These dudes want the American Empire to get the fuck out of Vermont... - Polidicks - Facepunch Forum

These dudes want the American Empire to get the fuck out of Vermont...

177 replies, posted
In This Thread

[QUOTE=Perfumly;19663561]ur argument is crumbling[/QUOTE] Well first of all, I hardly think you crying thee word troll is any sort of rebuttal. so uh, nice try though. no, my argument is not "crumbling" you braindead child.

[QUOTE=Hunterbrute;19628438]Couldnt have said it better myself. Bringing up the indians doesnt count, you might as well bring up the slave trade, it wont help your argument.[/QUOTE] I'm in support of a lot of conservative ideas and even [I]I [/I]think you're an idiot. [editline]11:56AM[/editline] And secession from the union is stupid. (a) you need congressional approval to leave (fairly certain, too lazy to look it up) (b) what the hell is going to stop the US military from invading the state and retaking it? The Highway Patrol?

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;19663580]What argument?[/QUOTE] emperor scorpious at the tail end of the the conversation trying to pry himself in because he's too braindead to respond accordingly? my god, stop the fucking presses [editline]09:00PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Strider_07;19667000][B]I'm in support of a lot of conservative ideas [/B]and even [I]I [/I]think you're an idiot.[/quote] Are you in therapy? [quote]And secession from the union is stupid. [/quote] So if the union became some crazy right wing dictatorship, you would still say it's stupid? [quote](a) you need congressional approval to leave (fairly certain, too lazy to look it up) [/quote] that kind of... uh goes against the idea of SECESSION also, you're wrong btw, if you're too lazy, don't bring it up [quote](b) what the hell is going to stop the US military from invading the state and retaking it? The Highway Patrol?[/QUOTE] posse comitatus [editline]09:07PM[/editline] didn't we just fucking go over this

[QUOTE=Trotsky;19667041]Are you in therapy?[/QUOTE] No, I don't believe that putting everything in the hands of the goernment is the answer to all problems. [QUOTE=Trotsky]So if the union became some crazy right wing dictatorship, you would still say it's stupid?[/QUOTE] I'm fairly certain Obama's administration isn't a crazy right wing dictatorship, and even so the force that Vermont could muster should it secede from the union would not be powerful enough to overwhelm the military. I support ideas that are on one side of the political spectrum, therefore I clearly ooze liquid malevolence. [QUOTE=Trotsky]also, you're wrong btw, if you're too lazy, don't bring it up[/QUOTE] I really don't care [QUOTE=Trotsky]posse comitatus[/QUOTE] Good luck taking on tanks with random armed civilians. Unless you're talking about the Posse Comitatus act, which has no bearing on it because they're quelling an insurrection, not acting as law enforcement. I'm not even arguing against you what the hell are you doing Oh right I forgot that conservative automatically means I'm a republican to you. Protip: I don't like either major party.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;19664077]Success in secession![/QUOTE] I was going to say "I hope they succeed in seceding". But I was pretty sure I spelt seceding wrong when it read "I hope they succeed in succeeding" which is just downsy.

Vermont is part of the US, so VT is in US, so VT can get out of US. Fuck you VT. Your syrup sucks!

[QUOTE=Strider_07;19667464]No, I don't believe that putting everything in the hands of the goernment is the answer to all problems.[/quote] Well your opinion is pretty cool and all, but too bad it ain't never worked dawg. [quote]I'm fairly certain Obama's administration isn't a crazy right wing dictatorship,[/quote] it was an example. [quote]and even so the force that Vermont could muster should it secede from the union would not be powerful enough to overwhelm the military.[/quote] uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh who said they're going to secede by blowing shit up? [quote]I support ideas that are on one side of the political spectrum, therefore I clearly ooze liquid malevolence.[/quote] well, when your side of the political spectrum clearly ooze's liquid malevolence, then yes, you are in support of it. [quote]Good luck taking on tanks with random armed civilians.[/QUOTE] you know who else said something like that? the British before the revolutionary war. [editline]09:53PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Strider_07;19667464]Unless you're talking about the Posse Comitatus act, which has no bearing on it because they're quelling an insurrection, not acting as law enforcement. [/quote] Read: Lamkist's post [quote]Oh right I forgot that conservative automatically means I'm a republican to you. Protip: I don't like either major party.[/QUOTE] I don't buy too much into American political parties.

[QUOTE=Trotsky;19668068][quote]Good luck taking on tanks with random armed civilians.[/quote] you know who else said something like that? the British before the revolutionary war.[/QUOTE] Trotsky, I usually stay out of arguments that you are in because you come off as a mean-spirited bastard. But that last statement was :downs: on so many levels.

i wasn't implying the British had tanks

[QUOTE=Trotsky;19668294]i wasn't implying the British had tanks[/QUOTE] I know. What I'm saying is that back during the Revolutionary war, it was mostly rifle vs rifle. And pretty much everyone in the colonies at the time had a rifle. The British had superior training, yeah, but the colonials had guerrilla tactics. Fast forward to today, and most citizens don't even own a gun, or at most a hunting rifle.

fine, what about French guerrillas in WW2? Or Russians?

[QUOTE=DiscoPony;19668414]I know. What I'm saying is that back during the Revolutionary war, it was mostly rifle vs rifle. And pretty much everyone in the colonies at the time had a rifle. The British had superior training, yeah, but the colonials had guerrilla tactics. Fast forward to today, and most citizens don't even own a gun, or at most a hunting rifle.[/QUOTE] This is Vermont we're talking about. Every family at least has a hunting rifle.

[QUOTE=Trotsky;19668479]fine, what about French guerrillas in WW2? Or Russians?[/QUOTE] The French Guerillas didn't really achieve much until OSS and MI5 started giving them weapons. I can't see a major country supporting the secession of Vermont. The Russians accomplished what they did in WW2 because they flung huge masses of men straight at the target until it was overwhelmed. That tactic wouldn't work in a civil war where one side is vastly superior in both numbers and weaponry. This is all making the silly assumption that Vermont would actually secede from the Union and that anyone would actually care enough about Vermont to want it back.

[QUOTE=Strider_07;19668609]The French Guerillas didn't really achieve much until OSS and MI5 started giving them weapons. I can't see a major country supporting the secession of Vermont. [/quote] It's not a matter of reaching goals, but a matter of holding your own. and you can't really know that for sure [quote]The Russians accomplished what they did in WW2 because they flung huge masses of men straight at the target until it was overwhelmed. [/quote] Call of duty is not history. [quote]That tactic wouldn't work in a civil war where one side is vastly superior in both numbers and weaponry.[/quote] you're [quote]This is all making the silly assumption that Vermont would actually secede from the Union and that anyone would actually care enough about Vermont to want it back.[/QUOTE] And you're silly to think that if Vermont succeeds, there's going to be an epic battle.

[QUOTE=Trotsky;19668861]It's not a matter of reaching goals, but a matter of holding your own. and you can't really know that for sure [/QUOTE] You're right, the supplies brought into France by the Allies served no purpose in furthering the destabilization of Hitler's forces. It was all the cunning nature of French civilians. [QUOTE=Trotsky;19668861]Call of duty is not history. [/QUOTE] So you're saying that the Soviet Union never attempted shitstorm charges straight at German forces? That would certainly explain the absurdly skewed death toll between the Germans and the Soviets, now wouldn't it :downs: The Penal battalions had nothing to do with this either. [QUOTE=Trotsky;19668861]And you're silly to think that if Vermont succeeds, there's going to be an epic battle.[/QUOTE] I'm not saying there's going to be an epic battle, I'm telling you that Vermont isn't going to secede because it's a stupid idea.

[QUOTE=Strider_07;19669047]You're right, the supplies brought into France by the Allies served no purpose in furthering the destabilization of Hitler's forces. It was all the cunning nature of French civilians. [/quote] way to skip the point A+ will read again [quote]So you're saying that the Soviet Union never attempted shitstorm charges straight at German forces?[/quote] the only time I've heard about that human wave tactic is in Enemy at the gates and Call of duty. And it was denounced by scores of Red Army veterans in the battle of Stalingrad. [quote]That would certainly explain the absurdly skewed death toll between the Germans and the Soviets, now wouldn't it :downs: The Penal battalions had nothing to do with this either.[/quote] The high death toll is due to the Germans being more advanced as well as the fact Russia isn't really that warm the penal battalion only had about a 1000 men in it. you can stop trying now, you're not getting too far I'm not saying there's going to be an epic battle, I'm telling you that Vermont isn't going to secede because it's a stupid idea.[/QUOTE] [editline]10:50PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Strider_07;19669047] I'm not saying there's going to be an epic battle, I'm telling you that Vermont isn't going to secede because it's a stupid idea.[/QUOTE] and you're argument is not going to fly because it's a stupid argument see, I can make pointless comments too

I'm still waiting for your response as to why you started this, I was agreeing with you in the first place.

