It hardly pertains to what I got to say but I was just curious. Anyway. My two cents is this there are two different types of freedom, "freedom to(of)" and "freedom from". Freedom from tyranny, freedom to bear arms etc. In my opinion govt can only handle "freedom from"
US involvement in Iraq is hugely limited - nothing like an assault on home soil would be. And the govt is careful to avoid civilian casualties so tempers its power. If it were set on tyrannising its own people, it'd have no such restrictions.
-
-
That is the most motivated reasoning I’ve ever heard. The cost of tyranny within an area that’s decently armed and willing to fight back far exceeds that of a complicit populous trained to behave.
-
Firstly, it would be impossible for a tyrant to realistically emerge in the US due to separation of powers. Secondly, if a tyrant were to somehow emerge, *and* have full support of military, what would an AR-15 possibly do against a F-22?
- 15 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.