roger-ruger
New member
in the event of political and economic turmoil do you feel your country is anarchy prone? in times like these, what do you think are your best weapons at hand and course of actions to take against lawlessness in the streets?
country is anarchy prone
- Thread starter roger-ruger
- Start date
Not to be trite, but my best weapon is my mind, and the best course of action, well, will be the best course of action given the circumstances.
If the SHTF in the way you seem to be driving at, it won't be anything like we imagine, and the best weapon will be a wise and flexible mind. I'll tell you this: I'm not depending on my guns to get me through an apocalypse.
The only thing I can count on is a life of dignity, courage, and honor, and when that becomes impossible, well then, a death of dignity, courage and honor. Anything else is pure speculation.
If the SHTF in the way you seem to be driving at, it won't be anything like we imagine, and the best weapon will be a wise and flexible mind. I'll tell you this: I'm not depending on my guns to get me through an apocalypse.
The only thing I can count on is a life of dignity, courage, and honor, and when that becomes impossible, well then, a death of dignity, courage and honor. Anything else is pure speculation.
I grew-up during the Cold War, duck-n'-cover with the "nuclear clock" reading five til Midnight for years. Add to that JFK's, Rob't K's, MLK's assasination (and what the heck, Geo. Wallace's too), riots--especially those in Watts--, the rise of the Black Panthers and other radicalized minority action groups, campus protests over Vietnam leading to violence like at Kent State, Berkley and Columbia; then Watergate and the collapse of a second term American presidency. I don't know if it was connected, but when formal Civil Defense programs in schools and communities went out of fashion in the 1970s, I watched the survival "fad" crank-up and continue til the fall of the Soviet Union. So, after a paltry survivalist revival with the Y2K hysteria: "do you feel your country is anarchy prone?" NO!
Garand Illusion
New member
Well said, Hayley.
We are probably more likely to see an invasion by China than a serious civil war or other kind of major civilian unrest. We're still a country where most people look out for each other when the SHTF because the know we'll pull out of it even when there are bitter divisions on the voting/political front.
Of course ... things in human history can change quick. Ask me again in 10 years.
We are probably more likely to see an invasion by China than a serious civil war or other kind of major civilian unrest. We're still a country where most people look out for each other when the SHTF because the know we'll pull out of it even when there are bitter divisions on the voting/political front.
Of course ... things in human history can change quick. Ask me again in 10 years.
CarbineCaleb
New member
Risks of Death
As to the likelihood of widespread anarchy in the USA, I have to agree with the others - probability is not zero, but is exceedingly small.
Noone is going to invade the USA. It's not going to happen. We have the most capable military in the world and are geographically isolated from any conceivable invading nation.
One scenario I could see is local anarchy - say, in a large city - this scenario has unfolded (at the level of whole neighborhoods anyway) occasionally in an American city (think of various "riots"). Even there, I wouldn't worry so much about it. Such events have still been relatively rare, and have been shortlived when they did occur.
To me, you need to think of the cost of preparation for an event - time, money, psychological, and ask if that is worth paying for the value you get out of it (security against the likelihood/seriousness of an event). For example, we were at odds with the former Soviet Union for decades. It is definitely not inconceivable that there could have been a nuclear exchange during this time. How many people built elaborate nuclear bomb shelters that could conceivably allow one to survive (if one could get in there in time) in their back yards and stocked them with great stores of food and weapons?
The US is a prosperous country (removing some prime motivations for anarchy), with a benevolent if not beloved government (removing others, except from the most irrational and rare of persons). To keep and restore order, they have well trained police and a National Guard.
I am not being sarcastic when I say that to me the most rational course is to consult historical mortality statistics when deciding what to guard against. I haven't looked lately, but for older people, heart disease, stroke and cancer were the most prominent. For younger people, auto accidents, and in some areas of the country, violent crime were the biggies.
As to the likelihood of widespread anarchy in the USA, I have to agree with the others - probability is not zero, but is exceedingly small.
Noone is going to invade the USA. It's not going to happen. We have the most capable military in the world and are geographically isolated from any conceivable invading nation.
One scenario I could see is local anarchy - say, in a large city - this scenario has unfolded (at the level of whole neighborhoods anyway) occasionally in an American city (think of various "riots"). Even there, I wouldn't worry so much about it. Such events have still been relatively rare, and have been shortlived when they did occur.
To me, you need to think of the cost of preparation for an event - time, money, psychological, and ask if that is worth paying for the value you get out of it (security against the likelihood/seriousness of an event). For example, we were at odds with the former Soviet Union for decades. It is definitely not inconceivable that there could have been a nuclear exchange during this time. How many people built elaborate nuclear bomb shelters that could conceivably allow one to survive (if one could get in there in time) in their back yards and stocked them with great stores of food and weapons?
The US is a prosperous country (removing some prime motivations for anarchy), with a benevolent if not beloved government (removing others, except from the most irrational and rare of persons). To keep and restore order, they have well trained police and a National Guard.
I am not being sarcastic when I say that to me the most rational course is to consult historical mortality statistics when deciding what to guard against. I haven't looked lately, but for older people, heart disease, stroke and cancer were the most prominent. For younger people, auto accidents, and in some areas of the country, violent crime were the biggies.
Widespread anarchy? Are you serious? Most Americans are too comfortable in thier lifestyles to want to throw it all away. Even many of the underpriviledged are much better off than they would be if anarchy were to break out. If anything, I would think a police state is a more realistic fear than anarchy, as a large portion of the sheeple seem content with giving up thier freedoms in exhange for security.
I am NOT a doomsday profit, but I do read too much history...
no one will ever invade the u.s.? ha!!!
I mean, i'm full of national pride, and i sure as hell hope nobody ever does...
and if it happens, my money says texas is the first to fight and the last to fall (okay maybe among the first to fall due to strategic reasons, but hey...state pride here....)
but to say the U.S. is invulnerable to invasion is just downright foolish...do you think the romans really expected to be destroyed by invasion of germanic barbarians (viewed as savages)? the answer is no, they didnt (Rome was sacked by the way, several times).
historically speaking (i'm just addressing general western history here), superpowers swap about every eighty to onehundred fifty years....they generally do so in MAJOR wars (Iraq doesnt count, hardly the scale of which i speak), usually involving an invasion of one of the world's dominant superpower about every fifty to one hundred years.....
Let's do the math:
America has been a "superpower" for about sixty years (since the end of WWII). So speaking by the numbers (for whatever they're worth, or not) we're between not quite one half and 2/3 the way through our "superpower allotment".
We can view our last major war to be one of two options...a)WWII, sixty years ago, or b) the cold war, won more or less 15 years ago.
another factor to consider is that the last time the U.S. was really invaded was the war of 1812, nearly 200 years ago. on one hand this speaks to american defensibility, on the other, it speaks to overdueness.
whats my point? i'm really not a paranoid lunatic. just a dedicated student of history. these are all my numbers, i made them up, i am not a history professor. But while these figures may be a little rough,they are all in the right ballpark, and they demonstrate that if history really does repeat itself (and I tell you, IT DOES), then America is long overdue to get a buttwhipping on her home turf (or at least an attempted buttwhipping, my figures dont account for who wins/loses, just the fact that the invasion occurs), probably in the next fifty to seventy years by the numbers...
It is easy to think that we are so strong now that we'll always be on top but i ask you:
*Forty years ago,at the height of the cold war, who in Russia could have forseen her current pitiful condition?
*In 1940, who in Germany would have envisioned her devistating defeat in 1945?
*In 1941 (the year Pearl Harbor was attacked), who in America would have envisioned Japan's current place as a major technological trade partner?
*In 1814, when we won the war of 1812, who in america would have guessed that just over a hundred years later England would be our greatest ally in a major world war?
*In 1750, who in Britain could have dreamed that a ragtag American army of farmers would whip their a** twice in the next sixty years?
My point is, how can we possibly speculate what kind of world we will live in fifty, seventy, or a hundred years from now? The answer is we can't... but we can, in the words of Winston Churchill, "Study history, study history..."
we should also avoid such hubris as to think nobody will ever take us on....
no one will ever invade the u.s.? ha!!!
I mean, i'm full of national pride, and i sure as hell hope nobody ever does...
and if it happens, my money says texas is the first to fight and the last to fall (okay maybe among the first to fall due to strategic reasons, but hey...state pride here....)
but to say the U.S. is invulnerable to invasion is just downright foolish...do you think the romans really expected to be destroyed by invasion of germanic barbarians (viewed as savages)? the answer is no, they didnt (Rome was sacked by the way, several times).
historically speaking (i'm just addressing general western history here), superpowers swap about every eighty to onehundred fifty years....they generally do so in MAJOR wars (Iraq doesnt count, hardly the scale of which i speak), usually involving an invasion of one of the world's dominant superpower about every fifty to one hundred years.....
Let's do the math:
America has been a "superpower" for about sixty years (since the end of WWII). So speaking by the numbers (for whatever they're worth, or not) we're between not quite one half and 2/3 the way through our "superpower allotment".
We can view our last major war to be one of two options...a)WWII, sixty years ago, or b) the cold war, won more or less 15 years ago.
another factor to consider is that the last time the U.S. was really invaded was the war of 1812, nearly 200 years ago. on one hand this speaks to american defensibility, on the other, it speaks to overdueness.
whats my point? i'm really not a paranoid lunatic. just a dedicated student of history. these are all my numbers, i made them up, i am not a history professor. But while these figures may be a little rough,they are all in the right ballpark, and they demonstrate that if history really does repeat itself (and I tell you, IT DOES), then America is long overdue to get a buttwhipping on her home turf (or at least an attempted buttwhipping, my figures dont account for who wins/loses, just the fact that the invasion occurs), probably in the next fifty to seventy years by the numbers...
It is easy to think that we are so strong now that we'll always be on top but i ask you:
*Forty years ago,at the height of the cold war, who in Russia could have forseen her current pitiful condition?
*In 1940, who in Germany would have envisioned her devistating defeat in 1945?
*In 1941 (the year Pearl Harbor was attacked), who in America would have envisioned Japan's current place as a major technological trade partner?
*In 1814, when we won the war of 1812, who in america would have guessed that just over a hundred years later England would be our greatest ally in a major world war?
*In 1750, who in Britain could have dreamed that a ragtag American army of farmers would whip their a** twice in the next sixty years?
My point is, how can we possibly speculate what kind of world we will live in fifty, seventy, or a hundred years from now? The answer is we can't... but we can, in the words of Winston Churchill, "Study history, study history..."
we should also avoid such hubris as to think nobody will ever take us on....
Garand Illusion
New member
A favorite quote of mine is: "He who ignores history is destined to repeat it"
But that said ... there's NEVER been a country/empire the physical size of the US that has been successfully invaded. Even Rome wasn't our physical size, and they weren't swallowed in a single war. It took a few hundred years of dwindling empire and bad military decisions/corruption until finally the home city finally fell.
Germany is considerably smaller than Texas, and has a population in the tens, not hundreds, of millions. Easily conquerable after they made the mistake of taking on countries with populations many times theirs (particularly the USSR, but also the US).
And can you imagine any army trying to control the armed and weapons savvy US population? Iraq has a fraction of our population in a country an even smaller fraction of our physical size, and the whole US army can't bring them under control. And if better than 100,000 US soldiers can't bring about 40 million Iraqis under control in their small country, what size army would it take to subdue the 250 million Americans in our huge country?
And American troops have body army. Can you imagine how the 3rd world armies amassed against us who do against the 30-06 hunting rifles popping out of windows?
No ... if the US ever "falls" it won't be from military seizure from without, it will be because our place in the world has been dwindling (possibly over hundreds of years like Rome, certainly over decades) and we choose to hand our soveriegnity to someone else. And while I can easily imagine that will happen someday, because the only thing constant in the world is change, I REALLY doubt it will be in my generation or my kid's generation or anytime soon.
And (hopefully) it will come in a controlled process, not anarchy, whenever it does happen.
And in terms of someone "taking us on" ... unless they can take down our huge nuclear force with some kind of amazing defensive weapon, we have nothing to fear. Even if we shrink from being the larged GDP on the planet (currently still bigger than the entire EU) and lose our overall superpower ranking, we'll still be able to clobber anybody of anysize.
The nuclear powers are like a bunch of street toughs standing around an alley, each holding a handgun of different size. Even if you've got a .44 magnum, you're not going to initiate something against the punk with the .22 LR because when he returns fire he will do some serious damage you may never recover from, and/or another street punk may decide to turn on you while wounded.
So ... don't worry about an invasion. Just stay up with politics and protect our sovereignity with your vote and your voice. If history teaches anything, it teaches us to fight corruption and keep our powerful government on the straight and narrow so it doesn't destroy our country from within.
But that said ... there's NEVER been a country/empire the physical size of the US that has been successfully invaded. Even Rome wasn't our physical size, and they weren't swallowed in a single war. It took a few hundred years of dwindling empire and bad military decisions/corruption until finally the home city finally fell.
Germany is considerably smaller than Texas, and has a population in the tens, not hundreds, of millions. Easily conquerable after they made the mistake of taking on countries with populations many times theirs (particularly the USSR, but also the US).
And can you imagine any army trying to control the armed and weapons savvy US population? Iraq has a fraction of our population in a country an even smaller fraction of our physical size, and the whole US army can't bring them under control. And if better than 100,000 US soldiers can't bring about 40 million Iraqis under control in their small country, what size army would it take to subdue the 250 million Americans in our huge country?
And American troops have body army. Can you imagine how the 3rd world armies amassed against us who do against the 30-06 hunting rifles popping out of windows?
No ... if the US ever "falls" it won't be from military seizure from without, it will be because our place in the world has been dwindling (possibly over hundreds of years like Rome, certainly over decades) and we choose to hand our soveriegnity to someone else. And while I can easily imagine that will happen someday, because the only thing constant in the world is change, I REALLY doubt it will be in my generation or my kid's generation or anytime soon.
And (hopefully) it will come in a controlled process, not anarchy, whenever it does happen.
And in terms of someone "taking us on" ... unless they can take down our huge nuclear force with some kind of amazing defensive weapon, we have nothing to fear. Even if we shrink from being the larged GDP on the planet (currently still bigger than the entire EU) and lose our overall superpower ranking, we'll still be able to clobber anybody of anysize.
The nuclear powers are like a bunch of street toughs standing around an alley, each holding a handgun of different size. Even if you've got a .44 magnum, you're not going to initiate something against the punk with the .22 LR because when he returns fire he will do some serious damage you may never recover from, and/or another street punk may decide to turn on you while wounded.
So ... don't worry about an invasion. Just stay up with politics and protect our sovereignity with your vote and your voice. If history teaches anything, it teaches us to fight corruption and keep our powerful government on the straight and narrow so it doesn't destroy our country from within.
ATK525
If you put a frog in hot water... he will jump out.
If you put him in cool water and gradually increase the heat...he will remain there until his goose is cooked.
The sheeple are a lot like frogs.
How's that for mixed metafors?
There will be no anarchy... alas, the sheeple have neither the conviction nor the brass for it...
And our government leaders have learned a great lesson from King George... They are very careful not to peak the ire of the masses.
If you put a frog in hot water... he will jump out.
If you put him in cool water and gradually increase the heat...he will remain there until his goose is cooked.
The sheeple are a lot like frogs.
How's that for mixed metafors?
There will be no anarchy... alas, the sheeple have neither the conviction nor the brass for it...
And our government leaders have learned a great lesson from King George... They are very careful not to peak the ire of the masses.
As long as the government and media keep giving the people "bread and circuses" - no problem. Meanwhile the government just does whatever the hell it wants, including the latest Supreme Court decision that the government can steal someone's home and give it to a business. Face it, most of the people in this country are too busy waiting for their own government subsidy and watching "american idol", "survivor" and any other "reality" show to pay any attention to real reality.
bergie
bergie
I have to agree that the Police State is going to happen before an invasion or anarchy.
But the invasion will happen after the police state is set up due to we won't have any weapons (the People) to repeal the invasion and the government military forces will be stretched too thin trying to repeal the invasion while trying to keep American hold outs under control.
America will go as Rome and other great civilizations of the world, from within.
