How well is that working in Afghanistan?
-
-
-
You're not an Afghani. And neither are Americans.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
We will lose, but no one will win. You just need a small contingent of survivalists to totally muck up the works (Hello Mr. X!) with targeted strikes at key people or infrastructure. We either die or run, but the "winners" will also starve.
-
Also, modulo California, even the bluest of the blue enclaves have at least a 35% red-sympathetic population. Unless genocide is in the cards (and most of the reminder don't have the stomach for that) you're in for a very protracted conflict.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
The bigger problem for the cities is that they are fixed targets, whereas the folks in the countryside can more easily disappear and melt away whenever a force is assembled to wrest territory from them. But some biological warfare does well enough for that.
-
"Its the infrastructure, stupid." You can't move/hide a city's power grid (not any way I know, at least) and defending it from outside and in is an expensive proposition. And soon Jimbob will be able to print kamikaze drones in his workshop. How much pain can cityfolk endure?
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Assuming that the military will listen to some autocrat in DC when SHTF. Not sure that model holds given where most line military comes from.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Right can't work together to stop any of the Left's economic and cultural agenda. But somehow this time...
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Allow me to present a more sophisticated argument in favor of the gentlemen's thesis:
- End of conversation
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.