Unchained Preppers
General Category => News & Politics => Topic started by: rah45 on October 02, 2013, 04:20:26 PM
-
Oath Keepers is going operational. (http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2013/10/01/oath-keepers-is-going-operational-by-forming-special-civilization-preservation-teams/)
Things are getting more serious. I wonder who else is going to take it to the next level?
Here is an excerpt, the first two intro paragraphs:
Oath Keepers is instructing it?s 30,000 members nation-wide to form up special teams and sub-teams in each Oath Keepers chapter, at the town and county level, modeled loosely on the Special Forces ?A Team? (Operational Detachment A ) model, and for a similar purpose: to be both a potential operational unit for community security and support during crisis, but also, as mission #1, to serve as training and leadership cadre, to assist in organizing neighborhood watches, organizing veterans halls to provide community civil defense, forming County Sheriff Posses, strengthening existing CERT, volunteer fire, search-and-rescue, reserve deputy systems, etc., and eventually to assist in forming and training town and county militias (established by official act of town and county elected representatives). We want our chapters to organize themselves as a working model that we can then take to other veterans organizations, such as the VFW, American Legion, Marine Corps League, etc. in each town and help them establish such teams within their already existing veterans halls. And likewise, to serve as a model and training cadre to help churches, neighborhood watches, and any other civic organization organize.
We are basing this on the Special Forces model, which has a twelve man ?A team? of specially trained soldiers who are inserted into a community to train and lead that community in resistance to oppressive regimes (hence their motto: ?De Oppresso Liber). SF?s primary mission is to teach, organize, and lead, rather than to directly fight. They can fight, of course, but they are most dangerous as a force-multiplier by helping an entire community to fight. We will do the same ? be force multipliers to help prepare communities so they can preserve civilization by providing their own security, disaster relief, infrastructure preservation, emergency communications, strategic food reserve, and medical care.
-
I found this article last night. I sent a link over to Hiberniason on youtube to check it out.
http://www.alt-market.com/articles/1744-oath-keepers-is-going-operational-by-forming-special-civilization-preservation-teams (http://www.alt-market.com/articles/1744-oath-keepers-is-going-operational-by-forming-special-civilization-preservation-teams)
-
:facepalm:
:violin:
:coffeeNews:
-
I think it's good they're taking that next step to try and help prepare others, or at least to organize in a more meaningful, physical way. I just wonder if other groups will start to do the same. Should be interesting if they do.
-
I was quite surprised by this, but I think it could also work for good if done properly. OK has a great public image and a wide-reaching membership.
-
At 30k membership they will either tap into militia wannabes and make something real or be demonized and marginalized.
My money is on the later.
-
I was considering joining. But since I didn't serve as a tyrannical cop or a brainwashed soldier I don't get full status... NEXT....
-
I was considering joining. But since I didn't serve as a tyrannical cop or a brainwashed soldier I don't get full status... NEXT....
What the fuck is that supposed to mean?
-
I was considering joining. But since I didn't serve as a tyrannical cop or a brainwashed soldier I don't get full status... NEXT....
What the fuck is that supposed to mean?
I actually thought of you as I typed that. And not because your brainwashed. I'm glad you said WTF. I just see no reasob to seperate those that "served" from those that supposidly havent. And they still ask for the same amount of money while they for some reason beyond me mark you as a less than. I'm every bit and beyond your average citizen who swore an oath. If they think they are elite in some government issued way they don't deserve me. They essentially appose current government but use the oath that government made them swear to as some sort of right of passage.. pick a side fuckers.. I know Reaver is legite no question.
-
It's still bullshit dude. You may think I'm " legit " but you still pretty much offended me bro.
What your saying is anyone that works LEO is ( or was at one point )a tyrannical douche & anyone who has or is serving is ( or was at one point ) brainwashed.
Hear that chesty, now that your serving even though you where awake prior to enlisting. You are a brainwashed ass hole.
Most ignorant thing I think I've ever read from you bro..... :enraged:
-
Guys, let's not forget that the important things is the Oath Keepers are trying to do something that is very necessary. It's a good goal for everyone, no matter what the OK stance is or how you feel about OK. "A-Teams" operating in local areas, effectively, towards a pro-Constitutional and self-sufficient end, is a step in the right direction.
I don't fault OK for targeting those who have officially taken the oath in the course of government employment. They did it to help defend the Constitution, which is never a bad thing. There are plenty of organizations which do not have those requirements, which also do not have the impact and influence that OK has. If they display unconstitutional tendencies, then have at them. Otherwise, why attack an ally? If they contribute more pro-Constitutional stability to a possible SHTF future, that only helps you.
-
Guys, let's not forget that the important things is the Oath Keepers are trying to do something that is very necessary. It's a good goal for everyone, no matter what the OK stance is or how you feel about OK. "A-Teams" operating in local areas, effectively, towards a pro-Constitutional and self-sufficient end, is a step in the right direction.
I don't fault OK for targeting those who have officially taken the oath in the course of government employment. They did it to help defend the Constitution, which is never a bad thing. There are plenty of organizations which do not have those requirements, which also do not have the impact and influence that OK has. If they display unconstitutional tendencies, then have at them. Otherwise, why attack an ally? If they contribute more pro-Constitutional stability to a possible SHTF future, that only helps you.
I agree. No, OK isn't perfect, but they bring a lot to the table. They have a great public image and lots of resources. If a group came to my AO I'd check it out just for the training opportunities at least. The colonies didn't like working with each other all the time, but it was either that or lose. History is filled with stories of people who allowed divisions to destroy them.
Dismissing them altogether would be a big mistake, in my book.
-
I was considering joining. But since I didn't serve as a tyrannical cop or a brainwashed soldier I don't get full status... NEXT....
What the fuck is that supposed to mean?
Reaver, welcome to the world of stereotypes and profiling. Enjoy your stay. It's kind of like saying that all liberals suck, though technically, only a small segment of their population actually physically do.
Now, Yeah Ken, what the fuck is that supposed to mean?
Edit: After a few moments of thought I'll just add that my own personal policy is to never call a cop for anything. Not that I think they are all assholes, most aren't. But it's just not worth the risk of having one of the one's that are show up at your door.
-
I'm not trying to be antagonistic here, but does anyone care to comment on how one can continue to serve an imperialistic government (whether at home or abroad,) while claiming to be pro constitution. Again, I'm not choosing a side. I just think that now is a good opportunity to explain your logic.
-
I'm not trying to be antagonistic here, but does anyone care to comment on how one can continue to serve an imperialistic government (whether at home or abroad,) while claiming to be pro constitution. Again, I'm not choosing a side. I just think that now is a good opportunity to explain your logic.
Special K, you antagonist you. It's not about serving an "imperialist government". It's about defending and protecting the citizens who are at present putting up with the government, despite said government's corruption of the Constitution.
If, and that is a big if, it ever comes to a climax I suspect you would find that among the lower ranking members of the military who aren't solely concerned about furthering their careers by kissing socialist ass, that those guns they hold in their hands are capable of pointing both ways.
-
@sledge
So you're basically saying that they are staying in for the purpose of infiltration?
-
Nope, not infiltration. As I remember, it's more of a sense of duty to the people who make up the nation. Kind of a price that is paid to be a citizen with the rights to the Constitution. Not saying anything about those who don't choose to serve. Just a partial explanation of why those that do choose to serve raise their right hand.
Edit: This is also the reason that veterans tend to get a little more pissed when they see the government F ing with the Constitution.
-
SK wrote:
So you're basically saying that they are staying in for the purpose of infiltration?
No they are staying in for a JOB!
U-6 unemployment is north of 15%. How many former vets are flipping burgers or sitting home because they don't have a job.
-
SK wrote:
So you're basically saying that they are staying in for the purpose of infiltration?
No they are staying in for a JOB!
U-6 unemployment is north of 15%. How many former vets are flipping burgers or sitting home because they don't have a job.
LOL I was just about to say that
-
Ah yes. I have heard the old "it's just a job" before. :-X
-
There's nothing wrong with those who take the oath, whether they be LEOs, military, firemen, etc. What matters is that every individual who takes that oath defends the Constitution and does not obey unconstitutional orders. If their actions reflect this, then yes, we NEED them. I would rather they stay, especially in a position to help defend the Constitution with more advanced hardware. God knows if something happens, anti-Constitutional forces will have enough of it.
-
I thought OK was already doing this special teams-things all the while since they started, but only now to find that they are thinking really hard about getting their shit together finally? Something about OK and Rhodes (mostly Rhodes) rubs me the wrong way. I could be all wrong about this, not the first time.
-
I'm sure the economy has driven some into the military. But believe it or not, it's not all about money. When i went in there was a war going on. Did I want to go over there? Hell no. Was it popular to be in the military? Hell no. Did the military pay any kind of living wage? Hell no. It isn't always about money. There are other reasons that come into play.
