If Bush declares martial law what will happen

[snrfmaster]

lets say before the next election Bush declares martial law, FEMA takes over, cancels the elections for the "forseeable future" and turns the US into a military Junta. What will you do?

and no it isnt that far fetched, listen to what Gen Franks has been saying - I think he'd know.

Also in light of the tyrannical nature of Bush's government, isnt it time Democrats re-thought their gun policies?

Seriously, look at the states with tough gun laws, they all have high crime rates. Coincidence? how about England? since they banned ALL guns there crime rates have shot up, murder and gun related crime are up by 40%. Obviously criminals who are planning on using a gun in crime arent going to care if the gun is illegal are they?

Personally as soon as I get back to the US I plan on buying myself some post-ban assault rifles. Why? Because I definitely now fear my government, and I'm afraid for the future. I wont live in a military police state, and I'll fight for my rights and my freedom.

And we all know the 2nd amendment was put there as a guard against future tyrannical governments. Well we now have a government that is headed towards being tyrannical, its already trampled the constitution and performed gross human rights abuses (guantanamo). The 2nd amendment wasnt about "sporting firearms", it was about protecting yourself from power-happy loons like Bush and Ashcroft. Maybe we should re-think the anti-gun stance, it would also help win the South.

[La_Serpiente]

1. If Bush took over in a military junta

I would join the fight to get him the hell out of there. I don't think the military would submit to such a egregious act, but just in case, I would join up in arms against him.

[onebigbadwulf]

2. Yes

now is the time to buy assault rifles, silencers, ammo, and scopes.


now is the time to go to the shooting range and train yourself to pick off a rabbit at 300 yards


now is the time to buy cammies, fatiques, uniforms, and kevlar.

Next year, we may no longer have a democracy.

[Selwynn]

5. Give me a break.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

47. It would be good for Democrats and liberal to be armed

I'm certainly not hiding out in my bunker with heavy ammunition, but it would be best for all of us if Americans took advantage of their right to keep and bear arms. It's a precaution - it's not like unarmed citizens haven't been enslaved before.

[FireHeart]

6. So...

We have a few thousand undisciplined, untrained and without a solid command structure individuals (not a team, but individuals) attempting to fight disciplined, trained and well commanded troops?

(Oh man...what a long sentence. I know I'm way to tired)

Armed citizens are, in general, no threat to the military should they try to revolt against martial law. To clarify: "No threat" means that in the long term, they will lose. How do you fight a squadron of F-16s that will strafe your city block if you openly revolt? With semi-automatic "assault" rifles? Silencers? Ammo? Scopes?

Why the hell do you think the Posse Commitatus act was originally developed? Because even at that time, CIVILIANS recognized that against a well trained, well equipped and commanded military, the average Joe and Jane Blow would be well nigh helpless.

There are, naturally, many arguments to this issue. It's not etched in stone. But if you look at the logistics...you'll run out of ammo long before the military does, not to mention other necessary supplies.

[BiggJawn]

28. Ah...The "But they have F-16's!" meme...

Haven't been paying attention to the news from Iraq, have you?

Your thesis is hardly original. It's the same one espoused for years by "Tokyo Rose"

"Why don't you lay down your arms, soldier boy? You're fighting a war you have NO HOPE of winning, while back home your wives ans sweethearts cheat on you..."

So that I'm fully up to speed here, you are sugesting what? That we just lay down and submit? Run for the border, which will most likely be sealed off like the E-W frontier in Europe was? Kill ourselves, to deprive the New Murkan Empire of Serfs?

C'mon, it's easy to sit there and type "Resistance is Futile" I'm waitng for a suggestion. What you got?

[FireHeart]

87. Well...

The Tokyo Rose scenario is not applicable. It was directed mostly toward our military personnel, not the civilian populace.

I'm suggesting that we fight in the courts, the voting booths and in peaceful protests. Not in the tiny amounts that we are doing today, but in massive grass roots efforts all over the union.

I DID say there were many arguments to the issue. Personally, I do not believe our troops would hold to a country-wide scale of brutal repression. They would, at least by a goodly measure, revolt against such a policy. I mean most of them wouldn't really care for killing their own mothers, sisters, fathers and brothers. Not to mention a lot of others. But keep in mind that the Romans used this to quell rebellion and was enormously successful in most cases--for a time.

HOWEVER...don't fool yourself. The current situation in Iraq is nothing at all like a Bush-ordered Martial Law scenario in this country. The ROE (rules of engagement) of the Iraqi situation differ vastly from the ROE that would be established with a general rebellion. I think most military people here would agree.

[FlaGranny]

32. I used to have the same argument,

and while I'd never advise anyone to do such a thing, just look how effective the Iraqis have become and remember Russia and Afghanistan. Not fast, but can be effective, but I can't imagine such a thing as shooting at fellow citizens. Admittedly, though, it doesn't bother the Miami police to "hurt" their neighbors.

I've lived during WW2, the Korean War, Vietnam, and all conflicts in between and afterward, but this is the first time I've really been frightened. I don't know whether to run and hide or whether to speak out. Sometimes I even feel afraid just to post on this web site. I'm sure Asscroft knows who each and every one of us is.

[Cleita]

73. This is why we must keep posting.

We can't let him cower us. Even if he knows, he also knows that there are a lot of us and we won't be that easy to control. From what I can see with Ashcroft though is that he is more bent on prosecuting porn and prostitition rather than ideological loudmouths.

So stay off that street corner FlaGranny, the Department of Justice wants you.

[FireHeart]

88. Yes...

But there are many factors involved. Logistics, for one. In Afghanistan, the Russians did have a logistics problem--supply routes were constantly under attack, they ran short of the military supplies and support they badly needed. The Afghanis were experts at hit and run tactics, something the Russians weren't really all that familiar with. Our citizens are not well trained in such co-ordinated efforts and would most likely act in a "one-on-one" manner. This is useless.

However, like yourself, I don't imagine our soldiers being willing to take on such a horror. But I don't know...they might, if they can be sold a bill of goods like Dubya is selling.

[knight_of_the_star]

39. That isn't as much of a threat as you think

For one, most of the Army and the Marine Corps is either insufficient in numbers to keep a lid on the populace solidly. That and considering that they swear their loyalty to the Constitution, I think that they fight turn their guns on the government rather than the people.

For two, while yes law enforcement would be mobilized to enforce martial law, there simply aren't enough cops to do the job. Just think about how bad the crime situation is in palces like New York, LA, and Chicago RIGHT NOW. Now think of how many cops will be left standing if the people of those cities revolt considering how strained they are just to keep the murder rate down. That is assuming that the police will even go along with it.

For three, there are enough people with enough guns that tech won't matter that much in comparison. Numbers to tell, and even if only say, half, of the population rises up, you still have 120 million to 1 million, maybe two or three of there are that many cops. Numbers do tell in battle, and here there won't BE any stable battle lines, leaving supply dumps and the like wide open for ambush. The last time our military fought in such circumstances was in Vietnam, and they didn't do so hot then. If enough people rose up, then the Army would either join them, refuse to fight, or get overwhelmed. That and there are a LOT of veterans who are NOT in the armed forces who would probably jump onbaord who have the training and such.

[Zhade]

58. Look at what just happened in Georgia.

If enough people rose up, then the Army would either join them, refuse to fight, or get overwhelmed.

The police ignored orders to block the protestors from storming Parliment. The rest is becoming history.

[TankLV]

43. A couple words - Vietnam, Lenningrad, 1776.

Can you spell "guerilla"?

Oppressors have ALWAYS failed.

British in India.

Marcos in the Philippines.

We can only discuss the length of time involved until good triumps over evil.

It's amazing what "a few thousand undisciplined, untrained and without a solid command structure individuals" can accomplish.

The most remarkable thing in my list above, was the Philippines - where not a single shot was fired - the people decided they just had enough.

[Snow]

86. I prefer Costa Rica myself

they got rid of their army after the revolution, and their economy's in pretty good shape, all things considered. So's the other aspects of their country.

[Zhade]

57. Really?

Armed citizens are, in general, no threat to the military should they try to revolt against martial law.

With the caveat that I am NOT endorsing their actions: tell that to the Iraqi resistance.

[Fescue4u]

66. You mean like Iraq?

"
We have a few thousand undisciplined, untrained and without a solid command structure individuals (not a team, but individuals) attempting to fight disciplined, trained and well commanded troops?
"

The Iraqis are not even close to running out of ammo.

[Fovea]

68. See Baghdad for your answer.

Modern warfare is not granular enough to take away weapons, and if you remember the sixties, you will remember that things burn pretty quickly.

And most of the really able troop are hangin out in Iraq or Afghanistan.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

76. yes, see the easy occupation of Iraq

without that "solid command structure" Iraq has been a cake-walk, yes?

[Walt Starr]

24. I'm with you

There is no way to stop it. The coming situation will be the most violent perriod in world history.

[brainshrub]

53. You have a talent for hyperbole. (Nt)

[jmowreader]

56. Do NOT buy a silencer!

Here's what it takes to get your own sound suppressor:

* First, find a dealer in this sort of thing who will hold a silencer for you for about six months; these things are transferred by serial number. If you're approved to own silencer 200010 and you have in your possession silencer number 200011, your ass is going to jail.

* Then go to the BATF's website and download form 53201 (if you're making a silencer) or form 53204 (if you're buying one).

* Next, get two passport photos of yourself. Go to the cops and get them to fingerprint you onto two FBI-standard cards. Go to the top law enforcement agent in your area (chief of police or sheriff) and get that individual to attest that you're a fine upstanding person who plans to use his/her new silencer for lawful purposes. Exactly what the "lawful purpose" of a silencer could be I do not know, but you need to come up with one. "Shooting beer cans in the basement without disturbing Sally's listening to Fifty Cent albums" is not an acceptable purpose. (Besides, the gunshot noise would only enhance a Fifty Cent album.)

* Get a big envelope. Deposit in it all the stuff you've collected so far, along with a cashier's check for $200, and send to the BATF.

* Now wait. This can take up to six months. If they don't approve you for some reason, they get to keep your $200 just for pissing them off, I guess.

Silencers are just too much trouble to deal with, and I love the H&K MP-5SD.

[rfranklin]

3. Most Americans will not blink an eye...

They will proudly don their armbands and goose step into the future with dearest leader.

[Selwynn]

4. No. It is not time to re-think sensible responsible gun ownership...

which is the only "Democratic" gun policy I am familiar with.

Not to mention the fact that my Glock and Shotgun are really pretty irrelevant when an armored tank division comes to get me.