Wayne
But the invasion will happen after the police state is set up due to we won't have any weapons (the People) to repeal the invasion and the government military forces will be stretched too thin trying to repeal the invasion while trying to keep American hold outs under control.
America will go as Rome and other great civilizations of the world, from within.
Wayne
CarbineCaleb
New member
texas07: Well, I do agree that the US will not be #1 forever - that's just a matter of time... while certainly no foregone conclusion, there are some pretty smart folks that say we are already at our zenith.
That conclusion does not imply that we will be invaded, however. While the US no doubt enforces its' will with a certain amount of economic and military aggression, this does not compare with that used in past empires, in my opinion, anyway. Further, we have a nuclear arsenal that can completely devastate any nation on earth, and there is zero doubt in my mind that we would use it to prevent a major invasion. Nuclear weapons didn't exist in the world of previous empires.
I suspect that when we go as #1, it will be gradual, and due to economic and political factors, rather than an invasion on US soil. Right now for example, our deficit is huge, our budget is completely out of whack, and we're not real popular with a lot of people out there beyond our borders... none of that is real helpful on either economic or political position, and both have long term implications.
With nuclear weapons, there is essentially too much force in militaries of superpowers for it to be rational for them to do battle. It could certainly still happen by accident/miscommunication/miscalculation... but not as a well informed, considered decision.
Terrorist groups, or some small nation that's been taken in a coup by a madman are another matter of course - can't count on them for self-preservation... but they're not invading us either. If we can identify them, we can lay waste to them, if we can't, then they're not invading us en masse.
That conclusion does not imply that we will be invaded, however. While the US no doubt enforces its' will with a certain amount of economic and military aggression, this does not compare with that used in past empires, in my opinion, anyway. Further, we have a nuclear arsenal that can completely devastate any nation on earth, and there is zero doubt in my mind that we would use it to prevent a major invasion. Nuclear weapons didn't exist in the world of previous empires.
I suspect that when we go as #1, it will be gradual, and due to economic and political factors, rather than an invasion on US soil. Right now for example, our deficit is huge, our budget is completely out of whack, and we're not real popular with a lot of people out there beyond our borders... none of that is real helpful on either economic or political position, and both have long term implications.
With nuclear weapons, there is essentially too much force in militaries of superpowers for it to be rational for them to do battle. It could certainly still happen by accident/miscommunication/miscalculation... but not as a well informed, considered decision.
Terrorist groups, or some small nation that's been taken in a coup by a madman are another matter of course - can't count on them for self-preservation... but they're not invading us either. If we can identify them, we can lay waste to them, if we can't, then they're not invading us en masse.
There are some real truths in this thread:
A: Invasion here is virtually impossible, . . . we have too many ways of detecting its occurance.
B: The sheeple like their pasture, . . . and probably don't give a hoot who owns the deed, . . . just keep the bread and circus available.
C: Police state is very much more likely than most other scenarios.
I agree with all of these and would like to add a little something to it. If the Bible is correct, towards the end of time, Israel is totally over run along with Egypt and Libya (part of the aftermath of trucking through Israel). Today, the world knows that such an attempt would get the USA motivated to defend Israel (along with Great Britain).
Because it has to occur, . . . prophesy shall always be fulfilled, . . . GB and USA must decline, . . . or become less viable as Israel defenders.
My vote is the oriental domination that is presently emerging will economically destroy both economies in the forseeable future, . . . making their ability to do much of anything except fight interior battles almost non existant.
Just the musings of a Biblical student.
May God bless,
Dwight
A: Invasion here is virtually impossible, . . . we have too many ways of detecting its occurance.
B: The sheeple like their pasture, . . . and probably don't give a hoot who owns the deed, . . . just keep the bread and circus available.
C: Police state is very much more likely than most other scenarios.
I agree with all of these and would like to add a little something to it. If the Bible is correct, towards the end of time, Israel is totally over run along with Egypt and Libya (part of the aftermath of trucking through Israel). Today, the world knows that such an attempt would get the USA motivated to defend Israel (along with Great Britain).
Because it has to occur, . . . prophesy shall always be fulfilled, . . . GB and USA must decline, . . . or become less viable as Israel defenders.
