So, you say that “There Will Be No Second American Revolution: The Futility of an Armed Revolt.”?
So, you say that “There Will Be No Second American Revolution: The Futility of an Armed Revolt.”? (http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2016/...)
Well, if THAT is the case, then why are the global elites doing their damndest to disarm We The American People? Does anyone recall how the First American Revolution began? A bunch of farmers with fowling pieces and woodsmen with Kentucky rifles turned out to stop a few regiments of Redcoats from seizing a stock of arms and powder at Lexington and Concord?
They did not try to fight the British regulars in stand-up formations; instead, they ambushed them, firing from behind rocks, trees, and walls, using hit-ran-run attacks that were called “partisan tactics” at the time, and would now be referred to as guerrilla warfare.
As a British Army after-action report phrased it “By this time the Country took y Alarm and went immediately I Arms, and we were thus harassed from behind rocks, tree, wall, stone hedges, and we were unable to meet a Man other than behind a rock, tree, stone wall, ect., who immediately gave his fire and off he went.”
Eventually, the Continentals became trained and somewhat equipped enough by France so that they could meet the Brits on conventional fields of battle, but until then they had to resort to guerrilla warfare and keep the enemy off-balance until they could fight—and WIN—conventional battles.
Unable to win? Maybe not at first—but guerrilla tactics can hurt—and ultimately KILL—regular military formations. I refer to the successful Afghani mujahideen campaigns against the Soviets, among others. True, they got a lot of help from the U.S. and other foreign sources, but it would have been worthless without a fierce fighting spirit that anyone trying to disarm and enslave us will soon discover all too many of us still possess!
Well, if THAT is the case, then why are the global elites doing their damndest to disarm We The American People? Does anyone recall how the First American Revolution began? A bunch of farmers with fowling pieces and woodsmen with Kentucky rifles turned out to stop a few regiments of Redcoats from seizing a stock of arms and powder at Lexington and Concord?
They did not try to fight the British regulars in stand-up formations; instead, they ambushed them, firing from behind rocks, trees, and walls, using hit-ran-run attacks that were called “partisan tactics” at the time, and would now be referred to as guerrilla warfare.
As a British Army after-action report phrased it “By this time the Country took y Alarm and went immediately I Arms, and we were thus harassed from behind rocks, tree, wall, stone hedges, and we were unable to meet a Man other than behind a rock, tree, stone wall, ect., who immediately gave his fire and off he went.”
Eventually, the Continentals became trained and somewhat equipped enough by France so that they could meet the Brits on conventional fields of battle, but until then they had to resort to guerrilla warfare and keep the enemy off-balance until they could fight—and WIN—conventional battles.
Unable to win? Maybe not at first—but guerrilla tactics can hurt—and ultimately KILL—regular military formations. I refer to the successful Afghani mujahideen campaigns against the Soviets, among others. True, they got a lot of help from the U.S. and other foreign sources, but it would have been worthless without a fierce fighting spirit that anyone trying to disarm and enslave us will soon discover all too many of us still possess!
Add Comment
All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read
- 1Posted by CircuitGuy 8 years, 5 months agoI think it's more about the spirit of taking care of yourself, of being adults not being completely dependent on the gov't. I see that as decreasing the need for a large standing army. All of that makes it easier for the people direct the gov't within a constitutional framework (something we need more of) without armed rebellion.| Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink
