Michael Daly wrote:

On 19-Feb-2005, Scott Weiser wrote:


if even 50 million fat men with guns manage to kill
only one soldier apiece (not difficult at all, particularly if you're
willing to die in the process)


If you had the slightest notion of the ratio of rounds fired to
soldiers killed amoung trained armies, or of kills per soldier,
you'd never make such a ridiculous claim. One kill per fat man?
Yeah, right.

Reminds me of the Japanese: they did have trained soldiers, and their
aim was to take out more than one Allied soldier for every one of their
own who bit the dust. Although many people will be familiar with
kamikaze, the average Japanese soldier also got suicide weapons, for
example to sit in a pit with a special mine waiting for a tank to drive
over him, or to run at a tank with special pole-mounted antitank
explosives. That mentality didn't do them much good against overwhelming
firepower...

If there was such a thing as organised resistance against the U.S.
government, the only chance would be to use terrorist and guerilla
tactics, and with the widespread terrorisation of the population through
the ever tightening grip of the government on society, I don't see that
happening.

Of course, there just aren't enough fat men with arms to take on a
professional army, and there's not a snowball's chance in hell to have
50 million of them stand up and fight their own troops. That would be
probably every ablebodied man between age 18 and 40 in the continental
U.S., and we're not talking about ablebodied men, are we? :-)

They might cause more of an uproar if they all jumped at the same time. ;-)

--
Wilko van den Bergh wilko(a t)dse(d o t)nl
Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe
---Look at the possibilities, don't worry about the limitations.---
http://wilko.webzone.ru/