Page 1 of 1
War on Guns. Does it have to be won?
Posted: February 18th, 2009, 6:07 pm
by Blip
What do the war on drugs, the war on terror, and the war on the economic crisis have in common? None of them have been won. Infact, it has made it all worse. There are more drugs, more terrorists, and worse a economic crisis. I think there is even a war on obesity, and Americans are getting fatter.
What would the feds have to gain from another war that may not be won?
Wouldn't it create domestic terrorists? Maybe that is what they want?
Re: War on Guns. Does it have to be won?
Posted: February 18th, 2009, 7:29 pm
by lundbaek
I believe there is a difference between the wars on drugs, terror and the ecopnomic crisis, and the war on guns. I believe the former to be a hoax; that drugs, terror and the economic crisis are fomented and used by the LDGs to achieve their goals. The war on guns is real because the LDGs want to disarm the American people as much and as quickly as possible.
Re: War on Guns. Does it have to be won?
Posted: February 18th, 2009, 10:26 pm
by LittleLion
lundbaek wrote:I believe there is a difference between the wars on drugs, terror and the ecopnomic crisis, and the war on guns. I believe the former to be a hoax; that drugs, terror and the economic crisis are fomented and used by the LDGs to achieve their goals. The war on guns is real because the LDGs want to disarm the American people as much and as quickly as possible.
Indeed, very well said lundbaek.
Re: War on Guns. Does it have to be won?
Posted: February 19th, 2009, 12:26 am
by Blip
lundbaek wrote:I believe there is a difference between the wars on drugs, terror and the ecopnomic crisis, and the war on guns. I believe the former to be a hoax; that drugs, terror and the economic crisis are fomented and used by the LDGs to achieve their goals. The war on guns is real because the LDGs want to disarm the American people as much and as quickly as possible.
In my opinion it will go down like any other war, never ending. It will last as long as any and create the desired effect. And the "LDGs" will get a sacrifice as usual. And the "LDGs" are the ODGs (Old day gadiantons) that use Pawns of Gadianton (PoG, or flesh) to carry out SO (special ops). But the LDSs are to stupid to see that and take it out on the PoGs and not the LDGs/ODGs and therefore doing the bidding of the ODGs, and there will be a sacrifice. And until we stop friendly fire and find the real enemy we are Sierra Hotel India Tango.. Oscar Uniform Tango.. Oscar Foxtrot.. Lima Uniform Charlie Kilo.
That will give many here something to laugh about, but I think any war will last a long long time. There is more that the feds can gain with having local terror groups (freedom fighters) to keep the population with an enemy. It will give the PTB more flexibility to capture anyone they want for being a rebel sympathizer. The arabs see the value with terroists..... Hmmmm I am going to need some more time to think of this, because it is controlled terrorist that have value. Terrorists that are out of control have no value to the PTB. Gun owners probably are considered out of control terrorist to the PTB.
Why would my unit be ordered to train foreign nationalists to create uncontrolled terrorists though? Or are they.
I am 24. I should be thinking about women and play. Surely someone has figured this out? It is a complicated mess. I don't see any organization in it at all!