>>520261852
>As a foreigner in this scenario, it baffles me how liberals think they have the slightest chance of winning when the geography, the percentage of armed population, and most importantly the food and water is against them. They just won't have the logistics to waltz everywhere around them, and even if they tried, they would be faced with guerilla warfare of the most terrible kind. And for the rest, they would be besieged in their urban areas running out of water, food, potentially electricity, being shelled 24/7, while hungry nogs are rioting and the blue haired division is having a panic attack. Even the highly trained spooks and their fancy toys aren't numerous enough to cover the whole battle area. Blue Cities like Washington DC and especially Seattle are ridiculously vulnerable and close to conservative hotbeds. It's going to be a one sided slaughter and these guys literally live in an alternate version of reality where they think their urban hive is everything in the world
4chan Search
3 results for "bda6d036e4df489534e2f120fe5a8cfd"
>>515480110
>>515480769
>Muh gun control!!!!!
Right, because a man being murdered in a "gun free zone" where all attendees are screened to ensure they have no arms on them, surrounded by private security, with the premise supposedly secured and patrolled by local police .. means we should just give up all our firearms and trust those same incompetent police to protect us if something happens. Makes complete sense! Fucking retard.
I wonder if that shooter and his geriatric jewish accomplice would have been so bold if they knew they'd face the prospect of being fired back at by every face in the crowd? I wonder why these tragedies always seem to happen in ether "gun free zones" or in states with the tightest, most draconian gun control measures. Can't possibly be a correlation there, could there be? And I'm sure that the fact that the vast, vast majority of gun owners being Republicans has nothing at all to do with the narrative that gun control is a must.
>>515480769
>Muh gun control!!!!!
Right, because a man being murdered in a "gun free zone" where all attendees are screened to ensure they have no arms on them, surrounded by private security, with the premise supposedly secured and patrolled by local police .. means we should just give up all our firearms and trust those same incompetent police to protect us if something happens. Makes complete sense! Fucking retard.
I wonder if that shooter and his geriatric jewish accomplice would have been so bold if they knew they'd face the prospect of being fired back at by every face in the crowd? I wonder why these tragedies always seem to happen in ether "gun free zones" or in states with the tightest, most draconian gun control measures. Can't possibly be a correlation there, could there be? And I'm sure that the fact that the vast, vast majority of gun owners being Republicans has nothing at all to do with the narrative that gun control is a must.
BOOGALO EXPLAINED pt2
>The military term for this is target denial. When you're against a military with air superiority, heavy weapons, or huge stand-off capability, you defeat this by never gathering in large numbers, and avoid open combat. Instead, you rely completely on ambush attacks using small groups, improvised explosives, or rockets if you've got them--as the enemy is gathering in large numbers.
>The goal is not to win, but to make the financial cost of the war too high to continue.
>The military term for this is target denial. When you're against a military with air superiority, heavy weapons, or huge stand-off capability, you defeat this by never gathering in large numbers, and avoid open combat. Instead, you rely completely on ambush attacks using small groups, improvised explosives, or rockets if you've got them--as the enemy is gathering in large numbers.
>The goal is not to win, but to make the financial cost of the war too high to continue.