The sooner we get over the redneck notion that somehow we can "outgun" our tyranical enemy the better. I love the idea that you think buying a post-ban assault rifle is going to make a lick of difference if the government decides they want you.

And finally, please post me sources for both the claim that every state with tough gun laws has higher crime rates that states without, and that Englands crime rates have shot up - although even stats unforuntately don't conclusively prove cause, seeing as how causation is one of the most difficult things to conclusively prove. But links to credible sources are a good start.

Until then, I don't believe it.

[Zhade]

59. Gee, good thing the Revolutionaries didn't share your views.

Otherwise, we'd all be speaking the King's English.

[w13rd0]

7. With the DOJ casting a more critical eye...

...toward 'anti-war' and other 'subversives' sites, I don't think fishing for a revolution is going to do anyone any good. Most americans don't notice what has already occurred, you'll be hard pressed to get more than a single digit percentage of the population to know or care enough to do a damn thing...

[rfranklin]

8. Your statistics are phoney...

UK had 59 gun homicides in 1997.

In 1996, 34,040 people died from gunfire in the United States.

Your point?

[snrfmaster]

9. they are not phoney

Thats the entire gun-related deaths, including accidents, the murders are just over 11,019. I know, its still a lot.

Click the link below to read about Britains soaring gun crime levels since the ban in 1996.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/gun/Story/0,2763,1056412,00.html

according to the BBC article below

"During the year 2001-2002 offences involving firearms went up by 49% to a total of 2,260 compared to the previous 12 months."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2069400.stm

And to those saying it wont make a difference if I have a gun when the govt becomes tyrannical, look at Iraq, and think about how many thousands of soldiers would refuse to fight inside the US. And think about how different the tactics would need to be in the US. They couldnt indiscriminately blow up buildings, they'd only help a resistance. Guerilla warfare worked in Vietnam and its working in Iraq, don't tell me a small armed populace can't hold off a tyrannical government. Not to mention the fact that there are 250 million guns in the US and only 1.4 million soldiers in the US army. You think they couldnt be defeated? Look at our own revolution too! And think about those Jewish people in the Warsaw ghetto who bravely held off the might of the German army for a month. You would have told them not to bother would you?

And yes, I promote reponsible gun ownership, a sane adult owning a gun is responsible ownership, doesnt matter if its semi-auto or bolt-action. Both can do the same damage. Doesn't matter if one *looks* like a military rifle, an AR-15 fires just as fast as the Mini-14 which isnt classified as an assault rifle.

Personally I don't care what you think, I'm going to protect myself just in case.

[LeahMira]

10. It was only a month, though.

And think about those Jewish people in the Warsaw ghetto who bravely held off the might of the German army for a month. You would have told them not to bother would you?

No, I woudn't tell them not to bother, but in the end they died same as the people who didn't resist at all.

Another thing they were doing was continue as much as possible their spiritual and intellectual life while underground. They refused to become like animals in that respect.

Although I'd imagine the police and military will include plenty of individuals who would like nothing better than to shoot a "traitorous liberal" I'd also hope that most will simply refuse to mow down their own neighbors. Sooner or later some of them will be lying awake at night haunted by the images of what they did that day and questioning.

[TexasMexican]

11. would you rather...

die like the jews that didnt resist? or would you rather die like the ones that did?

[rfranklin]

14. You're dead either way...

And you ain't gonna do much damage with your peashooter against the Bush gunships.

[Prodemsouth]

16. Tell that to the many that have brought down armies with "peashooters"

Today we learned two Americans were killed with knifes in Iraq.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

80. I'll die on my feet before I die on my knees

"If you love wealth better than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." --Samuel Adams

[snrfmaster]

17. If my family were at stake

Then I'd want to take some of the f*cks who were planning to kill them with me. So for what its worth I'd die like the ones who resisted.

Which is the more noble fate? to go to your doom willingly, or to fight and die for what you believe?

I'd fight and die anytime.

[snrfmaster]

18. only a month?

it was only a month precisely because Hitler was such a fan of gun control. He disarmed them, then later liquidated them. If he hadn't implemented gun control prior to his "final solution" he'd have had hundreds of thousands of armed jews causing havoc all over the place.

[Astarho]

37. .......

And to those saying it wont make a difference if I have a gun when the govt becomes tyrannical, look at Iraq,

Your gun(s) won't make that much of a difference. Do you know how to make a home made rocket laucher like the one one used in the attacks the other day? The easy way to get a gun would be kill the soldier coming for you rather then buying them all now, and red flagging yourself as a troublemaker.

They couldnt indiscriminately blow up buildings, they'd only help a resistance.

In the cities probably not, but in the rural areas, they could do it easily. They would bomb "terrorist training camps", whether Al-Qaida or the Michigan Militia. We carpetbombed the hell out of Iraq (mostly in the desert) during Gulf War I. Israel blows up buildings all the time, with the obligitory 'there was a terrorist in there'.

Guerilla warfare worked in Vietnam and its working in Iraq, don't tell me a small armed populace can't hold off a tyrannical government.

Guerilla warfare is not about direct confrontation, but wearing down your enemy. Guerilla wars aren't won by who has more guns, but by who can fight longer and harder. Wiring bombs in baby carriages and sending bomb-laden dogs under the tanks have been tactics used in guerilla wars.

Not to mention the fact that there are 250 million guns in the US and only 1.4 million soldiers in the US army.

