If our Government actually turned our Armed Forces on us, do you think we could stop them?

2018-03-26T01:27:34-04:00

I was part of a hotly debated issue that both sides are very passionate about earlier, and the issue of defending ourselves against the government came up. That got me thinking, could we really stop them if they turned our own Armed Forces on us?

Honestly, I don't think that would ever happen. It's not a lawful order and I am sure pretty much all of our service member would turn their weapons on our politicians. But lets say for arguments sake, that they did follow that order..........

We, better than any civilian know the capabilities of our Armed Forces. We may have the numbers, but they have the technology. This isn't Star Wars, we aren't Ewoks. This isn't the movies, we would be fighting the most formidable military on the planet with small arms and homemade explosives.

We would be bugs on a windshield.

Now, there is an argument to be had if they only turned our civilian government agencies on us. FBI, DEA, ATF, local and state police. We would stand a chance, a pretty decent chance I think.

Response by MCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 26 at 2018 1:39 AM

2018-03-26T01:39:57-04:00

I see this counter argument often from folks arguing against firearms ownership. I don't think there is any question that our military would have a distinct advantage. The deterrent is the fact that it would be slaughtering it's own citizens. Moms, dads, borhers, sisters, friends, etc. The optics are bad and it would signal the absolute end of the US as a republic. So, to answer the original question: military would win, but at what cost?
My $0.02

Response by SPC Josh McCoy made Mar 26 at 2018 2:41 AM

2018-03-26T02:41:57-04:00

I don’t think it’ll ever get this far but my belief is that the current SECDEF for sure along with the generals and admirals would never give the order on the population. Too much confliction for our military to fire upon their brothers who fought before them. As a former law enforcement officer, I can assure you that the sheriff won’t be collecting firearms either. There simply isn’t enough law enforcement to handle a job like that. I think that our 2nd amendment has the libs and dumbasses by the gonads whether or not they would attempt to abolish it or not. Our founding forefathers knew this would be a problem and that’s why the amendment is there. Also don’t forget that only 3% of the pissed off colonists who were mostly farmers that had little to no training picked up arms against the mightiest army of the day and won our independence. Don’t Tread On Me!!!

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 26 at 2018 3:45 AM

2018-03-26T03:45:25-04:00

There's a bit to unpack here.

First, it needs to be stated that no one has the authority to turn the armed forces on US citizens. Not even the president. Before I hear arguments - even if the president declared a state of national emergency AND suspended the bill of rights AND somehow suspended posse comitatus, there would be a lot of other pieces that would need to be moved into place before our commanding officers ever were convinced enough of a situation to "turn us on our citizens."

Second, me personally? I will not be following any orders to just randomly go start shooting people in the US or any other part of this planet without a good damned reason. Meaning - they had better be armed and shooting at me at the same time. In the Middle East you'll likely get a "wtf" or something, try that shit in the US? I'll likely end your life on the spot and save the military the hassle of running you through a court martial.

But. If I and my Soldiers are on a position somewhere in Anywhere, USA and you and your mask-wearing LARPers come start shooting at us? I'll kill you without blinking an eye. US citizen or not.

Now.

Let's say there was some major national emergency. Let's say that Antifa stopped being a bunch of pasty white fascist kids in masks shutting down the 1st Amendment on college campuses and actually got organized to the point that they sparked some sort of modern-day civil war. Let's say that we've moved into the nightmare scenario where we've been mobilized along with the National Guard and we're "at war" in the US.

IF the military stayed together as a united front because the threat was so bad, we'd obliterate the segment of the populace causing the issue. There's no question about it in my mind. If the full force of the 21st century US Armed Forces were brought to bear on a domestic element at war with our government, we would wipe them off of the face of the earth and we probably wouldn't even need to ever come face-to-face with them (which is the best part.) You're talking about drones, tanks, artillery, satellite-guided bombs, etc? AR-15s aren't going to stop us. Period. I'm not talking myself up or blustering either. American civilians do not comprehend the destructive power we can bring to bear on a target, and neither do a lot of those of us in uniform, for that matter.

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/ppmyvb/we-asked-a-military-expert-if-the-whole-world-could-conquer-the-united-states

There are a lot of other similar articles, backed by research.

We are a very formidable force regardless of our own opinions and inside-knowledge of some of the inefficiencies, failings, and silliness that goes on.

