Originally Posted by MrLiberty

Just to back up what AZYWinger is saying obama and his EPA are being sued by Alaska for implementing parts of a treaty not yet ratified.

Alaska sues the Obama regime over new costly shipping regulations illegally implemented by the EPA America's Watchtower

obama has proven time and again that he doesn't need permission to do what he wants. If congress doesn't bend to his will he just implements whatever he want to anyways.

Originally Posted by Dave1

Political suicide is not reality mlurp.....



This fairly tale makes it's rounds around NRA circles everyday but, no city or state in our great country will stand for our 2nd Amendment rights being taken away by any foreign entity........


When push comes to shove, there will be a battle and armed citizen armies will not give up.....


Hank Jr.....

Because you can’t starve us out
And you cant makes us run
Cuz we're them old boys raised on shotgun
And we say grace and we say Ma’am
And if you ain’t into that we don’t give a damn

Originally Posted by mlurp

Manitou, what you say and what is, leaves a lot of room from insane, to reality.

1. B-4 the announcement plans & Marshall Law will be ready to be used if need be a few days later.

2. During that time the US Govt., her agencies will listen to chatter from home phones, cell phones, e-mail and even the mail.

3. To put down any actions starting to take place, Marshall Law will be put in place, the last one Obama signed. Why?

Simple it doesn't require any reasons to be the source of it's use. But you can check and see if I have that right. You can start here or do your own search...

Also there is one 1 from 2011 you need to read.

The last Marshall Law Obama signed in May of 2012 - Yahoo! Search Results

And your assuming this part of your scenario based on how you see it will prevail, I quote..



1, He isn't a dictator he is the POTUS and as commander in chief most if not all military personel will follow orders they receive.

Some might check home to be sure their families are not involved. But that would depend on several situations from the chain of command.

I can agree with some of what you said about the POTUS but in my reality your not playing wit a full deck of cards.

And I mean that in a friendly way Manitou, believe me. One thing I do know is when orders are given those it is given to say Yes Sir.

To do other wise means an Artical 15 or a seat in front of 5 officers while you are under arrest from the moment you defied the order, in a Court Martial that will strip you of everything if this order was given in times of War or National Security Issues.

Because in both one can be held for a death sentence.

Originally Posted by mlurp

Look Manitou let me ask you one thing, just one thing! And it is more important than anything we discuss.

Documents from the Continental Congress and the Constitutional Convention, 1774-1789


In Congress, July 4, 1776. The unanimous declaration of the thirteen United States of America.

IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776.
THE UNANIMOUS
DECLARATION
OF THE
THIRTEEN UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

WHEN, in the Course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume, among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's GOD entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the Causes which impel them to the Separation.

We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their CREATOR, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

All from page one.. If this is your answer to a simple question, again I ask why hasn't the American people reacted to replace any of our past leaders or the present ones, from both houses & the POTUS?

And both you Dave1 and Manitou, pass it over to allow for armed reaction when the American people have yet to use the one tool to achive what is in our best interest and could have avoided many of todays many problems, from our debt moving down wards.

Why is it when our most important documents, as I place both this and our
Constitution hand in hand.

This document allows use to replace our govt., at any time if we have enough people for it. Yet not once has it been tried...


American Memory from the Library of Congress))

So can you give me a good reason why it has not been done when our Congress & Senate have scored so low as they have in the last 8 years+?

Originally Posted by GottaGo

He and TRY and do it. But do you really think any American would comply?

Originally Posted by MrLiberty

If reelected he will sign the treaty and enact the parts he can, with or without congress.

And yes, I do think there will be Americans who would turn in their guns if asked to do so. And I'd bet you'd be surprised as to how many would.

Originally Posted by mlurp

And they don't need the basic troops to overwhelm any armed citizens meaning to take control of the Govt., when they have well trained Rangers, Special Forces, Night Hawks, Seals Teams, Special ops, and Delta Forces among others who do follow orders.

Originally Posted by Manitou

They also are required to disobey all illegal orders, whether they believe it or not. I still say the Armed Forces majority hate their commander-in-chief, and from the top on down they will tell him to go to Hell. An illegal order makes all following orders irrelevant from that point. Anyway, all the Armed Forces will do is re-establish the government after they relieve the idiot in command. It is done within the branches themselves. It will be done Military to civilian commander.

I'm also having a difficult time trying to figure out how this "Americans against sycophants" war will not be a war of attrition, unlike the Iraqi and Afghanistan campaigns, for the millions of armed to the teeth Americans who will not surrender, and who do not go by any ROE.

Originally Posted by GottaGo

Maybe I would be surprised.

But I don't know a single person of my real life aquaintence who would, and that numbers many.

Originally Posted by mlurp

Good luck and I am out of this thread as my comments/opinions have little affect in the thinking of either side of this issue.

Originally Posted by MrLiberty

If reelected he will sign the treaty and enact the parts he can, with or without congress.

And yes, I do think there will be Americans who would turn in their guns if asked to do so. And I'd bet you'd be surprised as to how many would.