How many rocket launchers does the military have? Fighter jets? Tanks? Attack helicopters? Armored transports?

If Martial Law happens (I wish I could believe it won't), resistance against it won't be won with Red Dawn type fantasies, but I think it could be won. But remember, the Civil War raged almost five years, and Palestinians have been resisting Israel for over fifty.

[solinvictus]

48. Military

How many of them are going to still be deployed in Iraq next year? And money, if you have unrest, taxes aren't collected, people are'nt going to work; all those guided missiles cost $$$ which will not be there.

[BiggJawn]

67. When will you astroturfers GIVE UP?????

"You can't win, American gorilla fighter. the Army of the Potomac has F-16's, and tanks, and rocket launchers, and the resources of the CIA and Social Security...and besides, Emperor Bush has GAWD on his side..."

Yeah, damned inconvienient that we wouldn't be able to win this thing and have it all tidied up before "Survivor" comes back on, isn't it?

Why don't you just go make your plans to bow and scrape and do whatever your new masters want you to do? Hell, with your knowledge of what's been said here, they might even make you a Kapo in the Camps...

I'm getting sick of all these "Tokyo Rose" types dropping by to tell us we're nuts.

[Astarho]

74. Try reading what I said sometime

If Martial Law happens (I wish I could believe it won't), resistance against it won't be won with Red Dawn type fantasies, but I think it could be won.

Why don't you just go make your plans to bow and scrape and do whatever your new masters want you to do?

Are you calling me a collaborater? Because I disagree with certain aspects of this fight? STFU and read what I said.

I'm getting sick of all these "Tokyo Rose" types dropping by to tell us we're nuts.

And I'm getting sick of these "Red Dawn" types who think a cache of automatic weapons will win this thing. Your guns won't mean shit against the superior enemy, your tactics and strategies will.

[Trek234]

64. Please learn to read

The previous poster said under 100 people had been KILLED in 1996 by guns in the UK.

You come back posting that he is wrong because 2,260 offences INVOLVING guns had occured in the UK between 01-02. Two VERY different statistics. Hell you could steal a pack of gum with an unloaded gun in your pocket and that could very well be counted in your stats.

[Dead_Parrot]

79. "Gun related"

Means shooting someone. OK. It also means owning a gun without a damn good reason. Or attempting to buy on. Or holding up a sweetshot with a BB gun. Or robbing a post office with a frozen cucumber shaped like a gun*. Or stealing a shotgun...

I'm amazed it didn't rise 3000%, with all the things you suddently couldn't do...

*True. Northampton, c. 1997. I was was working for the Police at the time...

[mmonk]

12. I'm not anti-gun

for that reason. Its ok to ban assault rifles, armour piercing bullets, handguns in urban enviroments, but don't take away the right to bear arms.

[mr blur]

13. Beware the temptation to join in

"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders
of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple
matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist
dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no
voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.
That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked,
and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the
country to greater danger."
-- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials

[Democrats unite]

15. American revolution #2

eom

[Silverhair]

19. You are wrong about Franks.

So many DUers are coming down on Franks, trying to make it sound like they are planning a junta. Franks was talking about the probable public reaction after a WMD attack with large casualties. As reported here the poster changed Franks words from WMD to "terrorist attack". Not exactly honest of the poster. I hope you can see a difference between WMD and a truck bomb. Now please don't try to play "legal beagle" and try to define such a WMD attack down to something that is minor in scale.

Franks was talking about something that might take out an entire city.

Now I submit for your consideration, that if downtown Manhattan was nuked, or something on that scale, the public, including most DUers, would DEMAND that the gov't DO something to protect them. The new laws would make the Patriot Act look like a Magna Carta.

Your attempt to fight a revolution with your gun, (I am a gun owner, including handguns.)would be hopeless.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

81. Franks is WRONG to think Americans will beg for a military dictatorship

Franks said he expects the population to WANT a military dictatorship to suspend the Constitution - I say he is 100% WRONG. I expect Republicans and many Democrats to sit by while they suspend the Constitution, but I don't believe for one second the population is going to want it.

[ThomWV]

20. None Of The Above

I expect that were the nation to be tossed into the chaos of a Presidental attempt at utter control; cancel elections, martial law, suspension of the Bill of Rights, that sort of thing, that the nation would immediately strike.

I expect that all activity would come to a stand still immediately and I think that the Congress and the Court would band together with the military to oust the pretneder. I think it would be a very short lived takeover indeed. I also think, and this I believe with all my heart, that the real saving grace in this case would be the mid ranks of the military. There might be some Generals who would join with Bush, maybe some Colonels as well. But when you get down there to the mid ranks, the thousands of Captians, Majors, Light Colonels, where you have loyal patriotic men with at least decent educations in almost all cases, I am sure there is enough sense and understanding of just what the Constitution means. Those are the guys would would take back our country at the direction of and with the authority of the Congress (Even a Republican one) and the approval of the Court.

This is just my guess of course, but I have enough faith in my countrymen, as stupid as they may act some of the time, to believe there is a limit to what they will stand for. My limit has already been passed, but I'm quick on the trigger.

[Silverhair]

21. You are completely correct.

I spent 9 years in the service and I know full well that the military would not carry out orders for martial law, just because a president was afraid of an election.

Hell, even in Russia in 1991, the troops were called out and instead of suppressing the people, they joined in and protected the people.

