If America went totalitarian, where would you go?

[The Dude]

Interested in hearing some of your ideas or plans. Where would you go and what would you do? What countries do you think hypothetically would be welcoming to American refugees?

[Lucille]

Leaving America Redux: Sovereign Man's "Next Steps" Guide To Expats-In-Waiting (http://www.zerohedge.com/article/leaving-america-redux-sovereign-mans-next-steps-guide-expats-waiting)

[pcosmar]

If America went totalitarian, where would you go?

to War.



I start fightin' a war, I guarantee, you'll see somethin' new.
Capt. Malcolm Reynolds:

[Feeding the Abscess]

UP Michigan

[silentshout]

I guess france, but only because i could get citizenship there easily. I don't like their system though. Maybe Italy. But honestly, i prefer tropical locales, maybe costa rica.

[speciallyblend]

costa rica or central colorado or Upmichigan;) or an unknown farm in minnesota:) unless someone knows of other locations:)

[aravoth]

There are no more "new worlds".

If we want to preserve freedom and liberty, and give the human race any hope of re-discovering the raw power of the unrestrained individual, then this is where we have to make our stand.

[Guitarzan]

Trick question. We wouldn't be going anywhere.

[Anti Federalist]

If America went totalitarian, where would you go?

to War.

+rep

There's nowhere to run to, boys, nowhere to hide.

The handful of countries, that are not already worse off than we are in the world, would shut their doors so quick it would make your head spin.

It's make a stand here and stop this shit now, or resign ourselves and our posterity to a thousand years of a totalitarian, new world order, dark age, where any concept of freedom, as we understand it, will cease to exist.

[Mike4Freedom]

If America went totalitarian, where would you go?

to War.

Ding Ding! We have a winner!

[Thomas]

if?

[Mike4Freedom]

There are a lot of countries that have economic freedoms. New zealand has more economic freedom then us but they have very restrictive gun laws. Canada now has more economic freedom then us believe it or not, but they have restrictive gun laws.

You can't outrun what is going on, it will catch up to you. When you run you are just temporarily avoiding it.

It is better to stand your ground.

[Peace&Freedom]

What do you mean, IF it went totalitarian? By most objective structural standards, we have already moved there. The laws, regulations, policies and case law is nearly all in place now, just dormant or selectively enforced. All that is needed is another false flag event to trigger a more formal, universal and overt lockdown. This is one reason anti-war activists and 9/11 truthers keep drawing attention to false flags---as long as they keep being exposed, it delays the manufacture of a new such incident to trigger martial law, or to act as pretext for a new war based on lies.

[t0rnado]

You could easily buy land in the middle of the Ozarks or somewhere in Montana and live without much government interference if it was necessary.

[Anti Federalist]

What do you mean, IF it went totalitarian? By most objective structural standards, we have already moved there. The laws, regulations, policies and case law is nearly all in place now, just dormant or selectively enforced. All that is needed is another false flag event to trigger a more formal, universal and overt lockdown. This is one reason anti-war activists and 9/11 truthers keep drawing attention to false flags---as long as they keep being exposed, it delays the manufacture of a new such incident to trigger martial law, or to act as pretext for a new war based on lies.

That ^^^^ +1776

[fisharmor]

War?

I don't like the idea of being one of a couple hundred people who would be gunned down in the street, followed by a total media blackout/cover up, and nobody knowing it even happened for a decade or more, and nobody caring for 50 years.
And let's be realistic about what it would be, if it came to classical "war".

I would hope that everyone would realize the futility of saying "I'm grabbing my rifle and fixing this". The character of the conflict that would happen will involve the government's established definition of terrorism. (Shit, they're already calling us terrorists for having certain bumper stickers - imagine what even verbal defiance will soon entail.)

So perhaps prudence in talking about war is called for.

