Best Political Cartoons

[davedan]

Why are these people so fragile that they need to protest with Assault rifles and handguns?

[Cloud3514]

Because they think it sends a message that they're willing to fight to the death for their "rights." Of course, they don't realize that it actually makes them look like they're compensating for something.

[DarkPhoenix]

Because they think it sends a message that they're willing to fight to the death for their "rights." Of course, they don't realize that it actually makes them look like they're compensating for something.

Yeah, low intelligence.

[davedan]

Except carrying that sort of weaponry makes it clear not that they'll die for their beliefs but rather that they'll kill.

[Id82]

These people think that they can also stand toe to toe with the US army because they shoot cans off of their fences in their back yard.

[RavynousHunter]

My uncle-in-law is of that mind, thinking an armed civilian revolt could actually work.  He's not full "I CAN COUNT TO POTATO" militia, thankfully, but that's largely because he's too old.  Its also hilariously ironic because these are usually the same dumb cunts that, in the very next breath, ook about the firepower of the US Mihl'turruh.  Ya know, the armchair generals that think they're hot shit because they can rattle off statistics about the M1 Abrams or the rate of fire of a P90.  The exact same weapons tech that'd be brought to bear against them if they decided to go full potato and actually try to start an armed revolt...assuming they didn't last less than five minutes when Dale's "mother-of-all-pipe-bombs" explodes in his hands and turns half your LARPing group into paste.

[Id82]

Not to mention the tech the Army has is way more advanced than anything a militia would have. A bunch of M4s and kevlar vests would stand no chance against a camouflaged night seeing drone that can carpet bomb them before they would even realize what hit them.

[Vanto]

These people think that they can also stand toe to toe with the US army because they shoot cans off of their fences in their back yard.

My uncle-in-law is of that mind, thinking an armed civilian revolt could actually work.  He's not full "I CAN COUNT TO POTATO" militia, thankfully, but that's largely because he's too old.  Its also hilariously ironic because these are usually the same dumb cunts that, in the very next breath, ook about the firepower of the US Mihl'turruh.  Ya know, the armchair generals that think they're hot shit because they can rattle off statistics about the M1 Abrams or the rate of fire of a P90.  The exact same weapons tech that'd be brought to bear against them if they decided to go full potato and actually try to start an armed revolt...assuming they didn't last less than five minutes when Dale's "mother-of-all-pipe-bombs" explodes in his hands and turns half your LARPing group into paste.

Not to mention the tech the Army has is way more advanced than anything a militia would have. A bunch of M4s and kevlar vests would stand no chance against a camouflaged night seeing drone that can carpet bomb them before they would even realize what hit them.

*laughs in Vietnamese*

[RavynousHunter]

*laughs in Vietnamese*

*laughs in facts*

The only reason we pulled out of Vietnam was because of footage of the Tet Offensive, which actually ended as a crushing defeat for the NVA and Viet Cong, came over to the States and people misinterpreted it, causing a massive decrease in popularity for the war effort Stateside.

The people that say "Oh, we totes lost Vietnam because muh guerrilla warfare" are the exact same idiots that claim Hitler would've won WWII if America hadn't showed up; it was just a matter of when Stalin decided to send millions of angry Slavs to get revenge.  Not if, when.

[niam2023]

The same idiots who loudly talk about how ready they are to fight the government will be the first people to start whining about how unfair drones are, and how the government should come fight them like men.

[RavynousHunter]

The same idiots who loudly talk about how ready they are to fight the government will be the first people to start whining about how unfair drones are, and how the government should come fight them like men.

Not to mention stealth bombers, thermobaric explosives, napalm, tanks, combat helicopters; if the US government really wanted to, they could own your monkey ass and you couldn't do shit unless the military rebelled.

[davedan]

It wasn't even the case that the vietcong were killing more US soldiers for every vc killed. But if there was an organised uprising it would be squashed unless like Ravy says the US military joined in (presumably with some State governements) US Civil War II presumably this time it would be the West and East Coast vs the Middle, rather than the North vs the South.

[RavynousHunter]

It wasn't even the case that the vietcong were killing more US soldiers for every vc killed. But if there was an organised uprising it would be squashed unless like Ravy says the US military joined in (presumably with some State governements) US Civil War II presumably this time it would be the West and East Coast vs the Middle, rather than the North vs the South.

So, basically, a curbstomp battle that'd last, like, 3 months.  Tops.

Seriously, though, without support from the actual, factual military, any attempt at armed revolution in the US (organized or no) would be doomed from the outset.  They'd either get a face full of mass amounts of tear gas and yeeted into jail until the heat death of the universe, or they'd go up against every bit of tech they're normally spending their hours jacking off to on Reddit...and end up in a hole, somewhere, on fire.

[niam2023]

Let alone all the fun experimental shit - like rail guns.

[Vanto]

*laughs in Vietnamese*

*laughs in facts*

The only reason we pulled out of Vietnam was because of footage of the Tet Offensive, which actually ended as a crushing defeat for the NVA and Viet Cong, came over to the States and people misinterpreted it, causing a massive decrease in popularity for the war effort Stateside.

The people that say "Oh, we totes lost Vietnam because muh guerrilla warfare" are the exact same idiots that claim Hitler would've won WWII if America hadn't showed up; it was just a matter of when Stalin decided to send millions of angry Slavs to get revenge.  Not if, when.

That's not what your source says. To quote the summation paragraph:

Yet, to say the media cost America victory in Vietnam is vastly oversimplifying a very complex situation. As noted above, a number of sources warned U.S. leaders against becoming embroiled in Southeast Asia. Corruption and instability in South Vietnam’s government did not instill confidence in its people, or in the Americans working with it. Ruling out an invasion of North Vietnam assured that a purely military victory would not be possible, a fact that was at odds with many Americans’ expectations for the war.

Emphasis added.

It wasn't even the case that the vietcong were killing more US soldiers for every vc killed. But if there was an organised uprising it would be squashed unless like Ravy says the US military joined in (presumably with some State governements) US Civil War II presumably this time it would be the West and East Coast vs the Middle, rather than the North vs the South.

So, basically, a curbstomp battle that'd last, like, 3 months.  Tops.

Seriously, though, without support from the actual, factual military, any attempt at armed revolution in the US (organized or no) would be doomed from the outset.  They'd either get a face full of mass amounts of tear gas and yeeted into jail until the heat death of the universe, or they'd go up against every bit of tech they're normally spending their hours jacking off to on Reddit...and end up in a hole, somewhere, on fire.

Here are a few statistics you might find interesting.

There are about 1.5 million people in all branches of the American military put together. The majority are unarmed noncombatant support staff.

Between one-third and one-half of American adults own guns. Some only have one, but the average number is eight guns. About half of non-gun owners would be willing to own a gun in the future.

Even if we go with the more conservative estimates and assume that only a tenth would fight, armed civilians would outnumber the military two-to-one. And because this is a point that bears repeating, most people in the military don't actually fight.