Our forefathers were much braver than us, but it was also a different scenario. Britain was thousands of miles away and was nearly broke after fighting multiple costly wars around the world.
The British weren't truly beaten by the US. We just inflicted enough casualties that they said fuck it, we're too broke for this shit.
A US civil war now would be very different. We'd need to conquer not just win a guerilla campaign of attrition. The Continental Army was also more or less on par in arms with the British regulars. They used similar muskets and cannons. Let me know when the militias start flying F-35s and fielding Howitzers.
If all it took was marching on Washington and killing the people there it would have been done. But, that won't work because the rats will scatter and more rats will replace those who fall. Meanwhile the propaganda machine will run unfettered and everyone who isn't a true patriot will be against you.
The mistake you're making is assuming that the elites want to use fighter jets and artillery on their own cities. Even if they hate the people, they still want the infrastructure and resources to stick around. It would be against their own interests to nuke a city, for example. And even the best PR groups can't win the optics disaster that is firing on your own citizens. I think you'd reach a point where even the police and the military start to deem this as not worth it.
The other mistake you're making is to assume that you can conquer territory with jets and attack helicopters. You need men on the ground to enforce your rule over the land. To put it another way the rebels can't surrender to a drone, nor be policed by a drone. And men on the ground can be harassed by rebels, who don't have to fight by the same rules the soldiers adhere to. Think of the Minute Men, who sniped at the British from the cover of the forest and then ran away. We have access to far more guns than the military, so this kind of harassment would go on forever.
Which brings me to another point. There are millions of veterans living in America. Soldiers that still remember their training. Those soldiers can teach civilians how to fight -- how to live off the land, how to shoot and infiltrate. And imagine all of the explosives experts who will teach civilians how to make effective road side bombs and bombs to throw at combat patrols. Imagine all the technicians who fixed tanks and jets for a living, and will teach the civilians what parts to remove from those vehicles so that they no longer function. And keep in mind those fancy F-35s require fuel, which can be delayed by the rebels harassing the fuel transports. Don't think the war machine can't be disrupted, because it can.
Our forefathers were much braver than us, but it was also a different scenario. Britain was thousands of miles away and was nearly broke after fighting multiple costly wars around the world.
The British weren't truly beaten by the US. We just inflicted enough casualties that they said fuck it, we're too broke for this shit.
A US civil war now would be very different. We'd need to conquer not just win a guerilla campaign of attrition. The Continental Army was also more or less on par in arms with the British regulars. They used similar muskets and cannons. Let me know when the militias start flying F-35s and fielding Howitzers.
If all it took was marching on Washington and killing the people there it would have been done. But, that won't work because the rats will scatter and more rats will replace those who fall. Meanwhile the propaganda machine will run unfettered and everyone who isn't a true patriot will be against you.
The mistake you're making is assuming that the elites want to use fighter jets and artillery on their own cities. Even if they hate the people, they still want the infrastructure and resources to stick around. It would be against their own interests to nuke a city, for example. And even the best PR groups can't win the optics disaster that is firing on your own citizens. I think you'd reach a point where even the police and the military start to deem this as not worth it.
The other mistake you're making is to assume that you can conquer territory with jets and attack helicopters. You need men on the ground to enforce your rule over the land. To put it another way the rebels can't surrender to a drone, nor be policed by a drone. And men on the ground can be harassed by rebels, who don't have to fight by the same rules the soldiers adhere to. Think of the Minute Men, who sniped at the British from the cover of the forest and then ran away. We have access to far more guns than the military, so this kind of harassment would go on forever.
Which brings me to another point. There are millions of veterans living in America. Soldiers that still remember their training. Those soldiers can teach civilians how to fight -- how to live off the land, how to shoot and infiltrate. And imagine all of the explosives experts who will teach civilians how to make effective road side bombs and bombs to throw at combat patrols. Imagine all the technicians who fixed tanks and jets for a living, and will teach the civilians what parts to remove from those vehicles so that they no longer function. And keep in mind those fancy F-35s require fuel, which can be delayed by the rebels harassing the fuel transports. Don't think the war machine can't be disrupted, because it can.