Defensive Carry banner

41 - 60 of 83 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,728 Posts
I've said this before, but few get it. The advantage the police and National Guard have is organization. If the opposition is not organized, the authorities can take individuals down one by one no matter how many of them there are. And that organization is not going to just appear out of nowhere.
And I have said this before. The insurgents in Afghanistan are organized - along 15th century lines. We've been fighting them for 19 years. Now, while it is true that THEY haven't won, it is just as true that WE HAVEN'T EITHER. And at almost any moment, the political will to stay the fight on our side may evaporate - just like it did in Vietnam.

Few people seem to get that a people fighting in their own country overcome a great many technological and organizational advantages with something we used to call "heart." I wonder who will have the greatest amount of "heart?" Those fighting for their country? Or those doing the bidding of a socialist / communist leadership using the Army against their own friends and neighbors?

I've never been one to believe that a cause has no chance, until I see which way things shake out. It worked out just fine in 1776. It worked out just fine here in Texas in 1836. Custer had organization when he decided to take on all those Indians. So did Napoleon when he decided to chase off all those Russians. I'll be patient and pray we don't have to find out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,063 Posts
@OldChap: Your examples make my point. I did not say the organization needs to be based on technology. In fact, it is probably better if it isn't. In all of those examples, the insurgents had:
  • Command: They have leaders who the fighters agree to follow, even to the death. That command structure has to have a strategic plan, with specific objectives. Who would lead insurgent Americans? Who would set our specific objectives? You can't get conservatives in the US to agree on much of anything no matter how upset they are.
  • Control: If command issues orders, the right things happen. This unit goes here, supplies go there, the objective is X. If the plan doesn't work, command can adjust and the fighters adjust without question.
  • Communication: Command can only exert control if they have secure and timely communications to all involved.
  • Intelligence: The insurgency has to have a good idea of what the opposition is planning and when. It may not be perfect, but good intel is gold. It is a force multiple.
All the examples you gave had those things, if only primitive, and they either won or lost based how good their model was and how well they used it. Keep in mind with Afghanistan: Yes, we haven't beat them in 19 years, but they haven't kicked us out either. I for one, don't want a 19 year civil war and I think that is the best we could hope for. They can't beat us and we can't beat them, so the conflict just goes on and on.

This is not a new concept. It has been in place since war was invented. Guns, bullets, testosterone and outrage are not enough. Give me an example of where an insurgency succeeded with no command structure, no strategy, no specific plans, no control, no communication and no intelligence. Just a bunch of individuals spontaneously shooting it out with the government. Without those things, all you have is a riot, which may cause a lot of damage and may last for a while but it eventually gets put down and ultimately accomplishes little.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,728 Posts
Brother, you make too many assumptions about how things will or will not go down. Trust me. IF the shooting starts, it isn't going to be a riot. And I doubt very much anyone will knock on the door and ask how to do it.

What on earth makes you think no one ever conducted an insurgency with no structure, command, control, communication, or intelligence? Just because they're insurgents, doesn't make them idiots. You really, really need to talk to some folks who have on the ground experience fighting rag tag armies. You could start with Vietnam.

I think we'll just have to agree to disagree. And as usual, we're far off topic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Havok and G26Raven

·
Registered
Joined
·
209 Posts
I just saw this chart this morning and checked the numbers for today. As the chart was assembled on May 19, the numbers are obviously a bit higher today, May 24. I don't care whether you call it liberal vs. conservative, or Democrat vs. Republican, you've got to admit there is an interesting difference here. in fact, you could say the disparity is downright alarming. I can think of all kinds of reasons why these numbers are the way they are, but I don't think anyone can completely explain it as there are just too many variables.

Full disclosure: I self-identify as a constitutional conservative.

View attachment 327696

Note: I checked the numbers against the Covid-19 Dashboard which is update daily.
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6
This is obvious cherry-picking. For example, Kansas is a strong red state, Going to the official COVID 19 webpage shows 8,958 cases and 185 deaths. This puts it well ahead of MO, which they list at 16. One wonders what other facts they have ignored.

This is just looking at the official numbers, which is generally the best that we can do. Yet in some states, only hospital deaths, that can point to COVID 19 as a singular cause of death, are counted. This would ignore people who die at home, or died of multiple conditions, with COVID 19 being the final one.

As I said, how the deaths are to be counted, is hard to work around when relying on official numbers. But the choice to ignore red states that have higher death counts, very different than death rate I will add, makes me wonder what other intellectual dishonesty is hidden in that chart.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,918 Posts
@StripesDude that isn't screwing up. That's proper reporting. Knowing how many people have had any given issue helps understand the needed details to make informed choices.
In no way is that accurate reporting of the numbers. They don’t know how long this thing has been around or where it came from. What if this virus is 5 years old and the people who had it 5 years ago have antibodies, have now been tested and are being reported in those numbers?

If Texas releases the chicken pox infection rate tomorrow, should I be included since I had it in 1985? What about the broken foot I had in 1992 - does that get included in a figure put out today?

This is manipulation of the figures to perpetuate the scare tactics. It’s designed to keep terrifying people who are buying into this nonsense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
209 Posts
@G26Raven - There is something I'm confused about. I live in Missouri and the deaths reported here are almost 700 - not 16.
Agreed, I am looking at this state website and I am seeing 11,988 cases and 681 "Deaths attributed to COVID-19."

Of course, this is a micro exhibit of one of the core problems we are having with this disease. Even here it is being treated as a political event instead of treating it solely as a public health event.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,318 Posts
@StripesDude in all of your examples, yes, that data has to be included to be accurate. No, it is not data manipulation. Data manipulation is NOT including the people who got infected and have the anti-bodies but were not included in initial testing. They are alive, they survived, and they show how bad the virus really is not in this case.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,652 Posts
What is sad and predictable is that the liberals are using these disparities to create conspiracy theories and also use COVID to highlight all the ills they perceive in society.
Did you notice that they only bring up disparities in the racial variable? I suppose they have talked about the wealth disparity too, but only in urban areas. The rural poor don't count, I suppose. You pointed out the other tendencies that are all linked to proximity/ population density. But liberals aren't keen on claiming COVID disproportionately targets Democrats.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,652 Posts
No. I do know what police think about mass civil disobedience though. And I have been around a few discussions of what they would do IF that mass civil disobedience turns uncivil - like with guns.

Compare how many police there are in the US to the population who own guns. Even if a small percentage decide enough is enough, there will be very little the police can do.
Fair enough, but that bypasses what I said. I said people are willing to turn in their neighbors. Recently, people have been calling police on their neighbors for innocuous actions. I made the connection with how far that can go. And it has gone right to sending neighbors to death camps for being "undesirable".

So we know how easily people can be convinced that this is necessary behavior. And we know how far people are willing to take it. So before civil unrest even begins, when "common sense" prohibits certain firearms, do you think people will be reporting neighbors to the police?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
209 Posts
. . . but only in urban areas. The rural poor don't count, I suppose.
I have noticed this. I am in a rural county and our infection rate is 3,800/100k. The two nearby counties, that have regionally high population are at 3,750/100k and 4,630/100k (the common factor is meatpacking plants). These infection rates are near, or above, that seen in most of New York. But I can assure you, no one sent us a hospital ship.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,063 Posts
Brother, you make too many assumptions about how things will or will not go down. Trust me. IF the shooting starts, it isn't going to be a riot. And I doubt very much anyone will knock on the door and ask how to do it.

What on earth makes you think no one ever conducted an insurgency with no structure, command, control, communication, or intelligence? Just because they're insurgents, doesn't make them idiots. You really, really need to talk to some folks who have on the ground experience fighting rag tag armies. You could start with Vietnam.

I think we'll just have to agree to disagree. And as usual, we're far off topic.
Vietnam is a perfect example. Below is a simplified version of the Viet Cong organizational structure. That's what I'm talkin' about. And this is not even the N. Vietnamese regulars, who were also very organized.

Vcorganization2.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,844 Posts
@StripesDude in all of your examples, yes, that data has to be included to be accurate. No, it is not data manipulation. Data manipulation is NOT including the people who got infected and have the anti-bodies but were not included in initial testing. They are alive, they survived, and they show how bad the virus really is not in this case.
The way they are reporting it doesn’t show trends accurately. It’s being categorized together to drive up numbers. If Texas tested 200 people yesterday and reported 8 new cases, and they tested 200 people today and reported 10 new cases, that shows that the spread is increasing. Now we find out that yesterday 0 people tested positive for antibodies, and today, 3 of the 10 were positive for antibodies. That changes a lot of things.

In my opinion, as a Texas resident, the only thing saving our response from being a national embarrassment is that NY screwed up a LOT worse. The virus hasn’t been bad here by any means, but our handling of the situation most certainly has been bad.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
954 Posts
I've been wondering how much the regular yearly influenza has killed this flu season and if those deaths are being counted as Covid 19.
One last thing. Do they have to be called Progressive State's ? Seems a weak connection.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,844 Posts
I've been wondering how much the regular yearly influenza has killed this flu season and if those deaths are being counted as Covid 19.
One last thing. Do they have to be called Progressive State's ? Seems a weak connection.
Should be regressive, but they are the ones that call themselves progressives.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nmuskier

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,515 Posts
Conjunction function :yup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,652 Posts
I've been wondering how much the regular yearly influenza has killed this flu season and if those deaths are being counted as Covid 19.
One last thing. Do they have to be called Progressive State's ? Seems a weak connection.
I had those screenshots saved. Mid April, we had all but cured the seasonal flu. Mid May, the CDC recalculated. Suddenly, flu and pneumonia deaths shot up, and confirmed COVID deaths decreased. "Presumptive" COVID deaths stayed the same.

In my region, the press keeps reporting new cases. This gives people the impression that we have over 100 sick people. Then we emotionally connect that to hospitalization. We actually have zero hospitalizations, and one patient who is incarcerated.
 
41 - 60 of 83 Posts
Top