Why Afghanistan will always have firearms.

imported post

An interesting video I thought some of you would enjoy.

http://www.vbs.tv/full_screen.php?s=DGFE2305DC&sc=1363196

imported post

repost but still funny to watch. i love how he acts like having/making guns will somehow give them the upper hand. thats why we have 500-1000 pound bombs and air support

imported post

One of the things I like about Afghani culture is that they give a kalashnikov to a kid when he becomes a man, at age 12 or 13, can't remember which. They will always have guns. It considered part of being a man to have the ability to defend your family against whatever threatens you. I think we used to think that way. What the hell happened?

imported post

r6-rider wrote:

repost but still funny to watch. i love how he acts like having/making guns will somehow give them the upper hand. thats why we have 500-1000 pound bombs and air support

Click to expand...

I think he makes a stronger point than you do.

imported post

r6-rider wrote:

repost but still funny to watch. i love how he acts like having/making guns will somehow give them the upper hand. thats why we have 500-1000 pound bombs and air support

Click to expand...

I think Afghanistan proves the effectiveness of a widely armed populace even against 1000 pound bombs and other modern weapons of the warfare state. As we learned in Vietnam, as the Soviets learned in Afghanistan, as I fear we are likely to learn again in Afghanistan, it is almost impossible to subdue and concur an armed people.

You can bomb them into the stone age. You could nuke them and kill them all. But so long as a populace retains small arms, ammo, and the willingness to use them, it is darn near impossible to subjugate them.

The video portends warning to our military efforts in the area, but also proffers great hope on our own ability to retain our freedom in a worst case scenario.

Charles

imported post

You noticed in the video that he was shooting a russian model. That's because a lot of the copy-cat stuff in the market is actually low quality and can blow up in your face. They make duplicates of captured equipment using various types of steel - usually lower quality. They say a quick way to tell if it's the original or a copy is to fire a mag thru it. The copy will heat up to the point where you can't touch it because of the low quality steel. I've heard of them taking metal bed frames and grinding them down into gun parts. :shock:

imported post

i know i was just thinking of a funny picture in my head, all of them standing there waiting to fight armed to the teeth and then a bomb comes and wipes them all out lol

i think afghanistan has hope though, we're not really fighting the people just the taliban and al qaeda, the people are all for us helping them.

imported post

utbagpiper wrote:

r6-rider wrote:

repost but still funny to watch. i love how he acts like having/making guns will somehow give them the upper hand. thats why we have 500-1000 pound bombs and air support

Click to expand...

I think Afghanistan proves the effectiveness of a widely armed populace even against 1000 pound bombs and other modern weapons of the warfare state. As we learned in Vietnam, as the Soviets learned in Afghanistan, as I fear we are likely to learn again in Afghanistan, it is almost impossible to subdue and concur an armed people.

You can bomb them into the stone age. You could nuke them and kill them all. But so long as a populace retains small arms, ammo, and the willingness to use them, it is darn near impossible to subjugate them.

The video portends warning to our military efforts in the area, but also proffers great hope on our own ability to retain our freedom in a worst case scenario.

Charles

Click to expand...

I see the point you are trying to make but the only nation to ever receive a thumping from a nuclear device surrendered quickly and unconditionally after years of war.

imported post

Flintlock wrote:

utbagpiper wrote:

r6-rider wrote:

repost but still funny to watch. i love how he acts like having/making guns will somehow give them the upper hand. thats why we have 500-1000 pound bombs and air support

Click to expand...

I think Afghanistan proves the effectiveness of a widely armed populace even against 1000 pound bombs and other modern weapons of the warfare state.  As we learned in Vietnam, as the Soviets learned in Afghanistan, as I fear we are likely to learn again in Afghanistan, it is almost impossible to subdue and concur an armed people.

You can bomb them into the stone age.  You could nuke them and kill them all.  But so long as a populace retains small arms, ammo, and the willingness to use them, it is darn near impossible to subjugate them.

The video portends warning to our military efforts in the area, but also proffers great hope on our own ability to retain our freedom in a worst case scenario.

Charles

Click to expand...

I see the point you are trying to make but the only nation to ever receive a thumping from a nuclear device surrendered quickly and unconditionally after years of war.

Click to expand...

Thankfully Afghanistan is exactly like Japan.


:quirky

imported post

marshaul wrote:

Flintlock wrote:

utbagpiper wrote:

r6-rider wrote:

repost but still funny to watch. i love how he acts like having/making guns will somehow give them the upper hand. thats why we have 500-1000 pound bombs and air support

Click to expand...

I think Afghanistan proves the effectiveness of a widely armed populace even against 1000 pound bombs and other modern weapons of the warfare state. As we learned in Vietnam, as the Soviets learned in Afghanistan, as I fear we are likely to learn again in Afghanistan, it is almost impossible to subdue and concur an armed people.

You can bomb them into the stone age. You could nuke them and kill them all. But so long as a populace retains small arms, ammo, and the willingness to use them, it is darn near impossible to subjugate them.

The video portends warning to our military efforts in the area, but also proffers great hope on our own ability to retain our freedom in a worst case scenario.

Charles

Click to expand...

I see the point you are trying to make but the only nation to ever receive a thumping from a nuclear device surrendered quickly and unconditionally after years of war.

Click to expand...

Thankfully Afghanistan is exactly like Japan.


:quirky

Click to expand...

I don't recall ever making that detailed of acomparison between the two nations, but thanks for the jab. I expected something more logical coming from a poster such as yourself.

If they all were killed as was written by the poster I responded to, then I am not sure how they could continue fighting without any people left. Of course, I disagree pesonally as Ithink some would live regardless, butwe dohave the power to turn Afghanistan into a glass window if we so choose. They would crawl out of some holes and venture over from Pakistan, but what would they be coming to besides a radioactive waste zone? Doesn't matter the country when you have the weapons to destroyvirtuallyevery living thing, in any country, at any time.

Of course, this is all hypotheticalsince we will never use nuclear weapons again, presumably even if WMD's are used on our ownshores, so I doubt we would ever know whether you reallyhave a point or not. Our sympathy to "non-combatants" would never allow such weapons to be used again, IMO.

imported post

How is this possible? Guns are illegal in Afghanistan, and punishable by a mandatory minimum 3 months in jail....much tougher than any US laws. Obviously the Brady Campaign needs to get over there and make more laws!

When I was in Kabul I saw more Kalashnikovs in one place than I've ever seen in my life. They weren't made very well, but that AK design doesn't need perfect parts. One day my neighbors brought out all their AKs and I helped him field strip them so I could get a better look. They were pretty beat up and ragged, but I assumed they were in working order.

imported post

Flintlock wrote:

I see the point you are trying to make but the only nation to ever receive a thumping from a nuclear device surrendered quickly and unconditionally after years of war.

Click to expand...

It is certainly within the power of some nations to completely eradicate the populace of others.

And it was certainly convenient for us that our only two atomic bombs had the desired and predicted effect of breaking the will of the Japanese people. Nuclear weapons or other WMDs MIGHT have similar effect elsewhere. Or they might not.

Point is, there is a difference between turning a nation to glass and actually enslaving the people.

You can kill an armed man. But pretty tough to enslave him so long as he keeps his weapons AND his will to use them.

And as a practical matter, I don't see ANYONE in our nation's government having the stones to use nukes first, even if they were justified.

All the best.

Charles