If you've never felt those reasons than they are hard to explain. Some do, some don't. I'd say that most don't these days. Most didn't in the 1770's either. That's not any type of put down or attack on the way people feel today. Just kind of the way things have turned out. Probably by someone's design.
-
It's still bullshit dude. You may think I'm " legit " but you still pretty much offended me bro.
What your saying is anyone that works LEO is ( or was at one point )a tyrannical douche & anyone who has or is serving is ( or was at one point ) brainwashed.
Hear that chesty, now that your serving even though you where awake prior to enlisting. You are a brainwashed ass hole.
Most ignorant thing I think I've ever read from you bro..... :enraged:
Well I do stand by my LEO statement. Show me a cop who only enforces constitutional laws and ill show you an unemployed cop. Anyone who swears to uphold the constitution CANNOT be a cop.
As far as military goes. Ive made my share of dumb career choices. I'm not going to say to a guy "that job sucks what are you thinking". If they like it then go. I don't see how someone knowing what we know would remain in said job but that's not for me to judge.
-
I'm not trying to be antagonistic here, but does anyone care to comment on how one can continue to serve an imperialistic government (whether at home or abroad,) while claiming to be pro constitution. Again, I'm not choosing a side. I just think that now is a good opportunity to explain your logic.
Yes... and I'm not trying to rope special k in to my corner by quoting him but this is my feeling aswell. Its almost taboo to question a man for serving. But today... why...
-
I'm sure the economy has driven some into the military. But believe it or not, it's not all about money. When i went in there was a war going on. Did I want to go over there? Hell no. Was it popular to be in the military? Hell no. Did the military pay any kind of living wage? Hell no. It isn't always about money. There are other reasons that come into play.
If you've never felt those reasons than they are hard to explain. Some do, some don't. I'd say that most don't these days. Most didn't in the 1770's either. That's not any type of put down or attack on the way people feel today. Just kind of the way things have turned out. Probably by someone's design.
I know the exact feeling you speak of. That feeling drives me to do anything it takes to stay away. If I were homeless on the street and a cop was begging me to work for them at 100k a year, that feeling would give me the strength to say go fuck yourself. That feeling drives me to stand strong and proud to my values at all costs. To never give in to temptation and step on other Americans constitutional rights in order to "get by". That feeling dosent influence me to go help a tyrannical government. I don't see how it ever could.
-
BTRS
-
@kentactic
Unless you are not paying your taxes you are right there with that jack booted thug.
-
BTRS
http://www.allacronyms.com/BTRS (http://www.allacronyms.com/BTRS)
??
-
BTRS
[url]http://www.allacronyms.com/BTRS[/url] ([url]http://www.allacronyms.com/BTRS[/url])
??
Better to remain silent
I response in anger with confrontational language that serves no one. I will try to make the point latter when I have time.
-
I can see this thread probably going the same way the boston bombing thread went very soon.
As I see it oath keepers is a high profile group and therefore somewhat limited in the public positions they are inclined to take in order to avoid pissing off a good chunk of their membership. They are already walking a fine line by trying to represent both military and law enforcement as well as active and retired from both. Not to imply anything deriding any group but the many points of view are inherently different and more than occasionally at odds.
As for the "new idea" in my opinion it's just a progression of P.R. to keep the membership happy that something is happening with the group and the group is "current". The reality of implementing this is going to be a horror show that runs the full range from infiltrated cluster fuck all the way to effective cell organization. The alphabets may take the potential threat very seriously and expend considerable numbers of agents as infiltrators and significant resources cultivating C.I.s and employing surveillance and tracking.
Best group possible in my opinion is not a part of a national anything but just a group of locals who have known each other, the longer the better. The model presented is certainly a viable (even if a bit presumptuous) but way too rigid to properly adapt to local situations. I fear time may be wasted trying to "fill" positions. I also have a bit of a problem with the idea of a dividable 12 man team as a standard due to the increased trail/signature presented as well as the value of that size target. I personally believe the various old school vietnam style S.F. team structures would be much more effective and safer from catastrophic loss for their communities.
I really hope this thread doesn't blow up.
-
Good post Colombo. :thumbsUp:
-
Just a reminder regarding any further posts,
UCP Code of Conduct (http://unchainedpreppers.com/forum/mission-statements/code-of-conduct-3908/)
Violations of forum rules are subject to disciplinary actions by moderators or the forum owner. The following activities undermine the productive and peaceful operation of this forum, and are forbidden:
3. Displaying blatant disrespect or otherwise negative behavior targeting other members, including racist, sexist, religious or political attacks.
