stepped down and the Democrat congress cut off munitions and repair parts to the South that the NVA forces succeeded in defeating southern forces. It was a NVA tank that burst the gates of the South Vietnamese presidential palace, not a bunch of ragtag VC.
The best reply I heard to this is that the revolution that is needed is the one at the Ballot Box or on Voting day. IF the Democrats lose 100% of the elections that they are up for or lose to such a huge degree that both houses go back to Republicans than the remaining two years, for President Obama, will be controlled ones and then he can be replaced and hopefully all this Socialism can be reversed.

I will admit though that I've been very concerned that, what with the actions of the Democrats in Congress and with Obama) that some of the militia folks would take that (those decisions) as a right to exercise their long developed fears and actually try and implement an armed intervention.
quote:
Originally posted by beternU:
quote:
Originally posted by fifthcolumn:
http://www.lizmichael.com/armedrev.htm


That little wild-eyed, zany, off-the-wall treatise by some deranged militia type is something that should try men's (and women's) souls. I hope the NSA and the FBI have that nutcake under surveillance!


Isn't it strange that there are real-life shows about street gangs all over America who, everyday, murder at will, sell drugs to children, and commit armed robbery and rape as a hobby yet liberals and liberals in government are more paranoid of 9 or 10 people who are worried (and rightfully so) about the dark future of our country? These people probably have never hurt anyone while our government continues to ignore the massive daily crime wave in our cities. I wonder why?
Defending the Hooterville 9 is frankly, odd. They were not good ole boys afraid of the NWO and playing soldier in the woods on weekends, they were religious zealots with a grenade launcher, a whole lot of guns, and a plan to kill policemen, according to their federal indictment. I am not surprised one was a registered Democrat, seeing how many of them there were.

Which is your favorite? I like the one that looks like Curly Howard of the 3 Stooges. He looks like he would be the most "gung ho" when the Tribulation started or the DEA raided his meth trailer.
quote:
Originally posted by Aude Sapere:
Defending the Hooterville 9 is frankly, odd. They were not good ole boys afraid of the NWO and playing soldier in the woods on weekends, they were religious zealots with a grenade launcher, a whole lot of guns, and a plan to kill policemen, according to their federal indictment. I am not surprised one was a registered Democrat, seeing how many of them there were.

Which is your favorite? I like the one that looks like Curly Howard of the 3 Stooges. He looks like he would be the most "gung ho" when the Tribulation started or the DEA raided his meth trailer.


I defend them the same way you defend street gangs killing thousands of people EVERY YEAR.
What you talking about Willis? Crashtestdummy, you fall further down the rabbit hole with each posting, it seems. What cryptic street gangs have I been defending, pray tell? To my knowledge I only defend the Democratic Party when it acts in the best interests of the people, the Episcopal Church, the academy, the Enlightenment and dogs.
quote:
Originally posted by Aude Sapere:
What you talking about Willis? Crashtestdummy, you fall further down the rabbit hole with each posting, it seems. What cryptic street gangs have I been defending, pray tell? To my knowledge I only defend the Democratic Party when it acts in the best interests of the people, the Episcopal Church, the academy, the Enlightenment and dogs.


Strange how you NEVER go after murderous street gangs and murderous terrorists the same way you show your hatred for peaceful militia. Is it because the militia isn't homosexual friendly? Cool
What you talking about Willis? I let the government and cops take care of "murderous street gangs" and "terrorists." As for "peaceful militia," I have no ax to grind with them until they stockpile banned weapons and mix silly conspiracy theories and the Bible, and make plans to act against individuals and/or agents of the local government and/or state and/or federal government. They can play soldier all day and all night for all I care. It is the loons like the doomsday Hooterville Nine or whatever they styled themselves that I take exception to.

Yeah, I care about civil rights for all minorities. What about it? Do you not?
Grenade launchers and sawed-off shotguns are LEGAL...as long as the appropriate NFA/BATFE taxes have been paid and the weapons registered with the appropriate agency. If these taxes haven't been paid, or these weapons are, in fact, 'stolen', then they are ILLEGAL...not 'banned'.
quote:
Originally posted by Aude Sapere:
What you talking about Willis? I let the government and cops take care of "murderous street gangs" and "terrorists." As for "peaceful militia," I have no ax to grind with them until they stockpile banned weapons and mix silly conspiracy theories and the Bible, and make plans to act against individuals and/or agents of the local government and/or state and/or federal government. They can play soldier all day and all night for all I care. It is the loons like the doomsday Hooterville Nine or whatever they styled themselves that I take exception to.

Yeah, I care about civil rights for all minorities. What about it? Do you not?


Has it worked Homer? The ONLY rights you believe in are to make sure criminals will never pay. Maybe you should go shack up with a few of them. You know, experience their worthiness up close and personal.
Crash, you make less sense with each squeal. What in the world are you talking about RE: me and criminals? You are one of the silliest and cryptic people I have yet encountered, and thanks be to God, not in person. It is as if you spoke in riddles. Dropping non sequiturs as if a pieces of pigeon poop from the sky do not for easy reading lead.
quote:
Originally posted by barbaros45:
quote:
It was a regular force that seized Quan Tri. Even then, South Vietnamese forces forced them north of the DMZ.


South Vietnamese forces couldn't force your grandmother north...the war I was in they twittled while Saigon burned...


Then, perhaps you should have spent time with them. The ARVN took back Quang Tri from northern regulars in 1972. By then, US forces were less than 95,000. (I was still in country on my second tour.)

Entire ARVN regiments were wiped out in the final battle for Saigon.
quote:
Originally posted by Aude Sapere:
Crash, you make less sense with each squeal. What in the world are you talking about RE: me and criminals? You are one of the silliest and cryptic people I have yet encountered, and thanks be to God, not in person. It is as if you spoke in riddles. Dropping non sequiturs as if a pieces of pigeon poop from the sky do not for easy reading lead.


Oh boy, your hammer and sickle are waiting in the wheat field. Smiler

Add Reply

Likes (0)
Post

×
×
×
×