🚀 go-pugleaf

[Note follow-ups redirected to people who know about boomsticks and
people who know about low level warfare...]

Merlin Dorfman <dorfman@netcom.com> wrote:
> klaatu (klaatu@clark.net) wrote:
> : George Worley wrote:
>  
> : > >You might want to understand warfare before making such a claim again.
> : > 
> : > Being that I have been around the military for a good majority of my
> : > life, I do understand warfare and in the current state of civilians
> : > bring arms against the government... my money is on the military.
> 
> : But the point here is really this: most of the military would in any case be
> : fighting for the ideal of "America". And they'd clearly know that if they
> : tried to suppress a universal revolt, what would be left would be nothing like
> : the ideal they'd fought for... and so you'd not only have a 250 to 1
> : population difference, much of it armed, to suppress, but also a war against
> : the ideals that the military professes to serve. I guess they'd lose because
> : they wouldn't really want to win.
> 
>      Your stipulation was that the military 100% backed the government.
> I'll grant this is not particularly likely, especially after they saw
> the damage being done, but as long as that stipulation holds, my
> money is on the military.

Actually, my stipulation was that the military was 100% for the
government. I'll even through in the reserves and the NG, if you want to,
and still place my money on a largish civilian uprising.

I would say, as an uninformed guess, that about 10% actively resisting
should be more than enough.

--
"Frankly, Agent Mulder, alien abduction is the more believable option."
			Agent Skinner, X-Files, 3/09/98 [paraphrase] 
-- John E. Jasen  // DNRC Ambassador to Earth \\  jjasen1@umbc.edu --
-- My views are those of the DNRC only. Prepare to be domesticated --