But if downtown Chicago were to be nuked by terrorists, THEN the public would be demanding martial law and it would probably be carried out.

[sventvkg]

22. I was in the Army and I can tell you our troops would never turn guns on

the public just because Bush told them to do it. There would have to be a REAL proven and serious threat but they would not turn into the fucking SS just because the NEocons said to. These are REAL Americans and MANY of them extremely patriotic and loyal..Not to the president per se, but to the UNITED STATES and the IDEALS for which is stands...Most of my boys would see Bush as the threat and we would probably turn on him if he tried to seize power..F16 Pilots are highly intelligent and educated men and would not participate in bombing runs and missile attacks on Main street American...Get a grip people..If there is a take over, it wil be of a non-miliatry nature and just as it's been stated here, if there were a serious WMD attack, we would WILLINGLY give up our rights to the Neocons for protection..It's fuckng Orwell people!!! Americans will EASIY Fall prey to the tactic and it's the brainwashed Right-winger that will fall first..I would NEVER SUBMIT MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS FOR PROTECTION!!! Live free or die!!! If i'm in NY and they NUKE it, so be it!! I'll see you all in the next life!! Grow some balls!!!

[alarimer]

41. I agree

I woulnd not be among those asking for martial law under any circumstances. They can kill me if they want but I am not submitting willingly, that's for sure.

[tom_paine]

23. Obedience is what will happen

Free Americans will be Gulagged or worse...

Though I hope I am wrong I have come to the concluson that the dominant characteristics of the Imperial Subjects of Amerika are apathy and obedience.

A lethal combination for Free Americans.

[Gin]

26. Check out the terror alert color codes in your state...the highest one is

martial law..Virginia's says you can't leave your house without a good reason...or you can be arrested.

[Deja Q]

29. YIPES!

That is just wrong... that is not freedom at all.

Other countries have lived with terrorism for a lot longer period of time and, as far as I currently know, don't resort to this sort of restriction.

Of course, President Fascist* will ultimately allow a terror attack to happen, I reckon around October 2004...

[Zhade]

61. New Jersey's, IIRC, allows for you to be SHOT for leaving your house.

I could be (and would like to be) wrong, though.

[BiggJawn]

31. When I hear things like "Bush is our BOSS" I have to agree....

Heard that one last week: "Bush is our president, our Commander in Chief, and as such, he's really our Boss, and we need to obey him.."
Yeah, I'll bet it was astroturf, but if it's repeated often enough, it will become Truth.

The only way 70% of this nation of fat, greasy citizens ("Sleep On, ye Fat and Greasy Citizens"-Shakespeare) will be roused off of their couches is if the Cable goes out. Think that's "Elitist"? You may be right, but that is my belief. Deal With It.

[kodi]

25. there would be nation-wide strikes and sabotage

the army, navy, and air force do not grow crops, transport commodities, build houses or run power and water stations.

they do not make bullets or rocket fuel.

they will face a public which will not be forced into slave labor.

finally, all the secret service agents in the world would not be able to protect bush from his fate.

eventually, he would suffer mussolini's fate and be damned as no man in american history.

[Deja Q]

27. What?!

The 2nd amendment was created so that every man could have a gun to help defend his country with. "A well regulated militia" or whatever, with "militia" being the key word. A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. Our militia these days is the police, army, navy, air force, marines, coast guard, and so on...

How about links backing up your claims? The last I heard, countries with tough gun enforcement have far, far fewer gun-related crimes than the US.

Are you speaking of overthrowing the US government? That's a big no-no even though it's being overthrown from within (so why aren't THEY being lined up in front of a firing squad?!)

[davsand]

30. I have faith in our service people.

As has been pointed out upthread, our men and women in uniform would be the biggest roadblock they'd face if they ever DID try a military take over. Further, I also think that a large number of the upper echelon commanders would not support it.

Every one of those people is putting it on the line in defense of this nation and our ideals. While I know that many here are afraid of what this regime might be willing to do, I think it does a dis-service to view our military as any less than the patriots they are.

On the whole, I also think that the average Joe and Jane will fight it too. The people will accept it for a short time--about as long as there is any perceived immediate threat--but after that the shitstorm will begin.

Let me ask you all--do you really think that ANYTHING will keep functioning in this nation if the workers are unhappy and determined to monkeywrench it? The railines shut down, the trucks turn off and the planes won't fly--the phones don't work, the docks shut down and the office building sit dark and deserted due to failed power grids...

Stop and think about this--there can be tanks parked in your front yard for the next 100 years--but that doesn't mean they are going to know the difference if you go to work and flip the wrong switch or delete an entire hard drive. They cannot force the nation to run in the face of any type of widespread resistance. They simply don't have the manpower it will take.

Will it be bloody and ugly--most likely. Will it be a serious struggle? Yes. Will the people shut down the nation if they decide to? Yes. There isn't a thing they can do about it...

I also think the US has something going here that many of us discount in our dislike and fear of shrub and company. The people of the US pull together in times of crisis. Remember the feeling immediatly after 9/11? Everyone wanted to help. The entire nation wept. THAT is the spirit of the US. THAT is what they will face if they ever attempt to assume control at gunpoint.

Just my 2 cents.

Laura

[FlaGranny]

33. Heavens, people,

I can't believe things have gotten so bad that we are even having this discussion.

[rasputin1952]

34. The nation will not go into Martial Law...

There will be no destruction of democracy in the US. There will be no people lined up in front of trenches and shot by hte thousands.

