Or is the variable of the government's use of force the difference?
Maybe they felt there was some sanctuary being physically distant from the monarchy, and it gave them the confidence to make a stand?
Comments (20)
sorted by:
Or is the variable of the government's use of force the difference?
Maybe they felt there was some sanctuary being physically distant from the monarchy, and it gave them the confidence to make a stand?
I feel like one major advantage they had was the formation of a coalition while matching the war technology of the British. We are far from matching the government's ability to use force now.
That's not necessarily true. You can pretty much buy anything you want with a 250 dollar Federal License. We have roughly 20-30 million hardened veterans with skillz. To me a 60 ton tank is a road block paper weight.
You falsely assume our military, which are sworn to protect us and the Constitution, will follow unlawful orders and fire on us. I don't believe that for one second.
When it comes to political views, the military is very milquetoast, in my opinion. I talk to a few, and they typically like to copout and say they're libertarians (but maybe they vote republican). This is like 7 or 8 out of 10, at least. Most don't seem to take a principled stand, or care at all about social issues. Then you have the revamping that's going on and who knows what the mentality of the military will be in 10 or 20 years. This retarded generation is on deck to defend America.