Poll: Will there be another American Revolution?

Recommended Videos
Aug 25, 2009
4,611
0
0
VGC USpartan VS said:
MelasZepheos said:
Actually, in most US States, you can own Assault Rifles if you have a license :p. But nevertheless, I believe you wrong for saying America hates poor people. I have come to the conclusion that we dislike them but if a documentary covering the homeless comes out, we will help them.
I guess massive tongue in cheekness of my post aside what I was trying to say is that the American public can no longer stand against the American Military.

Just because you can own an assault rifle, or even a Ground-Air Missile, doesn't mean you stand a chance against the full force of the American military. even if, for example, the entire state of Texas was to rise up in arms against America, all it would take would be one or two tactical insertions and the entire thing would be put down in minutes.

Even back in the old days of the American Civil War, the south were just as well armed and trained as the north, which is to say not very well armed and trained at all. There wasn't much of an army when America went to war last time round, the basic tenet was that you raised an army when you needed it from whoever was available. The concept of having a standing army ready at all times just didn't exist back then. So when the Civil War rolled around there were just as many conscripts for the South as the North, and the biggest discrepancy was not in men but the training of their leaders. This was in fact basically the point of the Second Amendment 'A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' The idea is that an armed public is the ultimate defence against tyranny.

This was fine back in the days when a six shot revolver that took ten minutes to reload was considered uppity, and the majority of even the army were not what you'd call soldiers. If the public had ever risen up they would have been capable of genuinely fighting against the leaders of the land, as indeed they did in the Civil War.

But nowadays, as I mentioned, they have a standing army, with months of training and experience, leaders with a little more strategy than 'gather up all our men and charge in a straight line,' and no amount of home brew front porch rebellion, however well armed, is going to change that. The public of America could no longer stand against the might of the American war machine, unless said war machine decided to join their cause.
 

Capcom4ever

New member
Jun 24, 2010
80
0
0
Well yes but not because of economic disparity. It would be because of the gross abuse of American civil rights by the federal government and its concentration of statist power to take advantage of its citizens. If these trends continue, Americans will either submit to totalitarianism or demand their natural-born rights.
 

Gilhelmi

The One Who Protects
Oct 22, 2009
1,480
0
0
GWarface said:
Gilhelmi said:
I do not know.

Only because we are still comfortable, but if something happened like a ban on religions or any attack on any constitutional rights (1 thru 10) then the odd shift to 70% yes, 30% no.
Im no american, but im pretty sure that there is an attack on your constitutional rights right now.. Actually a couple of them.. Read alittle about the TSA and you will see...
I mean A major attack. With the airlines people can still say "No, I will just drive/take the train to get where I am going." We still have a choice about whether or not the service of air travel is worth the hassle and frisking of the TSA.

When I say "attack on the constitution", I mean something a bit more obvious like banning a religion, or making it unlawful to own a gun, or making it a crime to not answer police questions (believe it or not the one about police, that I think is the most likely).
 

Kolby Jack

Come at me scrublord, I'm ripped
Apr 29, 2011
2,519
0
0
Military recruitment tends to skyrocket during times of economic crisis because it's a stable job with decent pay and great benefits. As for the rest of the unlucky schmucks who can't find a job, well, they probably have more pressing concerns than a revolution, don't they?
 

Verlander

New member
Apr 22, 2010
2,449
0
0
Hahahaha no, of course not.

Simply put,the American propaganda machine is running too strongly over the mass ignorant.

Like physical materials, there needs to be a sudden drastic change from one extreme to the other before crack begin to show. Realistically? I think America will have little choice but to adopt more liberal and socialist attributes (which is for the better), and if ever there would be a war, it would be the backwards people revolting against these sort of changes. It's unlikely it will happen though.

As with all history, look towards what's already happened in Europe to get an idea of what will eventually happen in the US. You are still a baby country after all...
 

maturin

New member
Jul 20, 2010
702
0
0
Impossible without a split in the military, and the military has insufficient regional affiliations. More likely would be the military intervening to prevent a gulf engineered by radical politicians.

We've never seen a First World Country go the dogs in the age of globalization. The U.S. has the biggest economy in the world, dominated by multinational corporations that would be wrecked by some sort of revolution. Their voice will be heard somehow.

