Greg Littell, writing for a Western Nevada journal called “The Union,” has said in a op-ed article that the idea of armed rebellion against a tyrannical United States would be impossible because of a perceived weapons disparity. Essentially, Mr. Littell believes that a militia conceivably armed with AR-15s would be forced to back down because this tyrant could threaten to use nuclear weapons. Therefore, the only “rational course” to take would be Gandhi-esque civil disobedience and that refusing to work would grind the tyrannical government to a halt. Let’s back up a little and really analyze what Mr. Littell is saying.
First of all, let’s not be Polly-Annish about this. Barack Obama has already enforced his will on federal and state governments repeatedly in order to instill his liberal agenda on the American citizen. Between stuffing Syrian “refugees” into whatever corners of America will take them, attacking our Second Amendment rights, and repressing Christian Americans, Obama could already be called something of a tyrant. All that really remains between Barack Obama leaving office in 2016 and Barack Obama becoming President-For-Life is the support of the military. However, Obama has repeatedly slandered military leaders and attacked military establishments and traditions, so it is safe to assume the military would not back an Obama-led dictatorship. Any overtures of retaining his Presidency after the end of his office term would be quashed by the dutiful generals who serve on behalf of the American people.
Secondly, why would soldiers launch nukes on their own homes? Greg Littell is laboring under a literary fantasy more befitting a Tom Clancy novel than domestic politics. Mr. Littell’s genocidal fantasy may work for his own whims to quash Obama-dissenters, but fails to consider that the men behind the button are better Americans than he is and would be unwilling to act so coldly on their own families. One wonders what Mr. Littell imagines he would do?
Let’s accept the scenario Mr. Littell has given us. What would you do if Obama wrested control of the military, enacted martial law and you’ve taken up arms to cast him out of power? If this is the case, how would patriots get around federal maneuvers to launch nuclear missiles on American cities?
Read out more about Greg Littell’s article and a counterpoint on page 2.
You are so naieve, one step at a time, get on porch with the puppies and watch Americans take this country back while you have your oreos and milk..
Strong cities act….obsama gave the muslim Saudi controlled UN permission to roll tanks and troops on our soil to fight terrorists. Who do muslims consider terrorists? Everyone non-muslim!
Exactly!!!
They can have the cities we are tired of their$#%&!@*anyway. When the trucks stop bringing in supplies the cities will burn themselves down. Why do think most vets choose to live in the country. And they won’t be able to count on the sheriffs department either they are mostly vets and local boys I know plenty of them too.
Time to stand up Obama is not leaving without a fight
They are working both sides of the fence. Beware of the clandestine Feds that will show up to help isix after the fight starts!
YES, smart man to educate!
If necessary I feel Americans will rise for democracy
Sorry, bt not interested. Facebook for me is about FRIENDS not numbers. Not interested in kids looking for sugar daddies.
Yep. Cannot regulate the black market where the guns used for violence are bought/stolen. Feds know that, so why is there NOT an emphasis going after THOSE criminals? If you go after those already breaking the current laws, problem solved. Yes, I understand that is difficult, but, restricting guns from people who live within current laws will not solve the criminal/terrorist problem of killing by gun. Furthe to this post, we should raise the voting age to 25 (sooner for honorable discharged veteran with DD-214). Give the immature an opportunity to live in the real world where they have to provide for themselves instead of their spoiled life.