[TheForge] coffee and guns

Tue Dec 18 20:20:45 EST 2007

I'll, uh, take a shot at it:

	http://www.docsmachine.com/nonPB/mortar.html

Jeff Polaski

-----Original Message-----
From: theforge-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:theforge-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Jerry Smith
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 9:58 AM
To: Sponsored by ABANA
Subject: Re: Re: [TheForge] coffee and guns

Craig,

Try to get some mobile artillery in your garage. :)

Merry Christmas

Jerry

--- craig.schaefer at verizon.net wrote:

> And like in any civil war conflict, SOME of the
> governments war making equipment will become
> equipment of the insurrection, because that's where
> the sympathies of the government troops lie.
> 
> Speculating of course.
> 
> CraigS
> Gresham, OR
> 
> 
> >From: GRAF <adveniam at att.net>
> >Date: 2007/12/18 Tue AM 11:21:43 CST
> >To: Sponsored by ABANA <theforge at mailman.qth.net>
> >Subject: Re: [TheForge] coffee and guns
> 
> >Our armed forces are really good at meeting other
> organized armed forces 
> >that present a target rich environment.
> >It is not as effective as an occupying force.
> >It can barely keep the lid on in Iraq.
> >Imagine trying to constrain an insurrection in the
> highly urbanized 
> >landscape of the US.
> >It would not happen.
> >Add to that rural resistance  on the scale of the
> US .
> >
> >All in all I think Andy is correct. The mere hassle
> factor placed right 
> >up front is something any occupier, domestic or
> foreign, would find a 
> >significant stumbling block.
> >
> >It is much more cost effective to play up close to
> the margins of the law.
> >
> >What makes a huge stockpile of ordnance in private
> hands work in this 
> >country is that we DO believe in our rule of law,
> and that officials DO 
> >leave peaceably when their terms are up. That plus
> an adequate economy 
> >keeps those private arms locked away.
> >
> >Anything that weakens this system of private
> ownership, including 
> >registration in my opinion, works against us.
> >
> >Mike Graf
> >
> >
> >Andrew Vida wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> ries wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Dec 17, 2007, at 1:21 PM, Andrew Vida wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> And finally, Jim is spot on.  The ONLY thing
> keeping government from 
> >>> running wholly roughshod over us is the fact
> that we are pretty well 
> >>> armed.  Were it otherwise, the few rights we
> retain would probably 
> >>> have flown away decades ago.
> >>>
> >>>     -Andy
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Andy, you are a great guy, but you are
> completely FOS on this one.
> >>> No war in history has been won by small arms
> alone, and the ONLY 
> >>> thing keeping government from running roughshod
> over us is the 
> >>> constitution and our rule of law- GUNS HAVE
> NOTHING TO DO WITH IT.
> >>
> >>     I love you, too, but I must respectfully
> disagree.  Rule of law is 
> >> nothing more than an agreement.  If a group
> believes they can and 
> >> should take control, and assuming they in fact
> have the material 
> >> instrumentality to do so, there would be nothing
> in their way to stop 
> >> them, all else equal.
> >>
> >>     To say that the presence of privately held
> firearms has nothing to 
> >> do with the maintenance of so-called "liberty" is
> not reasonable.  It 
> >> isn't the only factor - I hastily said it was,
> and that was careless 
> >> of me. It is, however, a contributing one and I
> believe that it IS the 
> >> final check upon those who would consider
> something very extreme.  If 
> >> an action credibly risks armed revolt, the
> reasons for entertaining 
> >> such action had better be pretty compelling. 
> Citizens with no 
> >> recourse to the means of material equalization
> give usurpers 
> >> considerably less to think about.
> >>
> >>> Without a foreign nation supporting us against
> our, or any other 
> >>> government, we would be toast in two weeks.
> >>
> >>     This is not so easily determined.  This is a
> very wealthy nation 
> >> and the people here can be very resourceful and
> determined when the 
> >> complacency is swept away.  Rousing the people of
> this nation to anger 
> >> would be a very dicey gamble for any
> administration, were they to 
> >> consider something cure.  It would not be nearly
> the slam-dunk you 
> >> seem to imply.  But to your point, I will agree
> that some of the 
> >> outcome would be determined by the response of
> the corporate 
> >> community.  I am no longer confident that large
> corporate bodies could 
> >> be trusted to stand by their people.  If they
> were to side with 
> >> government, and I am pretty sure that many would,
> that would make 
> >> things far more difficult for the rank and file.
> >>>
> >>> The successful guerilla wars of the last 5
> decades or so were all 
> >>> only successful because a large industrialised
> nation, be it China, 
> >>> the USA, or the Soviet Union, supported the
> guerillas with a steady 
> >>> flow of new weapons ( in real combat, guns wear
> out very fast- 
> >>> machine gun barrels may last one day sometimes,
> and even a very well 
> >>> maintained assault rifle has a short lifespan)
> ammo, and, most 
> >>> essentially, crew served weapons.
> >>
> >>     A well maintained assault rifle should live
> for several tens of 
> >> thousands of rounds.
> >>
> >>> Without medium to heavy machine guns, mortars,
> rpg's, surface to air 
> >>> missles, and hundreds of tons of explosives, all
> of which are in very 
> >>> short supply in private hands in the USA, you
> have about a snowball's 
> >>> chance in hell of surviving a few days against
> the average big city 
> >>> police department, much less a real army.
> >>
> >>     Utter nonsense.  You seem to forget who feeds
> the army we'd be 
> >> fighting.  That would be us.  Without access to
> steady supplies of 
> >> food, the armed forces would be SOL in short
> order.  Weapons generally 
> >> do not run themselves.  Food reserves are more
> readily controlled by 
> >> millions of people than by a few thousands of
> troops dedicated to the 
> >> same task.  My point is that these scenarios are
> not simple and the 
> >> action is never linear.
> >>
> >>> Koresh had 50 caliber rifles, full auto weapons,
> and a reasonable 
> >>> supply of ammo for a private individual in the
> USA. He and his 
> >>> managed to kill a few feds by surprising them,
> but in a war 
> >>> situation, his seige would have lasted 2 hours,
> not 51 days.
> >>> A couple of runs by F-15's with 500lb bombs, and
> it would have been 
> >>> over by lunch.
> >>
> >>     Comparing this with a nation-wide armed
> revolt is not valid.  It 
> >> is easy to see that ATF could have burned the
> place down immediately, 
> >> rather than wait 58 days.  This proves nothing.
> >>>
> >>> So if the government actually decided to flex
> the incredible force it 
> >>> has as the largest military power on earth, no
> amount of deer rifles 
> 
=== message truncated ===

_______________________________________________
Manage membership or unsubscribe at:
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/theforge
theforge mail list group photo site is
http://www.photoaccess.com
Login:  blacksmithblacksmith at hotmail.com
password:  anvil
___________