[pcosmar]

What do you mean, IF it went totalitarian? By most objective structural standards, we have already moved there. The laws, regulations, policies and case law is nearly all in place now, just dormant or selectively enforced. All that is needed is another false flag event to trigger a more formal, universal and overt lockdown. This is one reason anti-war activists and 9/11 truthers keep drawing attention to false flags---as long as they keep being exposed, it delays the manufacture of a new such incident to trigger martial law, or to act as pretext for a new war based on lies.

This is true. Many say the line was crossed long ago. Also true.
There are casualties, and POWs.

I am a peaceful man (given my druthers) part old hippy. I don't want to start something that would be destructive to many. So I wait and endure (with disgust) what I see around me.
I have my line. A point at which it will not matter anymore.
Then this old hippy will use every bit of esoteric knowledge I got from the Army, Prison, Smuggling and and a lifetime of working with my brain and hands, to raise as much hell as I am able against the enemies of Liberty.

I ain't runnin".
:mad:

[freshjiva]

Agreed. Even though I could probably get Indian citizenship easily, I'd love to be a part of a massive popular anti-State uprising. American Revolution Part II.

[pcosmar]

Agreed. Even though I could probably get Indian citizenship easily, I'd love to be a part of a massive popular anti-State uprising. American Revolution Part II.

I have real doubts about it being popular.
:(

[StateHate]

if?

+1

[Anti Federalist]

I have real doubts about it being popular.
:(

Not even close to "popular".

I'd reckon a full 80 percent of the population would view us as the dangerous terrorists that government is already claiming we are, ready to turn us in at moment's notice, happy to help the state in it's effort to stamp out the anti government radicals.

[TNforPaul45]

Once it goes full blown totalitarian, they will close the borders (finally, and ironically). No one in, no one out.

There will be no where to go.

[Heimdallr]

I'd stay right here on the "Rock"

Probably move to some outport such as this:

http://www.legendtours.ca/scenicphoto/Durrells.jpg

[Nate-ForLiberty]

Washington D.C.

[Anti Federalist]

And you wondered why I questioned you about moving to Newfoundland? ;)

That has to be one of the prettiest sights I've ever seen.




I'd stay right here on the "Rock"

Probably move to some outport such as this:

http://www.legendtours.ca/scenicphoto/Durrells.jpg

[hazek]

Not even close to "popular".

I'd reckon a full 80 percent of the population would view us as the dangerous terrorists that government is already claiming we are, ready to turn us in at moment's notice, happy to help the state in it's effort to stamp out the anti government radicals.

Welcome to Nazi Germany in 1938.

It's repeating it self, only this time there's no other nations who would or even could fight it.

[Anti Federalist]

Welcome to Nazi Germany in 1938.

It's repeating it self, only this time there's no other nations who would or even could fight it.


http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t205/watstearns/fascism_goering_60_eft.jpg

Goering's comments were made, not at the trial, but recorded by a German speaking intelligence officer named Gustave Gilbert, who published his diaries of interviews of Nuremberg defendants in 1947.

His observation to Goering that prompted that comment is worth noting:



Gilbert - We got around to the subject of war again and I said that, contrary to his attitude, I did not think that the common people are very thankful for leaders who bring them war and destruction.

Goering - "Why, of course, the people don't want war," Goering shrugged. "Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship."

Gilbert - "There is one difference," I pointed out. "In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars." (Not anymore Mr. Gilbert, not anymore. - AF)

Goering - "Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

Gilbert, G.M. Nuremberg Diary.
New York: Farrar, Straus and Company, 1947 (pp. 278-279).


We are two degrees of separation away from a totalitarian nightmare just as bad if not worse than the horrors of NAZI Germany or Stalinist Russia.

And, just like then, nobody but a fringe element of refuseniks and agitators gives a fuck.

[BuddyRey]

If America goes (more) totalitarian, the government will be so bloated, backlogged, and inept that there's no way they'll be able to track down every cell of resistance in their own backyard. The smart thing, IMO, would be to find some relatively unpopulated spot in the continental U.S. to wait things out. My money's on Wyoming.

