Could The US Citizens Fight Off The US Military? US Military vs Citizens. What Would Happen?

Could The US Citizens Fight Off The US Military? US Military vs Citizens. What Would Happen?
-
(((DISCLAIMER: This is merely a Theoretical Examination of a possible conflict. I AM IN NO WAY CALLING FOR VIOLENCE AGAINST THE U.S. GOVERNMENT OR MILITARY. NOR ADVOCATING VIOLENCE AGAINST ANYONE)))
-
2,994,001 views Aug 26, 2019
The Infographics Show
-
Today we are revolting against the government, and the military has come to shut us down. Who would win in this epic face off between the United States citizens versus the United States Military. You may think you know the answer but the results would surprise you. Let's take a look in this animated video about Could The US Citizens Fight Off The US Military?
-
FAIR USE FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES
-
Mirrored From:
https://www.youtube.com/@TheInfographicsShow
***
(THE ARTICLES BELOW ARE MORE INTERESTING THAN THE VIDEO)
***
I posted this excellent video below when it first came out. It was an Ex-Marine explaining in depth Why the US Military could not Defeat the American Citizens in a Revolutionary War. The video was Deleted by YouTube. Gee, I wonder why?
-
Marine Explains: Asymmetric Warfare. Why American Civilians Would Prevail Against the United States Military with Small Arms and the Conviction of their Beliefs
-
Friday, August 5, 2022 
-
A brief summary on why American civilians would prevail against the United States Military with small arms and the conviction of their beliefs
***
Citizens would win against the U.S. Military, here’s how
-
https://medium.com/the-sword-and-shield/citizens-would-win-against-the-u-s-military-heres-how-ff336bd22bc5
-
The second American Revolution is the fantasy of every gun nut, and the disdain of every pacifist urbanite. Veterans, preppers, and rednecks all couch their need for varying caliber, large capacity, semi-automatic rifles in the need to defend themselves against both a collapsing society, and a tyrannical government. The attempt to confiscate these weapons would itself be the evidence that the government had become too powerful and tyrannical. In the showdown between the world’s most powerful military, and the world’s most armed citizenry, who would win?
-
My answer: the Citizens, without question.
-
“But the U.S. has a modern Air Force, with stealth aircraft and drones,” one might argue.
-
Attack aircraft are only as useful as their targets. Part of the reason there was no shock and awe campaign in Afghanistan is because there was a lack of military targets. If the U.S. Military faced a domestic insurgency, what would they bomb?
-
Country Bars? Gun Stores? Walmart?
-
Good luck with that.
-
Finally drones, Uncle Sam’s answer to the dastardly guerilla. Once again, you’re talking about bombing American population centers, and most of the people the military would target, would know how to avoid such strikes. Afghan and Iraqi drone strikes are directed by intelligence gathering techniques. This includes human and signals intelligence.
-
American Insurgents would be largely comprised of veterans, Three Percenters, and cops. This wouldn’t be some passive force, waiting for the United States Military to get enough information to act. They would be hunting informants, feeding counterintelligence to the military, scrambling communications, or avoiding electronic communication completely through couriers.
***
Why the U.S. Military Isn’t Ready for Civil War
-
A significant portion of Americans seek the destruction of political authority. What if they succeed?
-
https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/01/04/american-civil-war-january-6-capitol/
-
JANUARY 4, 2022, 3:51 PM
-
By Stephen Marche, a novelist and essayist who lives in Toronto.
-
For the U.S. government, an outbreak of widespread political violence inside the country’s borders would necessarily become a military operation. U.S. militias are significant enough that the FBI or the Department of Homeland Security would simply be insufficient to deal with them. Only the U.S. military could be capable of dealing with insurgent forces. And from a tactical point of view, any engagement between U.S. forces and a militia (or any insurgent force of any kind for that matter) would be entirely one-sided. Despite the preparations of right-wing militias, and despite the sheer number of weapons available in the United States, the U.S. Marines are still the U.S. Marines. No militia or organized group of militias could compete with them in battle.
