Or have worked through their denial - accepted death is imminent no matter what you do - and have chosen to die on their feet rather than flee to their persona due to lacking the courage to catalyze action.
Also if you have fought and you’re used to winning and you’re tired of half sized pear shaped faggots acting like their your boss.
I would suggest that you should be seeking the resolution that succeeds with as little bloodshed as possible. This is tactical and strategic planning. Bloodthirsty rage loses battles.
How long are we going to keep pushing the goal posts back? Just today they destroyed the 2nd Amendment. Now we have no right to vote, no free speech, and no 2A rights. How can we even call this the same country? We have no fundamental rights or liberties left.
The Founders explained to us what needed to happen if corruption took hold over every facet of the system and government. But good times created soft men, and we are soft men, so we don't even want to think about the reality of what we would need to do. Freedom has never been ushered in without bloodshed, unfortunately. Hence the phrase, watering the tree of liberty. You said bloodshed loses battles, but our country was formed on bloodshed.
I'm not advocating violence, just making a point in relation to history and the costs of freedom and what the Founders said in regards to corruption and tyranny.
This whole place needs a big Overton window slide - we have to accept there needs to be some before we get to trying to minimize it.
But since you’re a thinker - Which will have more bloodshed
War or genocide?
If your smart enough to identify the velocity and vector we are currently moving at you realize that immediately following disarmament you will have a conservative genocide.
The only way to avoid disarmament is fighting to the death. That fight is here now.
Drawing blood is less bloodshed than waiting until it’s being sprayed on the wall by your enemies and trying to intervene.
War is a million times better than genocide. And genocide is the inevitable end game, as history has repeatedly shown, when good men do nothing against tyrants.
BECAUSE REALITY IS TERRIFYING WE HAVE CHOSEN DENIAL TO ENABLE OUR AVOIDANCE OF WHAT MUST BE DONE
ITS FIGHTING TIME BOYS
THERE IS NO ESCAPE
There are certain truism that are timeless.
One of them is that people who are eager for war usually have never seen it, or are confident that they won't have to fight it.
Or have worked through their denial - accepted death is imminent no matter what you do - and have chosen to die on their feet rather than flee to their persona due to lacking the courage to catalyze action.
Also if you have fought and you’re used to winning and you’re tired of half sized pear shaped faggots acting like their your boss.
War is hell - GENOCIDE IS WORSE
I would suggest that you should be seeking the resolution that succeeds with as little bloodshed as possible. This is tactical and strategic planning. Bloodthirsty rage loses battles.
What other options are there?
Voting? We tried that.
Fighting it in court? We tried that.
Petitioning state legislators? We tried that.
Calling and writing our reps? We tried that.
Protesting? We tried that.
How long are we going to keep pushing the goal posts back? Just today they destroyed the 2nd Amendment. Now we have no right to vote, no free speech, and no 2A rights. How can we even call this the same country? We have no fundamental rights or liberties left.
The Founders explained to us what needed to happen if corruption took hold over every facet of the system and government. But good times created soft men, and we are soft men, so we don't even want to think about the reality of what we would need to do. Freedom has never been ushered in without bloodshed, unfortunately. Hence the phrase, watering the tree of liberty. You said bloodshed loses battles, but our country was formed on bloodshed.
I'm not advocating violence, just making a point in relation to history and the costs of freedom and what the Founders said in regards to corruption and tyranny.
This whole place needs a big Overton window slide - we have to accept there needs to be some before we get to trying to minimize it.
But since you’re a thinker - Which will have more bloodshed
War or genocide?
If your smart enough to identify the velocity and vector we are currently moving at you realize that immediately following disarmament you will have a conservative genocide.
The only way to avoid disarmament is fighting to the death. That fight is here now.
Drawing blood is less bloodshed than waiting until it’s being sprayed on the wall by your enemies and trying to intervene.
War is a million times better than genocide. And genocide is the inevitable end game, as history has repeatedly shown, when good men do nothing against tyrants.