[Vessol]

Montana. /thread

[heavenlyboy34]

If y'all want a good place to hide out when TSHTF, we've got loads of mountains and canyons and mines here in AZ (including the granddaddy of canyons, the Grand Canyon). We've got rivers and other resources to tide us over. The desert in the southern half of the State is similar to the mideast-dry and hot as hell during the summer. The northern half is cool and gets plenty of snow in the winter. Good for mounting a resistance.

[heavenlyboy34]

If America goes (more) totalitarian, the government will be so bloated, backlogged, and inept that there's no way they'll be able to track down every cell of resistance in their own backyard. The smart thing, IMO, would be to find some relatively unpopulated spot in the continental U.S. to wait things out. My money's on Wyoming.

Isn't Wyoming mostly flat, though? Doesn't seem like a good place to mount a resistance from to me. As far as unpopulated places goes, northern AZ isn't very populated outside of the cities at all. There are also vast stretches of open land in Southern AZ.

[1000-points-of-fright]

To the gun safe.

[GunnyFreedom]

There is a difference between running away and falling back. If it devolves into the Orwellian nightmare of our worst imaginings, I'll fall back to the Lakotah Nation, hang out around Wyo MT and Dakota for the regroup.

[GunnyFreedom]

Isn't Wyoming mostly flat, though? Doesn't seem like a good place to mount a resistance from to me. As far as unpopulated places goes, northern AZ isn't very populated outside of the cities at all. There are also vast stretches of open land in Southern AZ.

Yellowstone in the Rockies is flat?? :eek:

http://www.fas.org/irp/imint/docs/rst/Sect6/wy.jpg

Not sure I'd call that flat....

But my money's on WY also.

[Captain Shays]

Might go up to Montana where Pastor Chuck Baldwin is for my last stand. Might go down to my wife's family's farm in South Carolina to make my stand.If I see a bunch of freedom love'in patriots are going up to New Hampshire to make their stand I might go there.

Either way I ain't leave'in this country. I would rather die fighting for freedom than to even consider going to another country. This is MY country and I will kill and I will die for her.

[axiomata]

If America went totalitarian, where would you go?

Trick question. If America went full-totalitarian (you never go full-totalitarian) you're not going anywhere.

[Vessol]

Imagine if all of the liberty minded folks gathered in Idaho, Wyoming, Montana and S+N Dakota..That would be epic.

[2young2vote]

I have real doubts about it being popular.
:(

Yup. Those who fight will be called "Radical Revolutionist Nazi Terrorists" and they will be hunted down like Al-Qaeda. They will be demonized by the State run media and they will literally live the rest of their lives either in hiding or in prison. There will be no place for them to go unless they had all previously congregated in a specific area (kind of like the FSP) where they could live openly opposing the government with others like them.

What are the reasons countries fall according to Ron Paul? He said they fall because of monetary reasons. Their currency gets inflated and it collapses.

going to war with home made devices and simple hand guns would be an automatic failure. You can't take on the state physically, you need to take it on financially. Take every penny you can get but do not become reliant.

If you don't want to fight in any way then i think the best option is to move to the UP of Michigan. Other than Alaska, i think it is the most undeveloped and secluded area in the entire country. If you've ever driven through it then you know that it is just forest for hundreds of miles. You could easily hide and build yourself a small little shack to live in. I'm sure there are places that are more out of the way, but being in a forest means you have access to food to eat, fresh water to drink, snow/cold temperatures to keep your meat good for the winter, and plenty of trees to make any kind of settlement you want.

[JK/SEA]

''He's makin' a list, he's checkin' it twice, he's gonna find out who's naughty or nice......''

just sayin'...

