Where Would We Go?

[MachIVshooter]

It's not just us vs. them.....

Look at the WHOLE picture

The reality is that a bloody battle to preserve our constitution will not be limited to those already on American soil. Those overseas who wish to do us harm would most definitely exploit the vulnerable condition of an embattled nation.

I, too, doubt that our military (most of them) would have any part in disarming citizens, etc. But when the military goes renegade to defend the constitution and populous from it's own government, what do you think all those crazy folks on the other side of the globe will do?

This hypothetical situation has many more angles than simply American civilians being able to defeat the UN posse and other sympathetic gungrabbers.

I do not doubt our resolve, but in such a state of disarray as we would be with another civil war (and it would be), it is unlikely that we could hold of the WORLD.

A house divided against itself cannot stand.

That held true 140 years ago, and the international situation was far less complicated.

Bottom line, we CANNOT let someone into office who would shred the constitution.

 

[Meplat]

Reality is harsh, unfortunately.

So I learned as a child when I placed a .22 round between the eyes of the first calf I bottle raised from beebie cow status to table fare status.

Could you shoot your neighbor dead?
In cold blood, face to face, from ten feet away, in broad daylight?

Cold blood? No. Then again, anyone who catagorizes shooting someone who is armed - and ready and willing to shoot YOU in order to violate God given rights - as "in cold blood" is missing one heck of a boat. Face to face from ten feet and in broad daylight just makes the accuracy factor a little less of a factor.

If yes, congratulations, you have what it takes to be a revolutionary.

Guess I do, then.

I certainly couldn't shoot the chief of police of my local town dead, as he's my neighbor and we're on friendly waving terms.

I wouldn't have to. I used to shoot with ours...he's the man who got my son interested in competition pistol by allowing him to shoot his highly modified .38
Super. A man who, with a friendly wink in my direction at the enthusiasm of a twelve year old boy, told me over and again that as long as I kept him on the range and in the woods and fields, he'd probably never have to see the boy on a professional basis. Incidently, a man who would walk away from a job which he is not only very good at, but loves, rather than to be put in a position of enforcing illegal and immoral laws. If he were a different man, however - one who would shoot ME dead to enforce the unConstitutional wishes of some leftist power, then yes. Graveyard dead.

Yet, in a revolutionary situation, who's to say what side he would be on? What side would my anti-gun relatives be on? Would I be able to shoot them too if they tried to sell me out?

Have no worries there, either. I KNOW where my immediate family stands on the Constitution. As to the ones (and yes, if you include extended family, then I must admit to the occasional leftist hanging off a branch or two) then they won't HAVE to "sell me out". I've never made ANY secrets of where I stand, or what I believe. Won't, as long as I draw breath.

Yell 'Molon Labe!' all you like, but what happens when they cordon off your house and post snipers?

Then they pray I'm IN the house, and not in the surrounding swamps. Same swamps Andrew Jackson made such good use of. Depends on whether they are still dumb enough to telegraph their intentions as they did at Ruby Ridge and Waco. Those two incidents, as well as Masada, the Alamo and a host of others, have taught ME at least that taking a stand in a static location to defend against superior numbers isn't the way to go. When it comes down to having made the decision to rise against superior numbers, one has to recognize that the choice becomes not "how can I best survive?" but "how can I best survive long enough to make this VERY expensive?"
If they catch me IN the house, I guess I'm cooked. As to whether some of them come to dinner with me will be determined by how they carry out their plan, I suppose. Then again, if I allow them to take my means of self defense, or worse yet, my will for self defense, and anyone wants to do me harm in my own home, then I smell bacon frying anyway.

Will you sacrifice your wife and children for freedom? Will you look them in the eyes and say, 'We are all going to die today, because it is right', and mean it? Sacrificing your own life is hard enough, could you sacrifice all you love, and ostensibly are fighting for?

The Jewish people in Germany couldn't (or wouldn't - at least en masse). They hoped that the next appeasement would be the last asked of them. Hoped right up to the doors of the gas chambers. Ask the people of the State of Isreal that same question today.

My wife? Shoots better than I do anyway. Kids are grown. I live from day to day with the knowledge that it could be my last. Should I forget that, I have a little machine that kicks the stew out of me when my heart stops to remind me.