Now, as I stated previously, though - there would have to be some seriously bad stuff going on for this to even come about, and if things did get that bad to where we were facing a civil war or some sort of revolution we needed to squash, I think we'd need to also be worried about our force remaining as a whole instead of fragmenting between the US Government and the revolutionaries or whomever. If THAT happened, the war would be 100x worse than the Civil War in the 1800s in terms of sheer casualties and I think a lot of major population centers in our nation would be rubble.

Just my two cents.

We Asked a Military Expert if All the World's Armies Could Shut Down the US

The recent government shutdown almost threw the world into a "deep, dark recession." Maybe it's time the rest of the world said enough is enough. It's time for the rest of the world to get a great big army together and attack the US. Is it enough?

Response by SPC Erich Guenther made Mar 26 at 2018 4:15 AM

2018-03-26T04:15:46-04:00

I think the damage in morale in giving such an order would render much of the force combat ineffective and open the United States to outside attack. We will never know the full cost on the Chinese Military of Tinnamen Square but outside looking into that closed society it was clear they had to pull in units from outside the geographic area, some units clearly disobeyed orders, and there were purges in the military afterwards as well as Communist Party ranks of civilians that disagreed with the decision. One wonders what would have happened had the students decided to fight back instead of submitting to the force. I think it would have plunged the country into Civil War and it was getting close to that tipping point towards the end. I think that was one reason they left the TV cameras run for so long as a witness to what was going on because with them off.......even a rumor could have sparked a massive civilian rebellion.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Mar 26 at 2018 6:57 AM

2018-03-26T06:57:38-04:00

less than 2 million service members including reserves. 320M Americans, estimated that 25% own firearms (approximately 4~ each).

We can do a quality to quantity analysis, but one of the major advantages codified in law is that the government is prohibited from having a registry... for a reason.

The Citizenry wouldn't last long against an "Offensive" government force... but how long have we been fighting an Insurgency in places like Afghanistan and Iraq. How well do you think that would go on US Soil?

Response by SSgt Jim Gilmore made Mar 26 at 2018 6:58 AM

2018-03-26T06:58:57-04:00

I think the bigger question would be would they fire on their own?

Response by SGT David T. made Mar 26 at 2018 8:00 AM

2018-03-26T08:00:35-04:00

Interesting thought experiment. Seems we have forgotten the lessons of Iraq and Afghanistan. By all measure, the insurgencies were bugs on the windshield as you put it. However, with low tech and small arms they have been able to resist for years. The military is a big clunky thing. It's strength is against conventional armies. Unconventional insurgencies eh...not so much. That being said, I think the military would win mainly due to the apathetic nature of our population. Most would just complain and talk big on the internet.

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 26 at 2018 9:17 AM

2018-03-26T09:17:38-04:00

Let's hope to God we never have to find out.

Speaking hypothetically, I don't see the Government ever taking the risk of an outright "war" with the people; many posters have already explained the problems with that in detail.

If "they" did want to gain military control over a potentially hostile domestic force, then the logical strategy would be to steadily and irrevocably separate this "force" from the mainstream ideology. If it really was "good Americans defending their rights against tyranny"...the result could be an endless insurgency and crippling destabilization. However, portray them as "domestic terrorists" motivated by radical ideas...and the task would likely be less difficult, the result more decisive.

Response by MCPO Roger Collins made Mar 26 at 2018 10:58 AM

2018-03-26T10:58:34-04:00

SFC James C. Gammage, you covered my position fairly well on this general question. It would have to be in regard to a specific situation to properly respond. With very few exceptions, there would have to be an unlawful order issued and I doubt military leadership would favorably respond.

“Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.”

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 26 at 2018 11:55 AM

2018-03-26T11:55:14-04:00

Even with the lopsided advantage the military has there is a point to the 2nd amendment. It would REQUIRE an overwhelming and distasteful use of force on US citizens to defeat an armed populace basically ensuring the government could never go that far. If you win you also lose scenario.

Response by SN Greg Wright made Mar 26 at 2018 12:19 PM

2018-03-26T12:19:32-04:00

The entire world together could not conquer and occupy us. Civilian population would stand no chance. That said, no military commander is ever going to give that order.