You do not have to agree. We all have different opinions. However, members of UCP will show each other respect. Be nice, or don't post. If you have a serious disagreement, take the argument to PMs. If the problem persists, seek a moderator for mediation to resolve the issue. Thanks! ;)
-
Wait is like the thread that killed Straightprep? Oh goodie! I missed that one and didn't get to see all the drama. :popcorn:
-
Good post Rah! Lets keep it civil.
I agree with that Colombo wrote. :thumbsUp:
Best group possible in my opinion is not a part of a national anything but just a group of locals who have known each other, the longer the better. The model presented is certainly a viable (even if a bit presumptuous) but way too rigid to properly adapt to local situations.
Remember what happened to Randy Weaver who just attended a few Aron Nations meeting's. They were being infiltrated BIG TIME.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_Ridge
There is a lure to be hooked up with a group however it is better to start your own group so you know who is in it.
-
The leaderless revolt? Doesn't work.
-
IDK. I reread the posts and didn't see anyone not showing respect or giving reason for the mods to step in with suggestions on being nice. Just two or three guys with different views on service and answering questions on their point of view.
Unless there were some deleted posts that I missed I'm not seeing what all of that was about. I guess that I missed the powder keg because it's not in the posts that I reread.
Non the less I'll play nice. What can I add to that, hmmmm, I Love You Guys! No homo.
-
They probably assumed my edited post (removed) was a personal attack, which it wasn't but felt it better to say something and play it safe just in case. It's a good warning considering the edited post just to be safe IMO.
I was going to go back tonight and point out the hypocritical points that some where making about LEO/MIL not being able to serve and obey the constitution (which they can't) but figured it was not worth the trouble.
The point I would make is that NO ONE is without sin and should not be casting stones at LEO/MIL if they are not standing up for their constitutional rights either.
Like not needing a CCW license to carry concealed or a DL to drive a car, or paying taxes to a govt that does not represent them or being forced into Obamacare, or have their lives data mined without warrant, etc, etc, etc...
Just like an LEO having to compromise absolute constitutional theology to keep their job, we all do the same to stay out of prison.
Just because the USSC says something is the law of the land does not mean it's a valid law if it's not a right given to the feds and is a state matter.
Until you are ready to die (or be locked up) for your constitutional rights that are being violated everyday, I'd give a little slack to the guys taking bullets to keep some order in the world.
The alternative is to remove all the remaining good cops from the force and see how long it takes for the bad ones to really get out of hand.
-
They probably assumed my edited post (removed) was a personal attack, which it wasn't but felt it better to say something and play it safe just in case. It's a good warning considering the edited post just to be safe IMO.
I was going to go back tonight and point out the hypocritical points that some where making about LEO/MIL not being able to serve and obey the constitution (which they can't) but figured it was not worth the trouble.
The point I would make is that NO ONE is without sin and should not be casting stones at LEO/MIL if they are not standing up for their constitutional rights either.
Like not needing a CCW license to carry concealed or a DL to drive a car, or paying taxes to a govt that does not represent them or being forced into Obamacare, or have their lives data mined without warrant, etc, etc, etc...
Just like an LEO having to compromise absolute constitutional theology to keep their job, we all do the same to stay out of prison.
Just because the USSC says something is the law of the land does not mean it's a valid law if it's not a right given to the feds and is a state matter.
Until you are ready to die (or be locked up) for your constitutional rights that are being violated everyday, I'd give a little slack to the guys taking bullets to keep some order in the world.
The alternative is to remove all the remaining good cops from the force and see how long it takes for the bad ones to really get out of hand.
The difference between a civillian and LEO/MIL is a civillian is sacrificing their own rights to survive. LEO/MIL are taking other peoples rights to recieve personal gains. There's nothing in the constitution that says you must exercise all of your rights. However taking away/restricting others rights for personal gain is the definition of tyranny.
-
Very good point Ken! I had not looked at it that way before.
-
The leaderless revolt? Doesn't work.