[pcosmar]

If you don't want to fight in any way then i think the best option is to move to the UP of Michigan. Other than Alaska, i think it is the most undeveloped and secluded area in the entire country. If you've ever driven through it then you know that it is just forest for hundreds of miles. You could easily hide and build yourself a small little shack to live in. I'm sure there are places that are more out of the way, but being in a forest means you have access to food to eat, fresh water to drink, snow/cold temperatures to keep your meat good for the winter, and plenty of trees to make any kind of settlement you want.

:D
And it is largely ignored.
It is harsh in the winter, and poor in the summer. and nobody cares (government) about the UP.

To steal from Dune
The UP was made to train the faithful.

The Fremen are more numerous than they think.
;)

[Wesker1982]

You could easily buy land in the middle of the Ozarks or somewhere in Montana and live without much government interference if it was necessary.

:D

When I think about this though, I am reminded of Ruby Ridge.

[Rael]

if america went totalitarian, where would you go?

to war.

+1776

[GunnyFreedom]

Imagine if all of the liberty minded folks gathered in Idaho, Wyoming, Montana and S+N Dakota..That would be epic.

This. Diluted enough to not show up on the radar, but close enough to concentrate as necessary.

[Pericles]

If America went totalitarian, where would you go?

to War.

Correct answer - and yes we are essentially already there. But, so is the war - it is currently in a cold state being waged in the communications battlespace, but can change at any time.

[Bergie Bergeron]

New Hampshire would go rogue.

[puppetmaster]

If America went totalitarian, where would you go?

to War.

brilliant

[Vessol]

New Hampshire would go rogue.

NH is surrounded by too many Statists and Socialists :(. That's why the state surrounding Montana are best. Wide open area :)

[YumYum]

NH is surrounded by too many Statists and Socialists :(. That's why the state surrounding Montana are best. Wide open area :)

I lived in Livingston Montana and I live in the Ozarks. Both regions are dominated by inbreds. If there is tyranny they would be dangerous places to live.

[Vessol]

I know a few people who live in Livingston, I lived in Bozeman myself. Inbreds? Wut?

[GunnyFreedom]

I lived in Livingston Montana and I live in the Ozarks. Both regions are dominated by inbreds. If there is tyranny they would be dangerous places to live.

That's the silliest thing I have ever heard WRT MT. The biggest problem MT has is a liberal californication infestation. I know lots of people from MT, and one is right now 3 foot away from my right elbow. Perhaps your perception of rural communities is distorted by a perception filter?

[Vessol]

Yeah, Californianication is pretty bad in Montana. I'd agree that many from Montana may come off as hawkish, but for most there as well as the surrounding states- a libertarian streak is very common.

[YumYum]

That's the silliest thing I have ever heard WRT MT. The biggest problem MT has is a liberal californication infestation. I know lots of people from MT, and one is right now 3 foot away from my right elbow. Perhaps your perception of rural communities is distorted by a perception filter?

Depends of where you are in Montana. The railroad communities are very harsh and are very clannish. Livingston is a railroad community.

[Vessol]

Depends of where you are in Montana. The railroad communities are very harsh and are very clannish. Livingston is a railroad community.

Well I'll agree that many of the railroad communities may be full of old families, primarily due to the decline of the railroad and dying economies there. Harsh? I don't know what you mean by that. Perhaps you could provide an example?

[GunnyFreedom]

Depends of where you are in Montana. The railroad communities are very harsh and are very clannish. Livingston is a railroad community.

Livingston, MT? Sweet, do you know Mack and Jan? :D (No, I'm not just making them up...)

ETA -- If not them, maybe Ray and Jim? (Father and son respectively). Maybe Jim and Katie? they used to date. Totally unrelated by the way...

[YumYum]

My parents owned a ranch next to Jeff Bridges. The Livingston natives hated all the big money and Californians moving into Paradise Valley. My dad kicked out the caretakers because of incest. First cousin marriages are common in Livingston. Bozeman is a totally different world. It is more liberal because of the University and because of the amount of out-of-staters who had moved there.

[YumYum]

Livingston, MT? Sweet, do you know Mack and Jan? :D (No, I'm not just making them up...)

