In modern times, how would armed citizens in the United States rise up against a government they deemed tyrannical?
A lot of unduly dismissive answers here. All these responses seem to forget recent history. The US fought (or is fighting) two counter-insurgencies against “armed citizens,” in Iraq and Afghanistan. Neither of those went particularly well for the US military.Factors to consider:The US is huge. Around 20 times bigger than Iraq and 15 times bigger than Afghanistan. Much of it is remote . There are a lot of places for freedom fighters to hide.Conversely, the US is very urban. 80 percent of the population lives in cities. Urban counter-insurgencies are a nightmare to fight.The US is awash in guns - around 300 million of them. I agree that Joe Sixpack’s 12 gauge and 9 mm pistol aren’t a match for a M4 carbine or a M249, but they can still kill or wound someone.There are around 20 million veterans in the US - men and women with military training and even combat experience. And guess what the combat experience was in - counter-insurgency. These veterans, who will form the core of the freedom fighters, will know the tactics that would be used against them by the active military.The US is highly decentralized - states, counties, municipalities/cities all have relatively independent governments. Some of these lower governmental units will support the freedom fighters, providing shelter, food, medicine, etc., either explicitly or covertly.Similarly, we can expect foreign aid to our freedom fighters. Russia would delight in getting some payback for Afghanistan 1980–88. Depending on how “tyrannical” the federal government is, and how hostile it is to the rest of the world, I could see other countries lining up to support the freedom fighters.The freedom fighters don’t have to win, they just have to not lose. Gain the hearts and minds of the population, avoid big set-piece battles, hit and run.Interestingly, this question allows people on opposite ends of the ideological spectrum to reach the same (I think incorrect) conclusion: People on the right can argue that America’s military is too strong for mere “armed citizens” to have any effect, while people on the left can argue against the Second Amendment. Both interpretations are overly simplistic.
Discrimination Of Women In Afghanistan Under The Taliban???
I know fasts here and there. But can someone give me a breif and simple outline of this subject. Please answer a few questions: *how did the Taliban take power?And when? *when did it end? *how did they hurt women in Afghanistan? *which is the largest cooperation that has helped the women there? *Is life better in Afghanistan now? *how can we help? *any websites?
Why did Britain lose the American War of Independence/Revolutionary War?
The British were not yet an unstoppable empireSome ice, some desert, and a small slice of India In 1776, the British were one of several Great Powers in Europe who were all roughly equal in power. These were them, France, Prussia, Austria, and Russia. Below them were a few middle powers including Sweden, the Netherlands, Spain, and Portugal. Out of these strong nations, the British were known for their naval prowess but had one of the weaker and smaller ground armies - France was the expert here. As a result, when the 13 Colonies declared independence, the British were forced to ship soldiers 3,000 miles away and feed and supply them - no mean feat back then - to fight in an environment they were not experts in, ground wars. So this explains why they had difficulty against just the colonists alone. Now let's look at the international situation. 13 years before the Revolution, Britain and Prussia defeated France, Russia and Austria (there were also smaller allies on both sides) in the 7 Years' War. In the aftermath, French colonies from North America to India were seized by the British, which upset the balance between the Great Powers, frightening much of Europe. The British also spent a huge pile of money, which started them on the path of taxing the colonies which started the war in the first place. As a result, when the 13 Colonies declared independence, France was eager for an opportunity to even the score with their rival. Soon after the war began, France was bankrolling the American bid for independence. In the first year, France supplied enough muskets and uniforms for 30,000 soldiers (Larger than the initial size of the Continental Army) and 10 pounds of gunpowder per soldier. Then, France joined in the war openly with a navy that was at the time, roughly equal to the British one. They were eventually joined by the Spanish and Netherlands who brought even more money and soldiers to the table.tl;dr The British Army was never that strongIt was half of Europe and the USA vs Britain