The worst case scenario will be watching bush leaving the WH kicking and screaming while holding on to the door jamb with his fingernails.

We'ev been through a lot in oiur history, and the idiot in the WH is not the worst we've ever seen as far as crises in the nation. Let's not out fears beat us to death; just get out and vote the bastard prince out of office.

O8)

[Caution]

35. Oh sure, armed "resistance" against our government

That's going to work...uh huh. Oh hey look at those valiant Iraqis whow are killing american soliders every day...my ass. they are making the war politically inexpedient for the Bush administration and tragic for some individual families here, but they are having no actual impact on the situation from a military perspective. If it came to martial law in this country, it isngt just the army we woudl have to deal with. We have allowed this country to already become a police state because people are too damned stupid to realize that "a cop on every street corner" isn't about safety at all but is about control. I have no big beef with the police, but the mechanisms for this are in place now, and if you think that those of you who own a ton of guns aren't well known by the local cops you are dead wrong. You'll be the first ones "detained" When the shi*t hits the fan you can be sure the order will include a provision to detain any who might make trouble. It would take the American people a good 2-5 years before they could begin to mount an effective resistance. If martial law was instituted the only hope we would have would be if the military itself rebelled against this idea. And frankly this is exactly what would happen. Our military is not taught to "blindly" follow orders contrary to the conspiracy theorist view of things. This is especially true at the officer level where West Point and the other military schools teach them that they are entrusted with the protection of democracy and that the political leaders are imperfect.

If martial law is declared Bush's regime will fall and it will fall quickly. But if certainly won't fall thanks to the armed up-rising of a bunch of card-carrying NRA members. On top of this if Bush's regime is halfway intelligent he will use the NRA as a part of the "new" order. The NRA will begin using it's rhetoric to teach their members to support Bush it will be used to recruit "patriotic americans" who can help to "keep order" and protect their fellow american's agains the "terrorists" (ie anyone opposed to Bush's regime).

[Q]

36. Bush* already has a declared 'state of national emergency'...

...and would only use martial law as a last resort.

- But he has pretty much all he needs to control America right now.

[Mr.Green93]

38. what will happen?

See Shevardnadze

[TankLV]

40. Hypothetical question, here's my hypothetical answer.

Such a blatently illegal and extra constitutional act would be an act of war against the United States Constitution - an act of treason.

That would initiate the first stages of a civil war or revclution in this country.

Then, and only then, the following I would promise:

I would somehow spend all my energies clandestinely getting to become a member of the resistance while biding my time in the new reality.

I would dedicate the rest of my life to not only eradicating the entire bush cabal now in power from any further existence among the living on this planet, but I would also seek out and assist other in eradicating their next of kin to the 3rd generation.

Hypothetically speaking, for only the circumstances you described.

[many a good man]

42. String of bombings at polls on Election Day

Bush cancels election. Postpones indefinitely. That's my nightmare scenario.

If you think buying guns will save you you are badly delusional. Law enforcement and military have much more firepower than you can possibly dream of. You'd just be drawing attention to yourself and justify an attack. Not that I really think our soldiers will turn on us.

Fascism would come to America in broad daylight and the people probably wouldn't even realize it. We're much more sophisticated in this country.

[the_real_38]

44. The Stock Market would take a real hit..

... especially given it's dependence on the influx of foreign capital - I don't think the people who own him (the uber-rich) would approve of that at all, and I think we'd see capital flight on an order of Indonesia in '98.

[9215]

45. Arm yourself with knowledge: for robbers

cannot steal or oppressors kill......

I heard that, or something close to it, along time ago.

[raysr]

46. Gun Nuts

You're not going to stop a military take over with a few assault rifles. The first time the powers that be find out you have them you're either dead or in jail. "Red Dawn" was just a movie. Only whacked gun nuts think they'll protect themselves by owning a gun. How many people get away with blowing someone away in self-defence? Some do, most in up in the joint.

[DulceDecorum]

49. NUFINK

he does not have the money to pay the guards and the dollar is tanking.
He can BARELY afford to pay the soldiers in Iraq at present and the cash previously stashed in those offshore banks is barely worth the paper it is printed on.
A trillion US dollars may soon be worth less than a trillion lire.

Hopefully * has enough to pay his own personal bodyguards because such people can get REAL ornery when their mortgages default.

Frankly people, * does NOT have the manpower to do anything more than he is doing already. Futhermore, the Belgian Courts are watching intently and the International Court is going to make things VERY HOT for any miscreants caught outside the US.

And buying guns will not help you one whit.
Buying bullet-proof vests and medical supplies is a much better idea.

[roguevalley]

50. My state, Alaska, is heavily militarized. I think some possibilities would

be, if such a scenario played out:

1. The military would be coaxed to lay down their arms the way the Russian army was during the coup attempt on Gorbachev. These are our kids, our neighbors, our friends. They would not hurt us. The Russian army couldn't. Ours won't.

2. We have a 225 year tradition of military subservience to civilian rule. The army isn't going to attack our people. It would mean the death of the constitution and the death of our democracy. They won't hurt us.

3. Our state is one of three that voted against the Patriot Act. We are conservative up here in many ways but if the military ever got called upon to arm against us, there would be a blood bath up here, I believe. We are armed, defiant of intrusive government and loyal to the constitution. I am sure other conservative states would feel/do the same. But the army won't harm us. They ARE us.

