Could armed civilians defeat the US military?

It depends on what you would accept as a victory.

As a Vietnam Vet, I can tell you from experience (and so can our current troops) that even a small portion of a population can keep the best Military in the world tied up for decades, until they get tired, broke and go home. Guerilla warfare has never been successfully defeated, yet. By anyone. It worked in Cuba, China, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Afganistan, and it still appears to be working in Iraq, since the Tailiban still exist.

Although governments have been overthrown by guerillas, no one in the US wants to overthrow our Government. There are just some who would like to resign from it, peacefuly, if allowed. If the US was smart, and learned anything from the War for Southern Independence, they would allow it peacefully, then work on a diplomatic solution to their differences. Had they done that in 1860, all the states would've returned to the US voluntarily within 10 years, and no harm done.

But the answer to your question is an unqualified YES. A civilian population, with enough public support, using the right tractics, can eventually defeat a professional military force. It's been done many times.

That would be tough.... The military would have its work cut out for them being the citizens would know their towns, landscapes, terrain, etc. kind of like Iraq and Afghanistan. The locals would have the advantage, they could hide among the regular people and the military wouldn't be able to tell the difference between a normal citizen or a "rebel". The military would do some serious damage with their technology and weapons and strength in numbers. It would be very very bad for both sides, which is why an armed populace is still one to be feared.

Let's not forget the weddings bombed in outposts like Nangarhar in 2007. Now, I don't claim to be a military strategist, but even I can see that bombing a wedding (were the Taliban getting pissed up at the reception?) and killing 45 people including 39 women & children, is not going to endear you to neutral locals. It is an idisputable fact that the USA has an appalling record when it comes to civilian casualties, in Iraq & Afghanistan, and also throughout its past military campaigns-or were the 600,000 civilians killed in Cambodia between 1969-1973 as a result of the USAF's highly illegal bombing campaign deemed to be military targets too?

Depends on political will of the politicians in charge - Viet Nam had US army winning and Viet Army holding own until American democrat politicians cut off ammo resupply- political will ran out first and Viet Cong and North Viet Army now has South Vietnam. If you're talking a US revolution? Look at riots in cities in past years in LA, Detroit or Chicago- I was there for 1968 disturbance. A small number of armed thugs caused a lot of damage, a greater number of armed civilians supporting police get rioters confined- the Polish neighborhood deadline had over 30 bodies stacked up by warning sign next morning, no police did the shooting. IF they'd joined riots, might have had to bring in tanks with national guard. Ferguson is latest disturbance- political will kept away military from criminal element, civilians in a couple stores protected their stores. Armed civilians not violating constitution will have military setting and watching just like Waco- the request by justice dept for armed military crews was denied by military commander- they got to borrow the engineering vehicle base on a tank but it wasn't military crew driving it. Military commander said bring the martial law declaration and then we'll go to the site- BUT a sergeant will ORDER the FBI and ATF to GET AWAY from the site and if justice dept people don't leave when ordered the sergeant WILL kill you and it'll be JAG court instead of federal court determining any charges extra AGAINST the justice dept people. Donets region in Ukraine has armed rebel/civilians defeating the Ukrainian Army last month- figure some Russian army help likely there true- but US military personel could go on leave to support their relatives with a conflict against a politician and bring some equipment with them is more than likely. As for automatic weapons in civilian possession ? Already a 1/4 million class 3 registered and taxed weapons in civilian hands, about the same untaxed in police armories that might go to civilians in a conflict. Estimates of un taxed, unregistered, not exactly known where they are automatics? 100,000 is the low number from military 'can't find in the armory at this time' for current issue and the old war trophies aren't accounted for prior to 1958. During the cutoff to register amnesty 4000 M14s were registered- most by X marines that had paid for issue rifle not turned in at discharge. About 40,000 WW2 trophys got $200.00 tax stamps- Thompsons, MG42, M38/42 Berettas, and some MP40s like cousin had. These were the ones formerly unknown held by Democrats mostly that believed the government wouldn't hassle them afterwards- lots of cynics registered on of the 3 to 5 they had. I know of one guy in Chicago that turned in BAR to ATF- he was griping they got the best one and most of magazines , now he has to fix up the other two- and he was a cop.