ETA -- If not them, maybe Ray and Jim? (Father and son respectively). Maybe Jim and Katie? they used to date. Totally unrelated by the way...

I know Dave Viers and the Busbys.

[GunnyFreedom]

My parents owned a ranch next to Jeff Bridges. The Livingston natives hated all the big money and Californians moving into Paradise Valley. My dad kicked out the caretakers because of incest. First cousin marriages are common in Livingston. Bozeman is a totally different world. It is more liberal because of the University and because of the amount of out-of-staters who had moved there.

So you took one, single, incident and projected it onto a whole town and by extension then a whole state?

I have, again, at my elbow a person who has spent years around Paradise, Thompson Falls, and Livingston, and she says you are simply not speaking the truth.

ETA -- She does know Jeff Bridges, and the town gossip is that Jeff Bridges IS incestuous, but that this is confined to him and his family. Jeff married his stepmother's niece, so they were 1st cousins by marriage and not by blood. Perhaps Jeff is where you are getting this 1st cousin thing?

[Vessol]

My parents owned a ranch next to Jeff Bridges. The Livingston natives hated all the big money and Californians moving into Paradise Valley. My dad kicked out the caretakers because of incest. First cousin marriages are common in Livingston. Bozeman is a totally different world. It is more liberal because of the University and because of the amount of out-of-staters who had moved there.

The reason why they hate the Californian's is because they pricks who don't respect land rights.

Case in point. I remember a case in Paradise Valley(I think) where a rich ass Californian sued a rancher who lived next door because he could smell the crap from the cattle.

The Californians are buying up all the land and not using it. They then buy up Bridger Bowl, the local ski hill, and jack up prices. It's their right as property owners, but that doesn't mean the locals won't bitch about it.

Montanans don't like the big money Californians coming up. It looks like you were one of those big money Californians, so being on the receiving end sours your tastes.

[YumYum]

So you took one, single, incident and projected it onto a whole town and by extension then a whole state?

I have, again, at my elbow a person who has spent years around Paradise, Thompson Falls, and Livingston, and she says you are simply not speaking the truth.

ETA -- She does know Jeff Bridges, and the town gossip is that Jeff Bridges IS incestuous, but that this is confined to him and his family. Jeff married his stepmother's niece, so they were 1st cousins by marriage and not by blood. Perhaps Jeff is where you are getting this 1st cousin thing?

No, as I said, the railroad communities of Montana are much harsher. You have to realize that because of all the Californians and movie stars moving up there many locals became very bitter because they drove up property values and property taxes. A local in Livingston could dream of buying a small piece in Paradise Valley for a reasonable amount until the Californians moved in. Land that once sold for $1,000 an acre is now $100,000 an acre. The people of Livingston were not ready for this change. I've also been to Helena and Havre, and other parts of the state where there is a strong sentiment against non-natives. My parents are friends with couples who are first cousins; its not just the rumors about Jeff Bridges.

[YumYum]

The reason why they hate the Californian's is because they pricks who don't respect land rights.

Case in point. I remember a case in Paradise Valley(I think) where a rich ass Californian sued a rancher who lived next door because he could smell the crap from the cattle.

The Californians are buying up all the land and not using it. They then buy up Bridger Bowl, the local ski hill, and jack up prices. It's their right as property owners, but that doesn't mean the locals won't bitch about it.

Montanans don't like the big money Californians coming up. It looks like you were one of those big money Californians, so being on the receiving end sours your tastes.

Do I sound sour? :confused:

[Vessol]

Do I sound sour? :confused:

Well saying that everyone in a town is hostile and inbred is kind of blanket statement from one encounter. But honestly, this is going way off-topic lol.

[libertythor]

If Sofia gets her way and North America in general falls that direction, I suppose Chile and Paraguay would welcome Americans with some sort of marketable skill.

[YumYum]

Well saying that everyone in a town is hostile and inbred is kind of blanket statement from one encounter. But honestly, this is going way off-topic lol.