Absolutely correct, however the flip side of central planing from afar is just as myopic due to the opponent faced. Use the template provided by oathkeepers with the option to fit it to your communities situation and available qualified people (proper and irregular cell structure presents more problems for counter intelligence and infiltration). I would like to see a quieter and more clandestine element presented as well. Leaders must be chosen with great care and an understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the irregular troops we are talking about (inflexible, authoritah, and those used to the unquestioning carrying out of orders will not work with this kind of American guerrilla force like it or not). The oathkeepers idea has merit if it is implemented with an understanding of the security danger of any kind of contact with any significant area leadership for obvious reasons (one more related piece I strongly disagree with is the idea of some of the entire group as a locally politically active part due to the ease of identification of associates, the local political arm should be unaware of ANY fighter and direct support types in the group). One and only one piece of dogma should be endorsed (and in all probability will not) Work at your groups level and abilities to the goal of meeting at the other side then fine adjusting the course we set out on securely amongst friends when the enemy has been defeated. The rivalry and constitutional dick measuring can wait. Until our community gets this solidly in our heads we have a serious problem.
Just a few of my initial thoughts on implementation.
Feel free to curse me out, share, or anything in between.
Colombo
-
Its almost taboo to question a man for serving. But today... why...
Use your head. Why serve? Because people believe in the fundamentals that this country was founded on. You could very well have asked the same question of being an American. After all, if you hate what America has become, why bother trying to fix it, just go somewhere better.
Most of us, on the other hand, love this country enough to bust our asses and make the sacrifices needed to fix it.
So to answer your question "Why serve?" ?if you don't understand, it can never be explained to you. You either get it or you don't.
-
Show me a cop who only enforces constitutional laws and ill show you an unemployed cop. Anyone who swears to uphold the constitution CANNOT be a cop.
Let's try not to paint every one in a particular group with the same brush. There are a lot of tyrannical cops, but there are also a lot of legit ones.
http://youtu.be/q1G1IscWi58 (http://youtu.be/q1G1IscWi58)
-
Here's another for ya'
http://youtu.be/Y3bg2C3ly3w (http://youtu.be/Y3bg2C3ly3w)
-
@ Jeremy
Yeah, I saw that one back when it happened. But do remember, this is a rare case of 1 in a 100 IMHO.
-
I agree the ratio of good to bad probably sucks, but it does us no good to piss on the good ones. Just my 2 cents.
-
Here's another for ya'
That was hard to watch. Props to the Deputy especially for not letting the old codger steal their handouts.
-
Absolutely correct, however the flip side of central planing from afar is just as myopic due to the opponent faced.
Meaning that because of the .gov's ability to track down any leadership would stomp out the fire before it could catch? Without a vision and a leader(s) to direct can you obtain anything larger than small unit anarchy?
I'm no history buff but I don't know of any freedom fighters that won their fight without leadership and usually the support of an already existing .mil regime that joined their cause in a coup.
Use the template provided by oathkeepers with the option to fit it to your communities situation and available qualified people (proper and irregular cell structure presents more problems for counter intelligence and infiltration).
Does anyone believe that there is a substantial number of "freedom fighter cells" in America today? OathKeepers is a "big name" in this area and they are only 30K strong?
Are we really suppose to believe there are or will be a substantial number of people willing to fight an insurgence against the .mil to restore the Constitution to America? I just don't see it. If there are millions of secret guerrilla fighters hiding in the woods, what are they waiting for? The frog is boiling to death already. Without the .mil or local LEOs (largest standing army in the states) stepping up for the rights of their citizens, there is really no chance of rag-tag group of patriots organizing. That's where OK's idea of integrating with the local LEO is a good idea I feel.
I would like to see a quieter and more clandestine element presented as well. Leaders must be chosen with great care and an understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the irregular troops we are talking about (inflexible, authoritah, and those used to the unquestioning carrying out of orders will not work with this kind of American guerrilla force like it or not).
I don't understand your point here. Please clarify.
The oathkeepers idea has merit if it is implemented with an understanding of the security danger of any kind of contact with any significant area leadership for obvious reasons (one more related piece I strongly disagree with is the idea of some of the entire group as a locally politically active part due to the ease of identification of associates, the local political arm should be unaware of ANY fighter and direct support types in the group).
Unless you have been off grid for the past 10 years, you are easily found and already identified.
One and only one piece of dogma should be endorsed (and in all probability will not) Work at your groups level and abilities to the goal of meeting at the other side then fine adjusting the course we set out on securely amongst friends when the enemy has been defeated.
Other side of what? What's the goal if there is no leadership outside of local groups? Other side of the revolt?
The rivalry and constitutional dick measuring can wait. Until our community gets this solidly in our heads we have a serious problem.
