Conspiracies, sheeple, the universe and everything

[Bubblehead1980]

Originally Posted by u crank

I'm not talking about rights. Taking 200 million or so guns away from their owners is impossible. How would you do it?



A civil war may be the result of an attempt to disarm the populous, but what happens before that? And again there is the examples of failed attempts to subjugate smaller and less well armed nations. Ask the American gun owners on this forum what would happen. It would be messy. I think it would be almost impossible.

Question to the bishop. Will you wear the pointy hat?

Well it depends on how far things would escalate and who tyrannical the government is.Saying it could not and would happen here is just ignorant.Unlikely? Yes, but possible? Absolutely.

Lincoln launched a war of aggression that cost 800,0000 americans their lives, ruined an entire area of the country, left millions homeless and impoverished, scarred emotionally and physically,Lincoln suspended habeas corpus , jailed his critics for simply speaking out against him among his many other crimes. All over slavery which was on it's way out anyway.

All it takes is the wrong person in charge. I could see an unlikely but possible scenario of economic collapse(which will happened if we dont change course, could be 10, 20 years) leading to widespread unrest and with the wrong politican like BHO or worse in office, perhaps lucky enough to have a majority and shoving some wild anti gun legislation down our throats they way they did obamacare or the way the PATRIOT ACT was passed in the wake of 9/11.Then suddenly, any citizen caught with a firearm after so and so date is a felon.All depends on timing and how tyrannical said leader is willing to be. Don't say things like this won't happen, they have, Lincoln and civil war are prime example.

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

Well it depends on how far things would escalate and who tyrannical the government is.Saying it could not and would happen here is just ignorant.Unlikely? Yes, but possible? Absolutely.

You didn't answer the question. How would you do it? How would you physically take possession of an estimated 250 million guns in the hands of upwards of 80 million people. Ask politely? As I said there is no force on this earth that could accomplish this. There is no politician, including third term Obama, who would be dumb enough to suggest it. No police or military leader would be dumb enough to attempt it either. The logistics are impossible. Maybe you know something no one else knows. Again, how would you do it?

All it takes is the wrong person in charge.

Apparently anyone you don't approve of.

I could see an unlikely but possible scenario of economic collapse(which will happened if we dont change course, could be 10, 20 years) leading to widespread unrest and with the wrong politican like BHO or worse in office, perhaps lucky enough to have a majority and shoving some wild anti gun legislation down our throats

In a country that is in an economic collapse, explain exactly what 'some wild anti gun legislation' would or could accomplish. It would make no sense and be even harder to do. There would be other pressing problems other than turning a large portion of the population, armed at that, against the government. Again, not a chance.

Then suddenly, any citizen caught with a firearm after so and so date is a felon.All depends on timing and how tyrannical said leader is willing to be. Don't say things like this won't happen, they have, Lincoln and civil war are prime example.

Your view of American history is as slanted as your view of current events.

[Oberon]

I wonder how many other nations on this Earth who have had a civil war well over a hundred years ago, are still so heatedly divided today. Russia perhaps, although their most recent civil war was just under a hundred years ago, Korea as well, but that's much more recent. Ireland, perhaps, but again, although the history is long, the violence is still fairly recent.

[Dread Knot]

Originally Posted by Oberon

I wonder how many other nations on this Earth who have had a civil war well over a hundred years ago, are still so heatedly divided today. Russia perhaps, although their most recent civil war was just under a hundred years ago, Korea as well, but that's much more recent. Ireland, perhaps, but again, although the history is long, the violence is still fairly recent.

The difference between the US and secession in Africa, Eastern Europe, Asia, etc, is that the in US, we drew up our own union. In Africa, Eastern Europe and Asia, the French the English, the Russians, the Ottomans and the Chinese drew up borders for other peoples.

Also, the mythos of the "Lost Cause" dies hard.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_Ca...he_Confederacy

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by Dread Knot

The difference between the US and secession in Africa, Eastern Europe, Asia, etc, is that the in US, we drew up our own union. In Africa, Eastern Europe and Asia, the French the English, the Russians, the Ottomans and the Chinese drew up borders for other peoples.

Also, the mythos of the "Lost Cause" dies hard.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_Ca...he_Confederacy

Aye, bit like the old Stab in the Back theory after WWI. Defeat really is too bitter a pill to swallow for some.
Fully agreed on the designation of borders, and we're seeing the end result of that in North Africa and the Middle East today, the infamous (well, infamous now but relatively unknown before the Syrian civil war) Sykes-Picot agreement.
However, there are plenty of other nations that don't fall into that category, although their civil wars generally happened much longer ago. I mean, let's face it, most of Europe has been at war with both itself and everyone else in Europe at some point over the last two thousand years.

[Betonov]

Yugoslavia had it's own civil war during WWII.

Still abused for political points today. To the point of stalemating the economy.

[Dread Knot]

Originally Posted by Oberon

I mean, let's face it, most of Europe has been at war with both itself and everyone else in Europe at some point over the last two thousand years.

Over its tumultuous 1200-year history the Roman Empire was mostly in a state of near civil war or out right civil war. Eventually it did break into two halves. Seems to be the fate of some nations.

What did they say in the beginning of the HBO series? Rome ruled most of the known world. It couldn't rule itself.

The difference between the US and secession in Africa, Eastern Europe, Asia, etc, is that the in US, we drew up our own union. In Africa, Eastern Europe and Asia, the French the English, the Russians, the Ottomans and the Chinese drew up borders for other peoples.

How so?
Your country spent the next 130+ years negotiating with Britain on where each of you would agree to draw the lines on the map, sometimes going to other countries for international arbitration and getting those countries to help decide on a line to draw.
Currently you have 5 ongoing border disputes with your "new" northern neighbour, in the 1970s and 80s you went to Holland to ask the Hague to draw a border for you.
As for drawing up borders for other people, you seem to be skipping over Americas role in that practice.

[mapuc]

Some one mentioned "Tin foil hat"

Here's the story of this famous hat

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tin_foil_hat

I tried a hat my self-not to protect me against the government or other officials, but to protect my brain against all these conspiracy stuff.

Markus