Your Loadout for a Red Dawn Style invasion.
 

Well, theres zombies, so how about a scenario where theres chinese landing craft or blue-helmeted paratroopers? What would your loadout be? Ive ot to think mine through....anyone know yours?

Seems like a moot point. Now that Marxist-Leninism and "national liberation" ideologies have gone out of fashion in the Third World, I don't expect a "Red Dawn"-style invasion to occur anytime soon. The Islamists, the current threat to the West, tend to "invade" by emigrating to Western countries, using their high birth rates to pop out lots of kids who get raised on jihadist propaganda, and then sending them off to bomb subways.

That's what "invasions" are like nowadays; you're fighting against the demographics of your country's population, not guys in uniforms riding in BMPs and Mi-24s.

BTW, if history has proven anything about U.N. "peacekeepers", it's that they cower in bunkers and stand around doing nothing in the countries that they "invade". The only "loadout" you would need for a U.N. invasion is rice - that way you can bribe all the starving African rag-tag "soldiers" who make up typical U.N. "forces" into leaving you alone.

I know it's romantic and cool to dream about being like the Wolverines in "Red Dawn" for many in the pro-RKBA community, but unfortunately for you, (1.) that kind of shit doesn't happen anymore, and (2.) guerrilla warfare is a really nasty, awful experience for the insurgents.

To be fair, this is a fun what-if and i dont expect an invasion of coies any more than I do a zombie apocalypse....this post is for fun.

True. Unfortunately for me, I can no longer think of "Red Dawn"-type scenarios as escapist fantasy anymore. As you can imagine, I have trouble enjoying movies these days. :( :D

Anyway, if I were an insurgent dealing with a Chinese invasion, I would most likely be using whatever weaponry I could pick up along the way. But I wouldn't expect to be doing much shooting. As Iraq has shown us, there's really not much point in using the AK or RPG when you've got IEDs. They're hard to detect, hard to defend against, and best of all, they're impersonal - you don't have to be close to the target to use them. In other words, a guerrilla's best friend.

So, long story short, I'd be thinking about how to perfect my IED game instead of worrying about whether I was using an AK or an M4 to fight the Chinese. I would be figuring out how to AVOID having to get involved in shootouts with better-armed and numerically-superior Chinese troops, and small-arms simply don't allow that.

I wouldn't use IEDs really, too likely to hurt innocent people.

Id take out soldiers at long rang and evade after 1 shot to keep from being detected. A military force would wreck you at close range.

Now that i think of it, lure them into traps that would only hurt them and not civilians. Lots of woods and trails, have them climb a trap filled mountain.

Then you're probably too squeamish to take part in a guerrilla war. Though I think that tends to characterize Americans, and anyone in the West, in general...

Good luck. Not only would you have to be quite well-trained, but you'd have to be willing to survive out in the woods in hiding. And I doubt you're ready for that. I know I'm sure as fuck not.

The whole point of being a guerrilla is to blend in with the civilian population. The ones that can't do this are the least successful. Nobody wants to live in the woods because (A.) those are extremely harsh conditions to endure, and (B.) It makes no sense from a tactical point of view.

Guerrillas don't care about civilians getting injured or killed. They like this because it tends to radicalize the locals and win them over to their cause. It may be immoral, but in pure military terms, it makes the most sense.

I'll agree with the brute force of the IED.
The ultimate fire and forget weapon, you place it and leave. It will wait as long as it has to.
As scary and sad as the situation is with our soldiers facing those, I have to be a little impressed. Just like the Japanese in WW2, and the US in the revolutionary war, tactics that are unorthodox can do real damage.

Exactly. IEDs just make way more sense from a guerrilla's point of view. There's less risk of getting caught. And even though the jihadists want to die ASAP so they can get their 70 virgins, they're still smart enough to understand how much better IEDs work for their purposes, even compared to suicide bombers. Suicide bombers look scarier on the news to civilians, but I'm pretty sure IEDs are what soldiers in combat fear more.

Watch your step. ;)

Well if the chinese invades, I gotta watch my back cause I'm a US born Chinese, and despite what I might say about being loyal to the USA, neighbors who see an invasion from my "brothers to the east" might not think too fondly of me anymore. It'll be like when the Japanese attacked the US during WWII, a lot of Japanese citizens were hated for no reason other than they being Japanese.

It's interesting to know who really is your friend when people who look just like you start attacking them. I hope at least in my life time or my children's children where the Chinese don't go to war with the US.

But for the sake of this topic, I'd sooner volunteer to the Armed forces as soon as possible to see if they have uses for someone like me

I don't think it'll happen. A reversion to the days before rapprochement is highly unlikely. Despite what some people believe, the Chinese are not going to overtake the U.S. any time soon, militarily or economically. U.S.-China relations for the next few decades are most likely to remain based on interdependence and co-existence rather than outright hostility. As long as they need us, it wouldn't make sense.

As far as mass-internment goes (in the event of such a scenario), I doubt the U.S. would try that again because (1.) there are too many people of Chinese descent in the U.S. already, and (2.) it's pointless; internment was used in WWII because our intelligence then wasn't nearly as sophisticated then as it is now.

