A Message to ANTIFA from an American Infantryman - Salty Language Alert

[Irving]

I'm aware, but if that link to Wikipedia was all it took to justify shutting down some faction you disagree with by using lethal force, it would have been done already.

[hollohas]

So you guys disagree with the portion of the oath which says domestic? How do you understand that, Americans or foreign enemies which have infiltrated the border -- do you have historical backing for your interpretation?

Is it ok for them to want to kill a human being overseas? If so, why?

I most certainly don't disagree with it. I really do understand why it's there and am happy it is. I think there are domestic enemies that are far more mainstream and much more dangerous than these antifa douche bags. I don't think it's a bad thing to take pride in killing bad guys. Bad guys need to be gone. Nothing wrong with enjoying your job.

However, it was the "love to" part and the dares specifically that turned me off. Why the hell would anyone LOVE to have a chance to kill American citizens? He didn't say he'd love to fight for the American freedom and restore the individual liberty and constitutional government to it's rightful limited power. He said he and others would love the chance to kill Americans and dared them to take another step to violence so he would have the excuse.
WISHING that people would become domestic ememies is very different than being willing to defend against domestic enemies.

I am willing to defend my house against intruders. I wouldn't even feel bad about killing a bad guy who broke in, threatening my family. But do I go around daring criminals to break in because the idea of killing them gives me a hard-on? Hell no. That's crazy. Why the hell would I want to encourage someone, who may very well be the scum of the earth and have no good place on it, to take the step to threatening my house? No sane person would do that. But that's what this guy did.

[Irving]

Has this been vetted to have come from an actual vet or service member?

[Gman]

Yup, just like the big fight scene at the end of Twilight, Breaking Dawn-Part II.

There's a reference I will happily never understand.

[roberth]

There's a reference I will happily never understand.

Me either, now if Irving had referenced a man's movie like Dirty Harry I'd understand.

[Bailey Guns]

I most certainly don't disagree with it. I really do understand why it's there and am happy it is. I think there are domestic enemies that are far more mainstream and much more dangerous than these antifa douche bags. I don't think it's a bad thing to take pride in killing bad guys. Bad guys need to be gone. Nothing wrong with enjoying your job.

However, it was the "love to" part and the dares specifically that turned me off. Why the hell would anyone LOVE to have a chance to kill American citizens? He didn't say he'd love to fight for the American freedom and restore the individual liberty and constitutional government to it's rightful limited power. He said he and others would love the chance to kill Americans and dared them to take another step to violence so he would have the excuse.
WISHING that people would become domestic ememies is very different than being willing to defend against domestic enemies.

I am willing to defend my house against intruders. I wouldn't even feel bad about killing a bad guy who broke in, threatening my family. But do I go around daring criminals to break in because the idea of killing them gives me a hard-on? Hell no. That's crazy. Why the hell would I want to encourage someone, who may very well be the scum of the earth and have no good place on it, to take the step to threatening my house? No sane person would do that. But that's what this guy did.

Very good explanation. Wishing for something that would likely tear the country apart so you can get a "stateside kill". Anyone who wishes for that is just a douche.

Another thing I'll never understand about people wishing for revolution. They always assume it's going to turn out in their favor...like nothing can ever go wrong.

[brutal]

That'd go over well in front a jury.

"You say you killed these people based on similarities you believed them to have with other people from the recent past?"
"Yes, sir."
"And these anti-American monsters from the past, what did you say happened to them when left unchecked?"
"They became teachers and professors."
"Surely they killed people at some point?"
"Not to my knowledge."

Are you aware of Bill Ayers and WU history?

They blew up three of their own while making bombs.

[theGinsue]

I don't know this site, but came across this on facebook today. Video of AntiFa range day embedded in page

http://www.patdollard.com/antifa-res...idation-video/

or, here's the same vid:

That video was terrifying - terrifying I say. <sarcasm> Why? Let's see, they're shooting long guns at handgun distances. Ooooh, marksmen. Then, if you check out the second shooter, he's supporting the front of his AR by pulling back on the mag where it meets the well. Anyone here ever try that WITHOUT resulting in a FTF? Yeah, me either.

I can't abide by true fascists either, but today that term has been redefined to mean anyone not on the far left. If being of conservative and constitutionally sound ideology now makes me a fascist, I'll wear that badge proudly. If we want to maintain the true definition of what a fascist is, I'll condemn them with my dying breath.

Now, as to the whole wanting a "stateside kill" or hoping for civil war... Where do I begin? I'm with Brother hollohas; I desire neither. In fact, I'll go so far as to say that, given the situation, I'll go out of my way to avoid either possibility; but... Again, as Hollohas stated, should the safety or well-being of myself, family or friends be in jeopardy due to the actions of these Antifas or any other left-wing (and right-wing for that matter) group, I will do everything in my power to protect me and mine.

Many here have said that this group (the Antifas) pose no threat. I disagree. I believe that they are one element of useful idiots being hyped up by a person or persons unknown acting as a master puppeteer. Look at all of these groups (Antifas, Occupy, BLM, feminist protesters, LGBT protesters, Green Party, and on and on). All of these groups are curiously well funded and are typically protesting either totally bogus issues or issues that they themselves could resolve without protest through hard work and effort. Many of the "spontaneous" and "impromptu" large scale protests in the last 5 years have amazingly had hundreds of signs printed up for their cause-du-jour. Someone(s) manipulating these people into believing they're among the most egregiously victimized group in our nation. There is definitely an effort to destabilize this country and more and more people are falling sway to the false hype. So, are the Antifas really any sort of threat? Likely not by themselves, but combined with the other victim groups they certainly have the potential to become very dangerous. Look at the progression of violence coming out of thes groups over the last 8-10 years. While it's M-80's today, what will it be in a year or two when they see they're not getting what they've been told them deserve? A look at the history of many other nations can give you an idea of where this is going and it doesn't bode well for us. Can we simply dismiss the Antifa movement as essentially harmless? By themselves, sure, but if you're looking at the whole puzzle you should at least be concerned.

[Ridge]

If you say in one breathe that their ideals can never take over the country, and then in the next say that you're defending the Constitution from these people, then you have some cognitive dissonance.

[Gman]

Me either, now if Irving had referenced a man's movie like Dirty Harry I'd understand.

Yeah, something like...