Have you ever heard of the "Hutterites"?

[libertythor]

Have you ever heard of the "Hutterites"?

They are kind of like the Amish but around Montana. I have seen them in Livingston, MT, and they seem to be an okay sort.

[YumYum]

They are kind of like the Amish but around Montana. I have seen them in Livingston, MT, and they seem to be an okay sort.

Very nice people. But, they don't marry outside of their group and they were having problems with their kids being hemophiliacs, so they paid male Bozeman college students to have sex with their young women to bring in new blood.

[Anti Federalist]

Very nice people. But, they don't marry outside of their group and they were having problems with their kids being hemophiliacs, so they paid male Bozeman college students to have sex with their young women to bring in new blood.


:confused::eek:

[libertythor]

So they are inbred but not stupid inbred. :D They have the wherewithal to figure out the problem and do something about it without accepting outsiders.

BTW, is their offer still available? :p j/k

[YumYum]

So they are inbred but not stupid inbred. :D They have the wherewithal to figure out the problem and do something about it without accepting outsiders.

BTW, is their offer still available? :p j/k

I'm not sure. Are you a good kisser?

[GunnyFreedom]

I'm not sure. Are you a good kisser?

not if you look like Janet Reno. :D

[raiha]

If America went totalitarian, where would you go?

to War.

It's not really funny if you think about it, but that made me laugh. :D

[Vessol]

Very nice people. But, they don't marry outside of their group and they were having problems with their kids being hemophiliacs, so they paid male Bozeman college students to have sex with their young women to bring in new blood.

False. From what I've gathered this has been a constant story told in various ways in communities that live near Hutterite colonies.

It's a stereotype really. It's like how when someone mentions mormons, the first thing anyone says is "lol, he has tons of wives I bet".

http://www.hutteriteblog.com/2007/04/drunk-blond-blue-eyed-college-boys.html

The problem is that the Hutterites are largely isolationist, so they don't really have much of a chance to deny this.

[Dripping Rain]

Arrr, Lads ill have t' gi'e up my dream o' ha'in' a farmery and a hot wifey and lots o' babies and head t' the sea A pence for an old man o'de sea?
To the Carribean of course me cabin boy
Arrr, t' becomes a pirate
always been facsinated by piracy Garrrrrrr.
http://images.starpulse.com/news/media/south-park-pirates.jpg

[GunnyFreedom]

False. From what I've gathered this has been a constant story told in various ways in communities that live near Hutterite colonies.

It's a stereotype really. It's like how when someone mentions mormons, the first thing anyone says is "lol, he has tons of wives I bet".

http://www.hutteriteblog.com/2007/04/drunk-blond-blue-eyed-college-boys.html (http://www.hutteriteblog.com/2007/04/drunk-blond-blue-eyed-college-boys.html)

The problem is that the Hutterites are largely isolationist, so they don't really have much of a chance to deny this.

Your link seems to have a redirect problem in Firefox. This one points to the same thing without the redirect issue:

http://www.hutteriteblog.com/2007/04/01/drunk-blond-blue-eyed-college-boys-hutterites/

[Stary Hickory]

There are no more "new worlds".

If we want to preserve freedom and liberty, and give the human race any hope of re-discovering the raw power of the unrestrained individual, then this is where we have to make our stand.

I agree, live free or die. Tired of running. But there is more than one way to make a stand, doesn't necessarily have to be violent. But it may very well come to that I guess. Let's hope not.

[pcosmar]

It's not really funny if you think about it, but that made me laugh. :D
Not joking.
It is not something I wish for. Just the opposite. It is something I hope can be avoided

Certainly not something I joke about.
:(

[Pericles]

It's not really funny if you think about it, but that made me laugh. :D
The war is currently underway, if you are one of the adherents of William Lind's 4GW theory.