Fuck I don't even know can't be arsed to go back

[QUOTE=Strider_07;19669047] So you're saying that the Soviet Union never attempted shitstorm charges straight at German forces? That would certainly explain the absurdly skewed death toll between the Germans and the Soviets, now wouldn't it :downs: The Penal battalions had nothing to do with this either.[/QUOTE] They did in the winter war (mostly due to inexperience), and in the early months of barbarossa (mostly because of a combination of the inexperience of minor officers and desperation), but it wasn't used on a grand scale by professional commanders such as Zhukov or Konev. After 1941 the 'human wave', along with many other flaws in the red army (such as their huge amount of light tanks and inferior aircraft) faded into obscurity with the development of the red army. The death toll on the eastern front wasn't very skewed, 5 million dead axis to 9 million dead for the soviets, when you take into account the fact that 1-3 million soviet dead were PoWs killed in captivity, that the red army was hardly the professional military that germany was, and in the opening stages of the war the red army was unprepared. Also penal battalions have [i]everything[/i] to do with it, as they frequently made up a large chunk of the front line and were usually the people used in a 'human wave'. They weren't valued very much.

[QUOTE=gerbils_alt_2;19668022]Fuck you VT. Your syrup sucks![/QUOTE] That's blasphemy sir.

[QUOTE=Trotsky;19668479]fine, what about French guerrillas in WW2? Or Russians?[/QUOTE] The Russians were almost completely overwhelmed on all fronts until the 1941 winter. After the winter it bought the Russians time to organize and equip their troops. In the case of Vermont there is barely any equipment to give. In a modern war you need to have proper equipment otherwise you will be destroyed by advanced technology. [editline]08:02AM[/editline] [QUOTE=Strider_07;19669047] So you're saying that the Soviet Union never attempted shitstorm charges straight at German forces? That would certainly explain the absurdly skewed death toll between the Germans and the Soviets, now wouldn't it :downs: The Penal battalions had nothing to do with this either. [/QUOTE] Actually, no. Any human wave strategy used were used when the red army was in disarray. Once they became organized and equipped that strategy wasn't used. It was a waste of manpower and equipment vitally needed.

If Vermont seriously withdrew itself from the union, and the US invaded, there will no doubt be fanatics from across the country that will go to Vermont to "fight the US". I'm not claiming hundreds of thousands, but perhaps a few hundred. And what of the Vermont born people in the Army, Marines, and Navy? Will they be retained under suspicion or fear of desertion? This won't be a simple, small conflict between Vermont and the US. There will be many Americans who don't live in Vermont who will support their cause and may even act on it, in any way they think is right.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but America isn't an empire.

I live in Vermont, and I'm pretty sure nothing will happen. People are all talk here. Mostly just sit around and brag how they don't eat meat and grow their own weed. funfact: Vermont is the 2nd most alcoholic state behind Alaska, but it is also the healthiest state.

[QUOTE=Virtanen;19685496]Sorry to burst your bubble, but America isn't an empire.[/QUOTE] Really? Since when? No one informed me.

reminds me of the Falklands in a kind of way.

[QUOTE=Virtanen;19685496]Sorry to burst your bubble, but America isn't an empire.[/QUOTE] I present to you His Imperial Majesty Emperor Joshua Abraham Norton I [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/04/His-Imperial-Majesty-Emperor-Norton-I-portrait-crop.jpg[/img] Long live the Emperor!

[QUOTE=Virtanen;19685496]Sorry to burst your bubble, but America isn't an empire.[/QUOTE] Then America has a lot of land to hand back and a lot of military bases to close down

Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.