-
The real problems would be legal and bureaucratic, and these problems, in turn, would quickly take on a military character. The U.S. military isn’t culturally or institutionally designed to be an adequate domestic actor—rather, the opposite. Its role in American life has been specifically designed to make it ineffective in domestic operations. The use of the military would not be, in itself, a constitutional crisis; there are legal precedents and explicit executive orders governing the use of military force on U.S. soil. But any military response to civil unrest is highly likely to spin out of control into extended insurgency. And for all the U.S. military’s prowess, the outcome would be entirely uncertain.
-
Future faces of the Insurgency
-
A massive problem the United States Military would face is that their opponents would largely be their veterans, trained in the very warfare they would try to prosecute, and they would have to face them on the ground.
-
Insurgents and the Military:
-
There are approximately 20,000,000 veterans, and 63,000,000 gun owners in the United States. This means that if all resisted, the military would face a force approximately 33 times its size. For pity’s sake, let’s give the military a fighting chance. The Three Percenter movement is founded on the belief that only three percent of the United States population fought in the Revolutionary War. In an attempt to even the odds, let’s argue that only three percent of veterans and gun owners would become insurgents, along with three percent of cops defecting to the insurgent side. This puts the insurgency at 600,000 veterans, 1,890,000 gun owners, and 15,000 police officers, for a grand total of 2,505,000 insurgents.
-
At present, the United States Military has 1.2 million Active Duty members and 800,000 reservists. The United States also has approximately 500,000 Police. This comes to a grand total of 2,500,000 personnel attempting to disarm the civilian population.
-
Evenly matched right? But there’s one more piece of math we have to do: military state of birth.
-
In the military, some states contribute more than others. This comes from national pride and military history, something pinko gun grabbers know little about. Out of the top ten, troops from California (185,000), Washington (65,000), and New York (50,000), might participate in a war against their fellow citizens over their right to bear arms. This comes to a grand total of 300,000 active duty troops.
-
The remaining troops come from states like Texas (165,000), Virginia (115,000), North Carolina (112,000), Florida (92,000), Georgia (90,000), South Carolina (55,000), and Colorado (50,000). This comes to a grand total of 679,000. This means that the United States Military is comprised of pro-gun citizens at a ratio of more than 2 to 1.
-
Now a few troops from Florida and Colorado might go along with the program, but what are the chances that a Texan, Virginian, Carolinian, or Georgian would go along with gun confiscation?
-
Zero, zilch, nada, and these are some of the military’s best fighters.
-
Once the shooting started, a large chunk of these troops would resign and join the insurgency, and even more would be demoralized at the prospect of fighting to disarm their fellow citizens. They would be traitors to their nation, their state, their constitution, and their fellow citizens. Every step in uniform could be their last, and every neighbor an enemy.
-
The War:
-
“But the military still has tanks, armored trucks, machine guns, and grenade launchers!” one might argue.
-
It doesn’t matter, because it wouldn’t be that kind of war. Insurgents would first go after the politicians who created the law and sicked the military after them. Then they would go after the media that cheered on the slaughter of their fellow citizens. Then, and only then, would they face what pretty much equates to their little brothers.
-
Troops wouldn’t want to kill veterans, and veterans wouldn’t want to kill troops, because they are the same people. But if it came down to it, everyone is going to do what they have to. Many of the bases on American soil, were the previous homes of veterans. They would know the security patterns, layouts, buildings, and armories of their former homes. If the military was foolish enough to maintain its current posture, while attempting to disarm the citizenry, they could lose entire installations to insurgents without a shot being fired. Veterans only a few years, or a decade out of service, would have at their disposal weapons and equipment they knew well.
-
If troops continued to fight, then they would find themselves facing combat veterans who had walked in their boots, knew their equipment, and knew their tactics. Troops would still have to set up security checkpoints. Troops in tanks and troop carriers still have to get out to pee. Troops would still have to drive through hostile cities and interact with the population. Veterans know their weaknesses because they were OUR weaknesses.
***