this post was submitted on 17 Jul 2024
660 points (94.4% liked)

politics

18883 readers
3756 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Kaboom@reddthat.com 17 points 2 months ago (5 children)

The AR15 is just cute if it comes to battling the US armed forces. Anyone thinking they can have an insurrection by not taking over the army, but instead having civilians with AR15's fighting the US armed forces (or even the police forces) is just... Cute. Also, again, insurrections require less weapons and more planning, connections, popularity, that sort of thing.

Remember the middle east? Remember vietnam? A bunch of poverty stricken farmers kicked our asses. And with a US rebellion, you can bet theres going to be at least a few traitors in the military

[–] BurnSquirrel@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Remember the middle east? Remember vietnam? A bunch of poverty stricken farmers ~~kicked our asses~~ ground themselves against superior firepower, eeking out enough casualties to make an apathetic American public demand an end to the conflicts

Just want to set the record straight because the idea of "Kicking the ass" of the US army with a whole lot of of the smallest weapon they issue is disillusional. The vast majority of casualties in the GWOT were IEDs

[–] Olhonestjim@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Even today, nothing beats a rifle behind every bush.

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Looking at gaza right now, like yeah you can fight a government but it don't look great. If a government wants to kill you it will kill you.

[–] PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The Iraqi insurgency was run by ex -Baath party members who used to run and be the army when GW dismissed them to "nation build.". They went home and took their weapons with them. However, many, many died. They were also supported by Iran.

The rest, as they say, is history.

[–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 2 points 2 months ago

Do you think that there aren't plenty of former military people that are on the political left?

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world -2 points 2 months ago

The military stacked bodies in both of those conflicts. I know it's cool to run around yelling that we got beat by farmers but the reality was very different. The South Vietnamese government fell because the people wanted it to fall. We were the only thing holding it up. The minute we left the majority of the people made their will known. The same thing occurred in Afghanistan. People want to think the Taliban were hiding in caves and fighting us with farmers. But they acted and operated as a government in exile with their base in Pakistan. They had professional fighting units that infiltrated along the mountains and came down to fight anywhere in the country. (Sounding familiar yet?) Then at the end it turns out we were again, the only thing holding the government up. The people were literally just waiting for us to leave.

And in both conflicts the US military consistently won their engagements. This is not something you're going to win on the battlefield. This is something you win with massive movements of people.