Lets get back on topic:Weapons you wold go to war with,.


Id take an m1a with an ACOG, excellent firepower. A true combat rifle.
Something small, like a p90 or mp5 for close quarters/room clearing.
A 1911, probably dan wesson, and as many wilson combat mags as possible.

I thought Red Dawn was about Russians invading America, not the Chinese (???)

You like your Dan Wesson 1911s, is their anything particularly unique about them over other 1911s, or do you just have a personal like for them?

I'd use what I have handy. Chances are you wouldn't get to customize an M1A and other fun toys when being invaded by a foreign country.

The Dan Wesson CBOB fits right in my hand and is a nice size for CC in the future.. They also make a top-notch product. The only problem they ever made is not advertising better. I fired a custom Les Baer that I loved but is it worth 2 dan wessons? I also like the SPringfield TRP. The Dan Wesson Valor is similar. It comes down to if you want a light rail i guess on that one.

It seems like your a colt guy, if im not mistaken?

And Red Dawn was Russians, Im just trying to modernize.

The weapons i list are my preferred though, odds are in a real invasion id be called active duty and issued an m16 a2 (no optics or accessories) and a .40 caliber p229dak.

Right, but nowadays, Islamists are the biggest threat to this country, not commies (and please note that the Chinese government is "communist" in name only nowadays). And the Islamists don't invade with conventional armies.

I know I'm being kind of hard on you, since you think of this as harmless fantasy, but fantasy is only fun if it has some basis in reality. That, and the fact that I love raining on people's parades when it comes to geopolitics. It's an awful temptation for those of us in poli sci. :D

Yuck, politics. Leaves a bad taste in my mouth just saying it... ;)

I hate politics, but when it comes to them I'm heavily opinionated:D

loadout? what is this airsoft??????

It's less about politics and more about explaining why "Red Dawn" scenarios aren't worth even dreaming about.

But zombie scenarios are.....sorry, just didnt see you bashing those.....both threads are just for fun.

You make a good point. A zombie invasion is beyond impossible, yet it is MORE plausible than a Red Dawn style invasion? Not likely. I agree with k9870, if you have to image either scenario, it is just for fun. Even though either situation happening would be anything BUT fun.

Well, yeah, but at least zombies are unrealistic enough and hypothetical enough that it's possible to take them less seriously.

Whereas if you talk about fighting a guerrilla war against a human enemy, you're automatically going to have to talk about something related to real life. It's inherent to the topic. Apples and oranges, I'm afraid.

Less politics is excatly my style.
My theory on politics? Give equal consideration to both sides of the argument!
http://mspaintadventures.wikia.com/wiki/File:Ps680.gif

Except when it comes to gun control. Those libtards don't know what they're talking about. :D. I cannot physcially even attempt to give equal consideration when it comes to both sides of that argument.

Being apolitical is kind of a foolish mindset. You don't need to be one of these stupid activists who doesn't have a job yet is out demonstrating every day on the street corner, but being willfully ignorant of politics is immature.

Also, political science and electoral politics are two very different fields.

I see it like so:
The liberal approach to gun control is very endearing. They are trying sooooo hard to protect us from.... nothing. Best intentions, most moronic methods.

Background checks are great. I don't want a freshly released felon nabbing a SNS and offing his parole officer.
But I also don't want to be denied my constitutional right to own a firearm; ANY type of firearm.

By all means don't make it easy for us to get .50 cal HMMWV mounted guns, but don't make it ridiculous.

I'd probably go to Fort Bragg and join up with my brother's unit. Get my hands on a M24 and do some damage.:cool:

Awww why not????

Yeah, I've always wanted to own a GPMG. Anyone know how much transferable FN MAGs cost nowadays? I'm pretty sure that some were bought and registered before '86.

If you have to pay a big enough tax stamp, you should be allowed to own whatever you want. No low life criminal is going to pay a monthly fee to buy a Browning M2 and shoot up the hood, so I see no problem behind it.

Well, $200 isn't that big a tax stamp. It was big in 1934, when a new Thompson sold for $200 in the Sear's catalog, but today, it's pocket change.

Your job must make a lot of money because I certainly don't look at $200 bucks as pocket change. In fact, I don't think I've ever had $200 in my pocket, let alone as change.

Actually, I haven't had a real job since I graduated, which is why I'm going back to school again this fall.

But I meant in terms of gun costs. Most guns nowadays cost WAY more than $200, handguns and long guns. And "pocket change" is a bit of hyperbole. Don't take it so literally.

I really wish that they would repeal that stupid Hughes Amendment only 2 people since 1934 have been murdered with legally owned machine guns and one of the murderers was a police officer killing a police informant with a MAC-11.

Would the ability for civilians to gut full auto guns really benefit us more than when we could only get semi auto?

I dunno about you but I wouldn't mind having a full-auto.
I'm sure there is no need to go over the tactical advantages of fully-automatic fire.

Fair enough, I just don't take $200 as being a small sum of money.

Well, my civilian employer laid me off, so i havent worked there since January. Now Im making bank though. Government quarters. Government Food. Active duty pay. Its sweet:)

attached is an image of government quarters