I talk on an almost daily basis with a friend who lives in South Africa...a place where shooting another in self defense is soooo illegal that a policeman was recently arrested for shooting and killing a burglar who was shooting at HIM. A country which, coincidently, now has the second highest murder rate of any country in the world. (See [URL="http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/tax_tot_tax_wed_sin_wor"[/URL]) The bigger question is, would I live behind walls, in constant fear of being one more statistic in the enormous cauldron of statistics who are murdered, assaulted, raped and robbed on a daily basis, or would I rather die a quick death working towards a goal of keeping a free country free? Dad did his time in Korea shooting and being shot at...his older brother at Iwo doing same, second youngest brother in Vietnam...same/same...all in the name of upholding the oath they took. That oath was to the Constitution. I feel kind of beholden to that piece of paper too.

This isn't a thread about how much bluster we can manage, it's about where we could possibly escape to when the federal government's fist has finally crushed freedom.

There IS no place to "escape" to. Even if there were a place where bravery, honor and the willingness to allow free men to live that way still flourished, what makes you think they'd WANT our cowardly who wouldn't defend our OWN liberties?

If the military does not do their duty and arrest the congress and president, that's that. It's over, and there's nothing we can do about it. Period. Resistance will lead only to death, and the destruction of your family, because they did not quell your rebellion before it got out of hand.

The populace of Colonial America thought (in the majority) that way, too. As did the Crown. To quote Ronald Reagan, "...they were wrong".

There has to be a plan B, because plan A depends upon humanity's capacity to transcend its own shortsighted nature and do what's right because it's right. Those who can do so are vanishingly rare today.

Unless there's been some genetic mutation that I'm unaware of over the millenia, then people are still people. There will always be the urge and longing to live free. All that is required is that that longing cross paths with the right person, the right leader, and freedom results. Does it always work? No. But it NEVER works when not attempted.

Israel has been mentioned. It's a good possibility, but Israel as a nation of ethnic Jews will cease to exist within one or two generations.

Shame I'm not a betting man. I'd love for you to lay odds on that. We could place the money in a safe location, and my great-grandchildren could hoist a cup that they'd bought with your money. They've been trying to wipe out the Jewish people for five thousand years. Seems to me a couple of generations isn't going to be a long haul for them. There have been some soft liners who have attained power in Israel of late, but as soon as enough of them die at the hands of the people who hate them and wish them destroyed, I look for the soft liners to be replaced VERY quickly. Without getting into religious debate, I will only say that Israel will be here when the end of this world comes.

Most European nations are writeoffs...The Scandinavian countries...

Brazil is a good possibility, as are some other South American countries...

..former Eastern Bloc nations such as Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia, and possibly Russia as well...

...India...

India??? lol. India is already bursting at the rafters. The others?

Ah yes. These countries (or others) are going to erect huge statues in their harbors welcoming the "struggling masses yearning to breathe free but who were too cowardly to keep what was once theirs - the envy of the world".

Yeah, I can see that happening.

 

[kansas45]

let's go

You guy's are great! Let's stop this stuff before it get's to the bad stuff! You can bet that me & alot of the other Kansas folks will be by your side!

 

[American By Blood]

I'm a born cynic so I'm of the opinion that freedom is on its way out in America. Those possesed of both the love of freedom and the boldness required to exercize and defend it are a dying breed. Chalk it up to an over-abundance of high techology, too much peace, population density, an altered ethnic balance, or any other reason--you still get the same grim reality.

Those who say that the only option is to stay and fight are ignoring what our ancestors have been doing for generations. Thousands of years ago we left the Black Sea in search of open spaces and new lands. In doing so we created an unbroken chain of cultures from Iceland to India. A mere few centuries ago many of our forebearers could not stand the erosion of freedom beginning in Europe and set out for the Americas and Africa.

Throughout our millennia of migration we've carried in our blood and traditions a love of freedom and an essentially republican form of government. The Roman Senate, the Germanic Thing, the Slavic Veche and a host of others both ancient and modern all embody our natural tendency toward ordered liberty. No matter where we go we build these societies and once again finding greener pastures for this pursuit would be in keeping with historical precedent.

But where, then, to go? I respect the aspirations of the Free Staters, but I'm skeptical as to the feasibility of their plans. The Ninth and Tenth Amendments are largely moot in today's political scenario and it's highly unlikely they'll be making a comeback any time soon. Thus, any project located within the territorial confines of the USA is probably destined to failure. The only question is whether it will be a non-starter, a short-lived effort snuffed out quickly by clever Federal legal wrangling, or the next (albeit larger) Waco.

Building a new society from scratch is an effort that requires physical and political space alike. Given the technology of repression available in the West, the first world and former communist bloc are out as options. Asia is likely impossible as well due to the effectiveness of government in most Eastern nations. South America is a possibility, but even the poorest Latin countries have relatively well-equipped states. Corruption, not want for guns and personnel, is the main problem south of the Rio Grande.

