he says well if you think you need to arm yourselves to protect yourselves from the government you need f18's and nukes and stuff...
what kind of threat is that?

it is in washingtons writing that we should always have equal power to the government.....

also there are those of us that do have fighter jets all over the place so i think he has a false sense of security, how about you?

YES

Stating the obvious : governments have armies, navies, airforces and in numbers that exceed the capabilities of the average citizen. Governments can apply that power 24/7/365 with full maintenance and logistical back-up. So, if you think you need to match that firepower then that's the level you got to plan on attaining.

As for the serried ranks of citizen owned AFV's and warplanes : there is a reason they got surplused and sold onto the civilian market : they was replaced with better kit. And when it was surplused the neat stuff that does the real job of killing? That got de-milled long before it hit the auctions. Your pal has an MBT? Nope, they have an over-weight dozer in pretty camo. But fun to drive, yep.

i wonder if the Afghan government can control its civilian population or how about the Iraqi government controlling his civilian population with all of its and its allies magnificent Firepower

I believe the civilian population have the upper hand regardless of the Firepower against them if not then how come China couldn't take Gandhi

Less than 1% of the USA's population is in the military forces

I think the only way they can take the civilian population is if they are weak the civilians that is and it is getting that way ever so quickly we were once a strong people politicians are changing that

I don't think he would have ever said anything about it if they weren't really afraid it might happen think about that

And let's see that stupid old man launch a nuke at the USA let's see that play out

To be fair, while the US military could ABSOLUTELY crush a civilian uprising if it didn't hold back at all and no military personel dissented and stayed loyal to the government, I highly doubt that is how it would play out. If they bomb and nuke it's own cities, sure that might wipe out any resistance, but also wipe out factories, farms, and kill anyone who might still be loyal. Tanks and bombers would simply cause too much collateral damage to be used against most major cities. Then you got the fact that foreign powers might intervene or try to capitalize on a revolt. Then there's bound to be military folks who wouldn't be willing to attack their fellow citizens.

All in all, If the government ever ended up fighting their own civilians, I think it would be a pyrrhic victory at best. Tons of damage to infrastructure, massive loss of life, etc. At worst, a coup may happen, and the generals of the military might just put a bullet in the folks who order them to attack their own country. Hopefully we never see anything like this happen though. Still, not a smart thing for Biden to say, but that's hardly surprising.

Mack wrote:i wonder if the Afghan government can control its civilian population or how about the Iraqi government controlling his civilian population with all of its and its allies magnificent Firepower

I believe the civilian population have the upper hand regardless of the Firepower against them if not then how come China couldn't take Gandhi

Less than 1% of the USA's population is in the military forces

I think the only way they can take the civilian population is if they are weak the civilians that is and it is getting that way ever so quickly we were once a strong people politicians are changing that

I don't think he would have ever said anything about it if they weren't really afraid it might happen think about that

And let's see that stupid old man launch a nuke at the USA let's see that play out

Gandhi?

yeah i think it was them who china tried to enslave but gandhi and his followers peacefully and at great costs of lives refused to work for them

Mack wrote:yeah i think it was them who china tried to enslave but gandhi and his followers peacefully and at great costs of lives refused to work for them

?

*sighs*

yeah i know

Mack, if you're talking about the ghandi I think you're talking about, which I think you are given you mentioned he acted peacefully, then China as far as I know had no real conflict with him- Ghandi protested British rule in India, and it was largely the British who had an issue with him.

I admit, not super knowledgeable on Ghandi, but I do know that he did a lot to break British power in India, all with nonviolence and peace. A lot of which was later used by Martin Luther King Jr.

Edit- though if you are talking about a different Ghandi, then do feel free to mention that. I'm sure there were other folks with that name, that I simply do not know about.