I don't think class war is really in the cards, culturally speaking. If the economy got bad enough, the poor could always be turned on the Mexicans that will dominate the southwest.

And none of this would constitute an ideological revolt like the Revolution was. Well, some sort of disgusting ideology, possibly.
 

WorldFree55

New member
May 22, 2011
381
0
0
Maybe. But we really do need one because freedoms are being taken away left and right and whats worse is that some people think it's ok if the government says to them that its meant to keep you safe. Its a joke and I hope some kind of rebellion happens soon. I don't want it to involve bloodshed at all but if it has to come to that, so be it. The government really needs a cleanup along with the past "laws" if we can really even call them that.
 

MASTACHIEFPWN

Will fight you and lose
Mar 27, 2010
2,279
0
0
Even if there were, why would we revolt against the rich, why not the retarded ass political leaders?
 

RatRace123

Elite Member
Dec 1, 2009
6,651
0
41
Daystar Clarion said:
Wouldn't that be a civil war?
Yeah, pretty sure that's a civil war.
And no, I don't think that'll happen in the next 50 years. The gap between rich/poor may piss a lot of people off, but it's not enough to make people want to go to war.

Until one side starts actively killing off the other, economic reasons are why we'd have a civil war, if we even had one at all.
 

Luthir Fontaine

New member
Oct 16, 2010
323
0
0
demoman_chaos said:
I think it is likely. Government corruption is reaching an all-time high. If Obama wasn't black I'd say we'd already be up in arms (seriously, the people were on the edge of revolt when W. Bush was screwing us over but now everyone seems fine with being screwed over).

I'm all for taking an M14 to the pricks in power. I don't care about the puppets like the senators and what not, the men behind the curtain need eradicated otherwise we will end up in the same boat as before.
And note that most soldiers wouldn't be supporting the government. They would support the people, for they aren't mindless drones.
I was a soldier from 04 - 08. I think i would support the goverment over rebels that are rebelling for no reason
 

Luthir Fontaine

New member
Oct 16, 2010
323
0
0
No and God i hope not anyone who wants a war to happen needs to be put on the front lines.

Hopfully that well kill your romance bull shit dream of war. Innocent people die on both sides and who do you think well gain power after it.....the American Revoltion was a one in a million.
 

Soviet Steve

New member
May 23, 2009
1,511
0
0
The American proletariat tends to be the more supportive part of the US government, so I doubt it.
 

EllEzDee

New member
Nov 29, 2010
814
0
0
Joseph375 said:
No. [...]there would be no support and they would have to go up against one of the largest militaryies in the world.
You mean like the last one? Britain was pretty much the most powerful force in the known world. And there would be support, especially from people who want a stake in the country. Maybe China would happily give up their vast resources in exchange for the American's support of their commu-fascism.
 

emeraldrafael

New member
Jul 17, 2010
8,589
0
0
Um... no. First off, that wouldnt most likely be a civil war at that point, since the US doesnt really own territory to revolt.

second, theres always been poor and rich, and at no real time has there ever been a war between them in a sense of an "actual" war (except maybe Shay's rebellion, and the battle of brandywine, but that fizzled, I could see you argue that one).

finally, why? There's a new president in less then two years coming up, so why would people bother now? Yeah, times suck, but its not like its going to get better if there's war.
 

SuperNova221

New member
May 29, 2010
393
0
0
Anybody that says yes is fairly delusional.

This is why.
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/~jephrean/graph5.gif
 

Leftnt Sharpe

Nick Furry
Apr 2, 2009
560
0
0
SuperNova221 said:
Anybody that says yes is fairly delusional.

This is why.
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/~jephrean/graph5.gif
Are you actually familiar with the concept of a revolution? Half the time its the country's own army that is in revolt.
 

SuperNova221

New member
May 29, 2010
393
0
0
Leftnt Sharpe said:
SuperNova221 said:
Anybody that says yes is fairly delusional.

This is why.
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/~jephrean/graph5.gif
Are you actually familiar with the concept of a revolution? Half the time its the country's own army that is in revolt.
Yes, and good luck with that.