"In broad terms, fourth generation warfare seems likely to be widely dispersed and largely undefined; the distinction between war and peace will be blurred to the vanishing point. It will be nonlinear, possibly to the point of having no definable battlefields or fronts. The distinction between "civilian" and "military" may disappear. Actions will occur concurrently throughout all participants' depth, including their society as a cultural, not just a physical, entity. Major military facilities, such as airfields, fixed communications sites, and large headquarters will become rarities because of their vulnerability; the same may be true of civilian equivalents, such as seats of government, power plants, and industrial sites (including knowledge as well as manufacturing industries). Success will depend heavily on effectiveness in joint operations as lines between responsibility and mission become very blurred. Again, all these elements are present in third generation warfare; fourth generation will merely accentuate them."

The current battlespace is here:

"Psychological operations may become the dominant operational and strategic weapon in the form of media/information intervention. Logic bombs and computer viruses, including latent viruses, may be used to disrupt civilian as well as military operations. Fourth generation adversaries will be adept at manipulating the media to alter domestic and world opinion to the point where skillful use of psychological operations will sometimes preclude the commitment of combat forces. A major target will be the enemy population's support of its government and the war. Television news may become a more powerful operational weapon than armored divisions."

In summary - conflict occurs across the spectrum, not limited by location, and features a number of actors, with one side on the conflict (usually the side motivated by belief and not the state attempting to maintain control of territory) having a number of entities participating not under a central authority.

The military target is the legitimacy of your opponent to govern. Success consists of actions which decrease that legitimacy in the mind of the population.

[RideTheDirt]

If???

[mrsat_98]

Interested in hearing some of your ideas or plans. Where would you go and what would you do? What countries do you think hypothetically would be welcoming to American refugees?


Should the question read "Since the US has become totalitarian what should we do ?"

[WilliamShrugged]

Grab my Guns, Girlfriend, and dog and move up in the hills.

[heavenlyboy34]

Should the question read "Since the US has become totalitarian what should we do ?"

qft!! :(

[Toureg89]

since i'm learning arabic, and my family owns a home in morocco, that would be the first stop.

however, i'd probably eventually wind up in Switzerland; i love guns.

[RedBloodConservative]

+rep

There's nowhere to run to, boys, nowhere to hide.

The handful of countries, that are not already worse off than we are in the world, would shut their doors so quick it would make your head spin.

It's make a stand here and stop this shit now, or resign ourselves and our posterity to a thousand years of a totalitarian, new world order, dark age, where any concept of freedom, as we understand it, will cease to exist.


Agree 100%. We must stop this Bullshit right now!!!!!!!!!!

BTW where is that Pic in your sig from? I know I have seen it somewhere.

[Anti Federalist]

+rep

There's nowhere to run to, boys, nowhere to hide.

The handful of countries, that are not already worse off than we are in the world, would shut their doors so quick it would make your head spin.

It's make a stand here and stop this shit now, or resign ourselves and our posterity to a thousand years of a totalitarian, new world order, dark age, where any concept of freedom, as we understand it, will cease to exist.

Eight years later, I stand by this.

If pushed, top five choices are Switzerland, Finland, Argentina, Chile, New Zealand.

[Anti Federalist]

The current battlespace is here:

"Psychological operations may become the dominant operational and strategic weapon in the form of media/information intervention. Logic bombs and computer viruses, including latent viruses, may be used to disrupt civilian as well as military operations. Fourth generation adversaries will be adept at manipulating the media to alter domestic and world opinion to the point where skillful use of psychological operations will sometimes preclude the commitment of combat forces. A major target will be the enemy population's support of its government and the war. Television news may become a more powerful operational weapon than armored divisions."

In summary - conflict occurs across the spectrum, not limited by location, and features a number of actors, with one side on the conflict (usually the side motivated by belief and not the state attempting to maintain control of territory) having a number of entities participating not under a central authority.

The military target is the legitimacy of your opponent to govern. Success consists of actions which decrease that legitimacy in the mind of the population.

And that as well.