4. What army? The best dimwit could muster would be the air force. The guard IS us. They are you and me and my brother and sister. They are weekend warriors. They won't harm us. They won't do more than muster and stand still. Besides, we don't have an army big enough to corral 300,000,000 angry people. This happens over 'there', not over here. And the world wouldn't allow it. If America suddenly turned into Cuba, the world would boycott our butts into a standstill in a week.

5. Millions of people will go up to them and beg them to lay down arms and stand by us. They will. They will because they ARE us.

I would put nothing past the junta. They live in their own reality.
"Children will be singing songs about us for generations." Who can forget that bit of National Socialism?

Bush doesn't command the armys' respect and the generals hate him.
No way it can happen. Of course, I said what has passed couldn't happen but I think this would be over the top. Declare martial law and expect it to happen because you lose an election? I don't think so.

The military wouldn't harm us.

[TexasMexican]

51. ...

Civil War, Texas declares independence, Mexico annexes the Southwest, Russia invades Alaska, Canadians burn down the Whitehouse, Japanese bomb pearl harbor.

[Trek234]

65. WTF?

This is a joke right? Haha texas declares independence. Bush declaring martial law - Texas would be his biggest supporter. I live here and know how people are... Trust me, enough of them would support him.

[havocmom]

52. Martial law is the boogey man who diverts our attention and energies

from the real threat which is coproate takeover of the infastructure.

Farmers are losing their lands in law suits with Monsanto when GM, patented grain blows off trucks and sprouts in their fields.

Utility companies used to be publicly controled entities. Now your power, and sometimes your water, is delivered by a private company. You are at their mercy. And since they own our alledged repersentatives, they get to write the laws now. It ain't getting any better for us.

They write the laws which means everything they wanna do is legal and then they write 'tort reform' to ensure that we can't fight them at all. They get no responsibility, all our resources and a cheap, desparate labor force. They 'reform' bankrupcy laws so they get to forclose on the American dream.

The bit in the news recently about licensing and monitering all phases of food production and distribution to protect the food supply from terrorism is a joke at best, and a means to further decrease the independence of peoples and communities. They cannot protect every piece of food, but they can sure decide who gets to grow and sell it! Who do you suppose will do the licensing? Same kind souls who let the energy companies call the shots and let workers and retirees go broke and poor people die of heat and cold. It is not terrorists they are protecting food sources from, it is to assure you can only get food and water from officially approved sources. If you hate them owning the fuel tank on your car, think about your stomach at their tender mercies.

Martial law? Yeah, it is possible. If they blow up the US Congress (and I don't rule that one out, now that California has a GOP governor to appoint replacement congressmen) I could see a call to martial law. But like the good soldiers in the USSR, the human beings that make the rank and file of our troops will not pull the trigger on Granny. But while we fuss about that possibility, they are procuring the means to assure our obediance through the control of the necessities of life.

Get a grip, people. You wanna really be a thorn in their sides? Keep your guns oild and grow a garden! Consume as little of their products as you can get by with. Walk, bike, use public transportation. Get jobs close to home when possible. Learn basic skills and take pride not in trophies from the mall, but from what you can do for yourself! My neighbor has a windmill. His house will always have the lights on. Think about how you can deny them as much of your money as possible, cuz they are trying real hard to get it all from you and make you a begger.

edited cuz I write from my gut and it doesn't type worth a damn

[Mike Niendorff]

54. That's one hell of an "if".

But, ok, let's at least flesh out the hypothetical a little bit :

IF something like this were to happen, Bush would have to have one hell of a pretext for doing it. A nuclear or biological "terror attack", maybe ... I mean, that's the kind of "shock and awe" scale that would be necessary for him and his cronies to pull something like that off. The conditions (particularly the economic ones) that made Germany succeptible to the rise of a person like Hitler aren't (yet) in place in this country (although, in all fairness, Bush and his gang certainly do seem to be doing their level best to push the country into *future* economic ruin).

A key point to remember in this regard: these people have designs for a whole series of Middle East wars (aka: resource thefts). Because of that, they can't afford to have all their troops locked up here in the USA keeping a lid on domestic unrest. They need those troops for Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, et al -- and, as the occupation of Iraq is demonstrating, those are long-term committments requiring *huge* deployments of military manpower.

Another key point to remember : the kind of military expenditures that the Bushies are planning will require a large tax-paying citizen base to support it. Even if they don't need us to physically man the plants that build their weapons, they definitely need us to continue paying the taxes that fund their military designs. Members of the armed forces do not work for free, and the manufacture and upkeep of the world's largest collection of military machinery also carries a hefty pricetag. In short: Bush needs a cooperative America "here on the home front" to foot the bill for his invasions, and for the years and years of occupations that will follow. Absent some catastrophic "terror" attack (which is the only thing I can think of that would cause people to suspend their common sense and go along with such a plan), I just don't see this happening.

That being said, I can't deny that there is one obvious exception to both of these objections: the "big terror attack" exception. So, let's proceed from that point, assuming that such an event has occurred, and that our populace has been sufficiently "shocked and awed" into "temporarily" accepting the suspension of everything that makes America America.

Then what?