That leaves the would-be pioneer with Africa. No African country would be welcoming to American and European colonists setting up communities on their soil, but many would be able to do very little about it. More than a few African states are entities in name only and dedicated groups of settlers with sufficient numbers and arms could carve out spaces and hold them. It would be neither easy nor polite, but in the long run it could be worth it. Modern conveniences would be virtually non-existent in these towns for some years, and the settlements would probably never look like Tokyo, but the sort of people who value freedom over comfort should not be dissuaded by the prospect of growing food, pumping water, and not having a multi-plex theatre within walking distance.

The x-factor in this scenario is economic relations with the West. If the projects are judged as unforgiveably racist or imperialist our hypothetical settlers can expect the same sort of sanctions/embargo treatment that Rhodesia and South Africa received. They would be forced into virtual autarky. However, if the effort does not establish apartheid states but instead stays at the level of intentional communities it may be able to avoid massive public outcry. This lack of PR fallout would create the potential for entering into agreements with corporations that have interests on the continent. African self-rule is not working for multinationals as instability leads to broken contracts, unreliable supply lines, risk for workers, etc. If a single settlement manages to prove that it could provide metals, minerals, or oil more reliably than the locals it would very likely pique the business world's interest in other colonies. A scenario would present itself to resource extraction firms where they can invest fewer dollars and less manpower while reaping greater profits.

Do I think any of this will happen? No. I wish it would and I'd be more than willing to help found one of these settlements, but I doubt enough willing and qualified people will ever get together and make it happen. Those most willing are often the least qualified (IE skinheads with felony records need not apply) and the most qualified are often the most comfortable and therefore the least willing. My prediction is that America will slide further into Euro-decadence, our children will think of us as hopelessly reactionary fossils (think of how the babyboomers viewed the WWII generation), and we'll all die in our beds lamenting the West That Was while watching China continue to gear-up for the global endgame.

 

[Stauble]

Then they pray I'm IN the house, and not in the surrounding swamps. Same swamps Andrew Jackson made such good use of.

i beg to differ.
i do believe my moms ancestors made much better use of those swamps. and so will i.

 

[992]

where to go?

There really is not much choice on where to go that has not been all ready mentioned.But if you really think about it, the majority(?) rules.
If enough people think that the Hilllerybeast is the one that they will vote for, then she will be the one running things and we will be the unhappy miniorty(?).
It has happend before,and it will happen again.
The world will turn,the sun will shine and the grass will grow.
I don't like it,but I will do every thing in my power to vote for the oerson that I think will do the best job,and it won't be HER!!!!
I don't care if the person I vote for just gets one vote,then it will be MINE!!!
I still have to live with myself,and I will do what ever I think is right.
As for running,where are you going to run to that this kind of crap won't sonner or later catch up with you?

992
Tim C.

 

[Commissar Gribb]

As far as the military goes, I think the code of conduct sums it up.

will never forget that I am an American, fighting for freedom, responsible for my actions, and dedicated to the principles which made my country free. I will trust in my God and in the United States of America.

 

[Mannlicher]

we are indeed heading down the slippery slope of ruin, but even so, the USA is heads and shoulders above any other political entity in the world, so far as personal freedoms goes.
Hillary or a host of Hillarys won't get the Constitution ammended as you suggest. The logical thing to do is for us all to get off our butts, get heavily involved at the local level in politics, and take the country back.

 

[Bigjake]

Mannlicher said:

The logical thing to do is for us all to get off our butts, get heavily involved at the local level in politics, and take the country back.

Here here. You are right sir.

Rather than figuring out where those with yellow streaks down their backs will run, or how we'll shoot down any .gov jackbooted thug that attempts to take our guns, We should be getting active now before it ever escalates that far. there is still time.

 

[Meplat]

i beg to differ.
i do believe my moms ancestors made much better use of those swamps. and so will i.

If your mom's ancestors made better use of Louisiana's swamps than taking a rag tag bunch of 4,000 American rednecks with squirrel rifles and kicking the arses of 12,000 British Red Coats all the way back to England, then I salute her, sir.

 

[Phyphor]

Biker Sez:

I'd go nowhere, Fink, this is my country. In America I was born and bred, and will end up dead. Ya don't mess with a dog in his own backyard.

I'd say "f'n a" 'cept I'm in California...... pity she's not as free as the rest of the US.

 

[Bigjake]

Cali is still free-er than any other country on the planet. Even if it is infested with socialists. hang in the bro.

 

[wutzu]

Galt's Gulch?

 

[DRZinn]

Exactly.

American By Blood, I agree with damn near every word you wrote. And that's a rare thing.

