Citizens VS US Military 2nd American Revolution

Citizens would win against the U.S. Military, here’s how

Conor

 

Nov 28, 2018 · 6 min read

 

 

Eric Swalwell, a sitting United States Congressman, wrote an article about gun control, and the forcible confiscation of weapons from American citizenry. This sparked an angry debate, in which Swalwell tweeted that an armed citizenry doesn’t stand a chance against a nuclear armed United States Military.

The second American Revolution is the fantasy of every gun nut, and the disdain of every pacifist urbanite. Veterans, preppers, and rednecks all couch their need for varying caliber, large capacity, semi-automatic rifles in the need to defend themselves against both a collapsing society, and a tyrannical government. The attempt to confiscate these weapons would itself be the evidence that the government had become too powerful and tyrannical. In the showdown between the world’s most powerful military, and the world’s most armed citizenry, who would win?

My answer: the Citizens, without question.

Nukes, Stealth, and Drones:

Eric Swalwell asserted in a tweet that if the U.S. government went to war with it’s citizens,

“It would be a short war my friend. The government has nukes. Too many of them. But they’re legit.”

Which just shows his ignorance of warfare. Nuclear weapons would mean nothing in a Second American Revolution. If the U.S. Military even entertained the idea of using nuclear weapons on a U.S. population center, even the pacifist urbanites would rip soldiers out of their silos. That’s not even to mention the death of hundreds of thousands, and the rendering of an American city uninhabitable for a decade. Nukes are a non-factor.

“But the U.S. has a modern Air Force, with stealth aircraft and drones,” one might argue.

Attack aircraft are only as useful as their targets. Part of the reason there was no shock and awe campaign in Afghanistan is because there was a lack of military targets. If the U.S. Military faced a domestic insurgency, what would they bomb?

Country Bars? Gun Stores? Walmart?

Good luck with that.

Finally drones, Uncle Sam’s answer to the dastardly guerilla. Once again, you’re talking about bombing American population centers, and most of the people the military would target, would know how to avoid such strikes. Afghan and Iraqi drone strikes are directed by intelligence gathering techniques. This includes human and signals intelligence.

American Insurgents would be largely comprised of veterans, Three Percenters, and cops. This wouldn’t be some passive force, waiting for the United States Military to get enough information to act. They would be hunting informants, feeding counterintelligence to the military, scrambling communications, or avoiding electronic communication completely through couriers.

A massive problem the United States Military would face is that their opponents would largely be their veterans, trained in the very warfare they would try to prosecute, and they would have to face them on the ground.

Insurgents and the Military:

There are approximately 20,000,000 veterans, and 63,000,000 gun owners in the United States. This means that if all resisted, the military would face a force approximately 33 times its size. For pity’s sake, let’s give the military a fighting chance. The Three Percenter movement is founded on the belief that only three percent of the United States population fought in the Revolutionary War. In an attempt to even the odds, let’s argue that only three percent of veterans and gun owners would become insurgents, along with three percent of cops defecting to the insurgent side. This puts the insurgency at 600,000 veterans, 1,890,000 gun owners, and 15,000 police officers, for a grand total of 2,505,000 insurgents.

At present, the United States Military has 1.2 million Active Duty members and 800,000 reservists. The United States also has approximately 500,000 Police. This comes to a grand total of 2,500,000 personnel attempting to disarm the civilian population.

Evenly matched right? But there’s one more piece of math we have to do: military state of birth.

In the military, some states contribute more than others. This comes from national pride and military history, something pinko gun grabbers know little about. Out of the top ten, troops from California (185,000), Washington (65,000), and New York (50,000), might participate in a war against their fellow citizens over their right to bear arms. This comes to a grand total of 300,000 active duty troops.

The remaining troops come from states like Texas (165,000), Virginia (115,000), North Carolina (112,000), Florida (92,000), Georgia (90,000), South Carolina (55,000), and Colorado (50,000). This comes to a grand total of 679,000. This means that the United States Military is comprised of pro-gun citizens at a ratio of more than 2 to 1.

Now a few troops from Florida and Colorado might go along with the program, but what are the chances that a Texan, Virginian, Carolinian, or Georgian would go along with gun confiscation?

Zero, zilch, nada, and these are some of the military’s best fighters.

Once the shooting started, a large chunk of these troops would resign and join the insurgency, and even more would be demoralized at the prospect of fighting to disarm their fellow citizens. They would be traitors to their nation, their state, their constitution, and their fellow citizens. Every step in uniform could be their last, and every neighbor an enemy.

The War:

“But the military still has tanks, armored trucks, machine guns, and grenade launchers!” one might argue.

It doesn’t matter, because it wouldn’t be that kind of war. Insurgents would first go after the politicians who created the law and sicked the military after them. Then they would go after the media that cheered on the slaughter of their fellow citizens. Then, and only then, would they face what pretty much equates to their little brothers.

Troops wouldn’t want to kill veterans, and veterans wouldn’t want to kill troops, because they are the same people. But if it came down to it, everyone is going to do what they have to. Many of the bases on American soil, were the previous homes of veterans. They would know the security patterns, layouts, buildings, and armories of their former homes. If the military was foolish enough to maintain its current posture, while attempting to disarm the citizenry, they could lose entire installations to insurgents without a shot being fired. Veterans only a few years, or a decade out of service, would have at their disposal weapons and equipment they knew well.

If troops continued to fight, then they would find themselves facing combat veterans who had walked in their boots, knew their equipment, and knew their tactics. Troops would still have to set up security checkpoints. Troops in tanks and troop carriers still have to get out to pee. Troops would still have to drive through hostile cities and interact with the population. Veterans know their weaknesses because they were OUR weaknesses.

It should never come to this. This should stay the fantasy of gun nuts, and the disdain of pacifist urbanites. This would be a situation where the cure is infinitely worse than the disease.

And to the politicians who would so cavalierly violate the rights of their citizens, and who would threaten war so casually, I have a cliched phrase for you:

Molon Labe.