I see in your post a kind of "Red Dawn" fantasy-world, where a bunch of random people with no formal training or organization somehow magically defeat a huge occupying army by learning how to piss into overheated radiators, etc. The obvious problem here is that handing a pistol to Joe The Angry American does not magically turn him into a resistance fighter, any more than handing a rifle to him will suddenly make him a soldier in the US Army. It just ain't that simple. Military situations involve large-scale organization, intensive planning, tons of training, the establishment of funding and lines of supply, chains of command, bases of civilian support, and a whole host of other things that these kinds of "Red Dawn" fantasy scenarios simply don't take into account. Having a shotgun or two hidden away somewhere does not make you a significant threat to an occupying army, no matter how many NRA members try to tell you different. Military situations require military hardware, military supply lines, military planning and military training.

Now, add to that the following:

If Bush and his gang are *seriously* able to convince Americans that they are under a threat so great that even free elections cannot be tolerated "at this time" -- if they can actually get Americans to go along with that -- then how in the world do you propose to bridge the gap between "some guy with a shotgun" and "an organized American resistance"? Under circumstances like this, you can bet your ass that any armed resistance movement will *immediately* be labelled as "a terrorist organization", and most of your (terrorized) fellow citizens will be more than happy to turn you in to the "authorities" if you appear to even *sympathize* with such a group (let alone actually support it).

In short: if things get to the point where the RW can pull this off, then don't expect a shotgun in your closet to save you. AFAIC, the only real way to save yourself, and America, is to prevent things from getting to this point at all.

</.02>


MDN

[Silverhair]

62. It is a pleasure to see some LOGICAL thinking on this topic. n/t

[leftofthedial]

55. docile acquiecence

and lots of platitudes about patriotism, supporting our leader, and how evil "they" are (whomever the media disinformation machine decides to label as the enemy next)

Lots of flag decals and red, white and blue yard signs.

Escalating violence aginst liberals and dissenters, er, domestic terrorists.



I must comment that it is ironic that the left are now talking about fearing their government, the need for armed opposition, etc., just like the militia movement talked about Janet Reno.

[Zhade]

60. Very simple: it is better to die on my feet than live on my knees.

That's all there is to it.

[Trek234]

63. Do you think DUers are stupid?

Hmm let's see. A 16 poster person asking for all DUers who would take up arms against the US government, who also happens to use the EXACT same arguments & statistics against gun control that are used at free republic. How odd....

[havocmom]

70. Have noticed a lot of low count posters baiting on these topics lately

Am a bit concerned that some DUers could get baited into jail for advocating violence. We know these boards are monitored by many and we do not know the motives of some. We can make educated guesses that not all are idiot wing nuts.

Hope all the DUers aware of the posibility of being baited into talking the talk that can get people locked away without much hope of fair treatments.

Some of you are too young to recall the antics of agents who infiltrated protest organizations in the 60s.

It's a jungle out there guys. Heads up

[Fescue4u]

71. Thats right! Democrats only want to take your guns

Heaven forbid that one actually wants to see an American defend himself (rolling eyes)

This place is so fricken paranoid of low posters its laughable.

[havocmom]

72. being a tad paranoid does not protect us from those who would do us harm

And it is agood idea to remember that the Patriot Act is a nasty bit of business which can be used with very little actual provocation.

My husband is unable to get a certain cheese from France because of that @(*$ Act. We would hate to see DUers hauled to prison for posting that they would take up arms against the government.

Am not saying one shouldn't fight for one's rights. But one should be careful about saying it in a manner which might result in being entrapped by agents of an establishment with a track record of provoking illegal activities as a means of busting protesters.

[Fovea]

69. You would not get a uniform martial law.

You would get Blue States vs Red Statess.

[Hep]

75. SUSPENDED ELECTIONS

The key.

[Beaker]

77. Will NEVER happen.

The American electorate wouldn't put up with it.
People who honestly think that it is a possibility are pretty much hopeless, and might want to consider seeking out a competent mental health professional.

[Hep]

78. Yeah

Bush would never be so underhanded as to manipulate an election.

We go to code red, and Bush can do just that. Whether or not it will ever come to that isn't up to me. I have no idea.

[Beaker]

83. Ummmm...have you ever heard of World Wars 1 or 2?

or any of the other conflicts that the U.S. has been involved in during election years?
And yet- NEVER a missed or postponed election.

If you nust fret about something, find yourself something more realistic to fret about...

[Chants]

82. To answer the question in the original post...

To answer the question in the original post, it is essential to know what "event" precipitated the Bush's implementation of martial law.

You asked what would happen if Bush declared martial law. The answer to this question depends almost entirely on the reason why martial law was declared.

Let's take one scenario. Bush just woke up one day and decided, "Hey, I want to be a dictator and a ham sandwich would be good right about now." He then declares martial law and has lunch. Now, this would really piss me off and I would be definately protest it.

Let's take another scenario. Terrorists managed to detonate three atomic "suitcase" bombs in New York, Washington DC, and Chicago. The cities were compeltely leveled. 17 Million people evaporated in the initial blast. 45 million people will die in the next few weeks due to radiation sickness. Now if Bush declared martial law under these circumstances, I would be either already dead, dying, or a hell of a lot more concerned about the event triggering martial law than "Mah Rights."

[Scott Lee]

84. They'll blame it on Howard Dean (or Nader)

.

[the big fl dem]

85. Just remember

Your puny guns are no match for the F15s carrying naplam that the government will send after you.
You will be own3d by Imperior Bush.

However, peaceful protest against his administrative policies are sure to work.