--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
snip
> > > >
> > > > "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a
> free
> > > > State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall
not be
> > > > infringed."
> > > >
> > > > 'Government' in the Constitution (and particularly in the
> > > > Declaration of Independence) is to be feared for its inevitable
> > > > inclination to Tyranny, and necessarily then, harnessed and
> fettered
> > > > by the laws of the new republic. It was assumed that eventually
> any
> > > > government will go bad and the ability to resist your own
> government
> > > > (gone bad) by force of arms was understood to be one of the last
> > > > resorts to Tyranny.
> > >
> > >
> > > There's absolutely *ZERO* possibility of any 'militia' being capable
> > > of successfully resisting the weaponry and manpower of the US
> military.
> > >++ the military is sworn to uphold the constitution and, obviously,
> > the government hasn't been.
>
>
> Then why do you need a 'militia' if you trust the US Military to
> "uphold the constitution?" And how do you expect a 'militia' to stand
> up the the US Military if it doesn't?
snip
>
> Get realistic. Without the US Military, the US would have been no
> match for the Japanese military.
>
I don't know if the Japaneese or German war machine was larger but
the German takeover in Europe bypassed Switzerland which is a
relatively small country where I believe, at the time, it was
mandatory that all citizens be armed.
It seems to be a positive factor as they haven't had any sign of a
war in their country since before America was discovered.