 

[BigFatKen]

never underestimate the loyalty of marines to their CO. If that CO is worthy of it, those marines WILL follow him to hell and back......twice, just because.
__________________
"The right of a citizen to bear arms, in lawful defense of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the State government. It is one of the 'High Powers' delegated directly to the citizen by the United States Constitution, Amendment II....

Of course Marines would open fire, if so ordered. "If that CO is worthy of it". Once or twice, as you say. Perhaps for a long long time. Hillary would order the troops to mow down the FBI or other people that stand in her way that would over throw her. It would be the "Bloody Sunday", "Boston Massacre" or "Remember New Orleans".

One Chinese man stopped a tank.

While we are on Hollywood analogies, there was an early Star Trek where the Comms ruled this planet like Earth. They dominated the Yangs. It took one thousand years but the Yangs held out and took back what they once had. The North Vietnamese did not care if it took 10,000 days to win. Victory goes to ths side with the most will not might.

 

[DRZinn]

never underestimate the loyalty of marines to their CO. If that CO is worthy of it, those marines WILL follow him to hell and back......twice, just because.

Of course Marines would open fire, if so ordered.

Yeah, because Marines are just a bunch of mindless automatons.

What is it that qualifies either of you to make that judgement about Marines?

 

[utahminirevolver]

Canada is infested with leftists too, but has always managed to keep from slipping into death camps style authoritarianism. In fact, right now they're swinging back towards the middle with a Conservative minority government.

It's near by, it speaks the language, it has some wide open spaces still, it's a possibility for holing up long enough to regroup before joining forces with some Texas or Dixie freedom fighters to take our place back from the communist/jihadist/latinonazis or whatever usurpers may be the problem.

 

[BigFatKen]

What is it that qualifies either of you to make that judgement about Marines?

Sorry, I was just quoting him. While Army troops disarmed N.O. residents, no one was shot. You are correct, it remains to be seen if Marines would open fire.

Army troops did open fire at Kent State University

 

[NineseveN]

While you say the military would just walk over a community, remember that many of us took an oath :

I, _______, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

Been the same since 11 July 1868. I support and defend the CONSTITUTION not politicians. Given orders to the contrary, it is my DUTY to disobey those orders. And I will, if need be.

And when the constitution says the Second Amendment only applies to the army and national guard after the FEDGOV gets done with it? How many of your fellow soldiers are going to make the dstinction when our rights are reduced or removed by the constitution and the bastardization of it through the courts? Curious.

 

[Stauble]

If your mom's ancestors made better use of Louisiana's swamps than taking a rag tag bunch of 4,000 American rednecks with squirrel rifles and kicking the arses of 12,000 British Red Coats all the way back to England, then I salute her, sir.

i thought you were refering to him during the seminole wars
my mom 1/2 seminole indian.
he tried twice to kick them off thier land. once as a General, and once again as president.
the US tried so hard to kick them off thier land, but they fought it out, and in the end the government just kinda gave up on them.
thats how they made use of the swamps.... hit and run tactics

 

[jcoiii]

American By Blood has it. We must colonize. How's the moon looking these days? or Mars?

 

[Meplat]

i thought you were refering to him during the seminole wars
my mom 1/2 seminole indian.
he tried twice to kick them off thier land. once as a General, and once again as president.
the US tried so hard to kick them off thier land, but they fought it out, and in the end the government just kinda gave up on them.
thats how they made use of the swamps.... hit and run tactics

That is indeed interesting. You'd have thought he would have "learned" from his own actions that fighting a determined guerrilla force in the swamps is not something to be undertaken lightly, or with great expectations of sucess, wouldn't you?

 

[Dave R]

fighting a determined guerrilla force in the swamps is not something to be undertaken lightly, or with great expectations of sucess, wouldn't you?

The way I heard it, the Seminoles never signed a peace treaty with the US Government, like most other tribes. I think they consider that a victory, and I'm inclined to agree.

Stauble may correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Selfdfenz]

History may hold an asnwer to the original post.

I've always wondered if many young men and/or their families left their homes and immigrated to other countries or migrated to some of the more remote sections of the US to avoid the draft or the hostilities associated with the Civil War.

I don't believe either migration or immigration was significant. People stayed where they were and what happened, happened.

Regardless of what the future holds that scenario will play out in the US of the future. What kind of raw oppression here would ever be entirely free of some level of eternal resistance?

S-

 

[Stauble]

Stauble may correct me if I'm wrong.

youd be right my friend
when chief Osceola was presented a treaty to sign he took out his knife, stabbed it though the paper and said "This is the only treaty I will make with the whites"!
id like to say something similiar, but since im 75% white that would be a little akward saying