No Way! The US military has the best equipment and weaponry in the world. We also have some of the best troops in the world.

This is an extremely controversial subject for many Americans.

A lot of people feet that this Amendment gives them the right to have guns of any shape, size or power. I disagree.

The Second Amendment reads: “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.”

Of course this is open to individual interpretation, but I read it as this:

The military shall keep and bear arms. It doesn't say that an individual has the same right. It says people (as a whole, not individually).

I am sure there are going to be a lot of people who disagree with me, but I am just stating my opinion.

In my mind, no - absolutely not.

It is simple, the people would get their guns and start attacking major government buildings such as the Pentagon and the White House. These buildings have their own bomb shelters, so the politicians would be fine.

Now, the people would start running out of ammunition - where do they get more? From a gun shop - all of which have been closed and the ammunition in that shop taken and destroyed.

Now 60 million Americans have M4 Rifles to use as really nice clubs - at which an US Military tank is deployed leaving the entire US population completely defenseless and forced to stop the operation - at which everything returns to normal.

You see, it is really very, very, very unlikely.

I hope this helps you in your moral cause - but it simply is not possible.

Magic T.

Tho.. I certainly wouldn't agree with trying to overthrow the gov't right now... I think you better have plenty of people within the military and policeforce to go along with such a cause.. If not, I think it's almost hopeless... Certainly, if the entire populace were to join forces and stand up, we'd definately be more than capable.. But that'll never be the case.. Best shot, would be around 10-15% would try, and they'd get mopped more than easily... Right now?? No chance in hell.. Is the populace capable?? Heck yes.. Easily.. The reason the U.S. is undeniably the most powerful country in the world isn't exactly because of the military.. It's because of the firepower our citizens hold.. No country in their right mind would ever try to come here.. We have enough weaponry to arm every citizen.. It'd be suicide..

You get the majority of the populace to follow?? Gov't and military will fall quick....

You're fighting a 21st Century war in the 19th Century. Which works if the country is living in the 19th Century, like the Mid-East. To beat the American Army you need hackers, not musketeers in three cornered hats. You need the deploy them to Uzbekistan and Nepal. Set up an HQ in Bhutan. Start promoting basics to Captain. Send the Navy to the Baltic Sea. Take a lesson from 9-11. Everybody knew it was coming, corporations were breaking their lease to move out in time, and where was military intelligence. Somewhere else as usual.

You are fogetting one important part of the puzzle...we took an oath to support and defend the American people...what makes you think, if the masses attempted an over-throw of the government that we'd kill our fellow Americans? This belief, that the American military would not go against the people, is why Obama wants a civilian force equal in strength (or stronger) than our military. Watch the video and listen to what he says. Many ill-gotten leaders did the same thing...Chavez, Castro, Stalin, etc. He agrees, for example, that Honduras' President Zelaya is the one to support, as does Chavez and Castro. Zelaya (read the second link) is the President in Honduras who tried to change their constitution so he could stay in office longer than their constitution allows for. Their justices ordered the military to remove him, which is correct according to their constitution. If our own President Obama agrees with Zelaya, what makes you think he will not try and do the same here?

Your forgetting one important piece of information.In the USA all military swear to uphold the Constitution. They don't swear to uphold any one leader.Therefore any mass great uprising would most likely include military leaders and most of the troops. I'm not saying we couldn't have riots in the streets. This country has before, and brought in the troops to stop it and to kill...but the "CHANGE" going on in our Govt. right now may not stand. It really does depend upon the majority of people and how we all as a group view our Govt. On the flip side, look at Afghanistan... people with small arms keeping a large country with massive weapons at bay