Response by SGM Bill Frazer made Mar 26 at 2018 12:45 PM

2018-03-26T12:45:12-04:00

Looks, the armed forces number about 1.0 million, the states of TN and GA alone have 3 million registered hunters- and if the NG/USAR refused to side with the gov't, then the people would actually have more weapons, armor, planes and the regular forces.

Response by SPC David Willis made Mar 26 at 2018 12:59 PM

2018-03-26T12:59:32-04:00

I think it would be more in the vein of Vietnam or Iraq. The military could win every single battle and still lose due to attrition. The military would see fewer people volunteering and you couldn't plug holes in formations from losses. Also unlike previous wars if one tank was destroyed along with its crew there would be 2 tanks fully crewed to replace it, if a tank was destroyed that unit may never see another fully crewed tank again. If a resistance could survive and grow in their numbers at a more rapid rate than the military who at this point would be seen as tyrannical it could easily win. Of course on top of that there are something like 200 million privately owned guns while the military has way, way fewer.

Response by CW3 Jeff Held made Mar 26 at 2018 1:22 PM

2018-03-26T13:22:33-04:00

Yes. The cost would be horrific but we could stop the government.

Response by Col Joseph Lenertz made Mar 26 at 2018 2:03 PM

2018-03-26T14:03:14-04:00

I agree it wouldn't happen. We swear the oath to the constitution for a reason.

Response by MSG Louis Alexander made Mar 26 at 2018 3:13 PM

2018-03-26T15:13:04-04:00

At most small unit guerrilla tactics could be of some use against a military ground force. Would it win a major battle? Probably not. Small unit tactics are delay and stall tactics, sure there will be casualties along the way from both sides but really who will suffer the most? The small units that’s who.
After all major military forces have field hospitals, and supply depot capabilities where the small units at most have a few medics and if they’re lucky, maybe a doctor here and there and no resupply capability. The spirit however can be a formable force to be reckon with and can crush the moral of larger forces.
Take the Vietnam war for instance, with all the military power not only from the United States, but various allies like South Korea, Australia, Thailand etc. The Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese Army were able to strike fear not only in the hearts of South Vietnamese, but all nations gathered to wage war against them.
Spirit, focus and determination is what won that war. With all the veterans, law enforcement agencies combined with the civilian community having this mentality as a primary factor, perhaps the government would be forced to crumble and secede to the people by winning over both at Command level and those serving below them.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Mar 26 at 2018 6:09 PM

2018-03-26T18:09:44-04:00

The military would never be arbitrarily turned against the citizenry... But with creative legislation and patience, I think we can baby step us there.

1) Pass legislation specifying what the phrase "arms" means as it pertains to the 2nd amendment.
2) With the new latitude granted by the revised definition of "arms", pass legislation forbidding the possession of arms that don't meet the new criteria by the citizenry.
3) Set mandatory turn in dates for all now illegal arms.
4) Begin media campaigns vilifying any holdouts or resistors. Make sure you use the words domestic and terrorism a lot.
5) Create a catchy new name to encapsulate all resistors, make them seem like an organized, homogenous group.
6) Begin crediting this group with any subsequent gun violence in the country
7) Label this group domestic terrorists
8) Begin using the US military, as our oath specifies a duty to combat domestic enemies. Legislate changes to "posse comitatus".
9) Label anyone opposed to the plan as terrorist sympathizers, unpatriotic, or simply a danger
10) Congrats, the military is not fighting the citizenry at all, they are combatting a domestic terrorist cell.

Response by CWO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 26 at 2018 6:18 PM

2018-03-26T18:18:01-04:00

Not likely.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 27 at 2018 9:05 AM

2018-03-27T09:05:40-04:00

I think that the better question is would the Armed Forces listen.

Afghan goat herders and Vietnamese rice farmers have both given our big bad military some stiff competition and those two countries are A LOT smaller than the US. Afghanistan is roughly the size of Texas and Vietnam is roughly the size of the west coast.

Response by SFC Robert Walton made Mar 27 at 2018 9:11 AM

2018-03-27T09:11:54-04:00

CPL Tom Surdi Stick with me here once this Started where would the Military get the weapons and ammunition to use it is all produced by former Military and civilians what the Military has the civilians and prior Military would have shortly. This kind of thing would not happen over night People would prepare and weapons and ammunition Corporations are going to want to protect what they have so they are going to arm the only people that can take down the Government. IMHO