My vote is the oriental domination that is presently emerging will economically destroy both economies in the forseeable future, . . . making their ability to do much of anything except fight interior battles almost non existant.
Just the musings of a Biblical student.
May God bless,
Dwight
Dwight55,
With Israel getting back their lands, and with Israel giving up their lands, how close do you think we are?
I've been following the Bible also and Israel is under attack, or soon will be, from those forces that surround it. And it looks like Iran and maybe others will be the first to try to take it out.
My only question is, how far along do you think we are and with the USA being one of the only protectors, if not the only one, of Israel, how long do you think it will be.
Wayne
With Israel getting back their lands, and with Israel giving up their lands, how close do you think we are?
I've been following the Bible also and Israel is under attack, or soon will be, from those forces that surround it. And it looks like Iran and maybe others will be the first to try to take it out.
My only question is, how far along do you think we are and with the USA being one of the only protectors, if not the only one, of Israel, how long do you think it will be.
Wayne
With the biblical wording being fairly specific that the invader(s) will come from the North, . . . with the prospects seemingly being scuttled of a truly peaceful Iraq/Syria/Iran area, . . . I think the key to "how soon" hinges on what finally occurs in Iraq & Syria.
If we leave strong democracies in both, or at least Iraq, . . . the time table could be seriously lengthened, . . . as the Iraqi sheeple would not want their bread and circus messed up. On the other hand, . . . if we leave Iraq to the fate we did with South VietNam, . . . I would see it only a question of how soon we could be reduced to a 2nd or 3rd world power (economically), . . . and then the invasion comes.
Even today, . . . we could easily mount successful military defense strategies for Israel (many of us would probably load up, . . . grab a Hebrew/English dictionary, . . . and go personally help), . . . but when our nation is taken over by another Peanut Picker President who scuttles the Navy and disarms the Army & USMC, . . . we will not be able to do so, . . . Israel's foes will see it, . . . and act on it. North VietNam recognized Nixon's successor as a sham president, . . . a gutless political wonder, . . . and acted accordingly.
Such will bring on the invasion of Israel.
In the mean time, . . . keep your powder dry, . . . vote for a strong USA, . . . and hope our children/grandchildren know how to do the same.
May God bless,
Dwight
If we leave strong democracies in both, or at least Iraq, . . . the time table could be seriously lengthened, . . . as the Iraqi sheeple would not want their bread and circus messed up. On the other hand, . . . if we leave Iraq to the fate we did with South VietNam, . . . I would see it only a question of how soon we could be reduced to a 2nd or 3rd world power (economically), . . . and then the invasion comes.
Even today, . . . we could easily mount successful military defense strategies for Israel (many of us would probably load up, . . . grab a Hebrew/English dictionary, . . . and go personally help), . . . but when our nation is taken over by another Peanut Picker President who scuttles the Navy and disarms the Army & USMC, . . . we will not be able to do so, . . . Israel's foes will see it, . . . and act on it. North VietNam recognized Nixon's successor as a sham president, . . . a gutless political wonder, . . . and acted accordingly.
Such will bring on the invasion of Israel.
In the mean time, . . . keep your powder dry, . . . vote for a strong USA, . . . and hope our children/grandchildren know how to do the same.
May God bless,
Dwight
Edward429451
Moderator
While no afficiando of the Bible, I follow what you guys are talking about and my guess is from anytime to 10 years? Of course, biblical scholars have deduced the same thing from the 50's too, so while we may think its bad now, we can only speculate as to how bad the Bible infers it to be at that time compared to how it is now. Some key things to look for are...
1) The US breaks ties with Israel (all nations rise up against Israel).
2) A 7 year treaty being signed.
3) The temple has to be rebuilt.
I can't tell from the Bible of a nation resembling the US being present at the time. Does this mean we're going to be wiped out somehow? Maybe we wont break ties with Israel...we simply might not be here as a nation?
Just musings.
1) The US breaks ties with Israel (all nations rise up against Israel).
2) A 7 year treaty being signed.
3) The temple has to be rebuilt.
I can't tell from the Bible of a nation resembling the US being present at the time. Does this mean we're going to be wiped out somehow? Maybe we wont break ties with Israel...we simply might not be here as a nation?
Just musings.