Again, I don't understand the reference.
-
I can see the OK method working well in SHTF (economic collapse) to provide community security in augmentation with local LEO. Some interesting lessons to be learned from the Mexican example if you can watch the whole thing.
http://youtu.be/a6dETs540NA (http://youtu.be/a6dETs540NA)
-
I'm not endorsing any action, these are just my thoughts and speculation. An exercise if you will.
Absolutely correct, however the flip side of central planing from afar is just as myopic due to the opponent faced.
Meaning that because of the .gov's ability to track down any leadership would stomp out the fire before it could catch? Without a vision and a leader(s) to direct can you obtain anything larger than small unit anarchy?
I'm no history buff but I don't know of any freedom fighters that won their fight without leadership and usually the support of an already existing .mil regime that joined their cause in a coup.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's no longer a matter of tracking down but just snatching and crossing off a list for whatever accusation they choose to give to the media. National leadership will not work any better here than overseas when it gets hot. Before hand there's some room for general advice and getting some templates out there but those people/high value targets will not make it beyond the opening moves. As for the "freedom fighters" of the past there are none that I can think of that were faced with the kind of situation here, scale, resources, balkanized populace, but most importantly the massive initial resources and moves from the regime that become almost immediately taxed due to total area, numbers, backlash and public opinion. Of course all national coms are toast for anyone even drifting slightly off approved script at the point the regime decides overt actions begin.
Use the template provided by oathkeepers with the option to fit it to your communities situation and available qualified people (proper and irregular cell structure presents more problems for counter intelligence and infiltration).
Does anyone believe that there is a substantial number of "freedom fighter cells" in America today? OathKeepers is a "big name" in this area and they are only 30K strong?
Are we really suppose to believe there are or will be a substantial number of people willing to fight an insurgence against the .mil to restore the Constitution to America? I just don't see it. If there are millions of secret guerrilla fighters hiding in the woods, what are they waiting for? The frog is boiling to death already. Without the .mil or local LEOs (largest standing army in the states) stepping up for the rights of their citizens, there is really no chance of rag-tag group of patriots organizing. That's where OK's idea of integrating with the local LEO is a good idea I feel.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There doesn't need to be but a small handful due to the absolute paranoid fear and over reaction shown already by the powers that be. Boston, dornier, Miriam Carey, the vets visiting memorials... each of these incidents provoked such a poorly thought out disproportionate response that future incidents will cause more dissent and swell the ranks of affected citizens resisting further. It always starts small and oppression becomes the standard. The majority of secret guerrilla fighters don't know their guerrilla fighters yet, they merely keep their heads low, go to work, and try to get by. They will become more and more resistant to subjugation thru petty less dangerous means of non reporting of blackmarket activities, tax evasion, pointing the wrong direction when questioned or "didn't see nuthin", some pushed to far will progress to more active resistance. The frog you mention is already boiling merrily and the bureaucrats are grinning and confident while untold numbers of eyes are watching both the pot and the "cook". I feel somewhat saddened by the obliviousness of most law enforcement and the likelihood of there missing the bus so to speak but this has been repeated constantly in history, they for the most part seem to follow their leaders until those leaders have suddenly disappeared and the locals are coming to express some strongly felt grievances.
I would like to see a quieter and more clandestine element presented as well. Leaders must be chosen with great care and an understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the irregular troops we are talking about (inflexible, authoritah, and those used to the unquestioning carrying out of orders will not work with this kind of American guerrilla force like it or not).
I don't understand your point here. Please clarify.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There will be need for those not on any radar whatsoever for reasons that I will not talk about. Feel free to take that any way you want. As for the leaders of any forces of resistance, this will not resemble any civil war seen in history. The fighters available will range from actual combat vets to widowed housewives, most being somewhere in between. These are not for the most part capable of use as line troops. They are for the most part not even good for day trips and carefully thought out strikes against unconventional targets like support and resources. The best use for most would be sabotage of the system thru "incompetence" Going toe to toe will lead to ugly slaughters and an already filled quota of propaganda for the gov-media.
The oathkeepers idea has merit if it is implemented with an understanding of the security danger of any kind of contact with any significant area leadership for obvious reasons (one more related piece I strongly disagree with is the idea of some of the entire group as a locally politically active part due to the ease of identification of associates, the local political arm should be unaware of ANY fighter and direct support types in the group).
Unless you have been off grid for the past 10 years, you are easily found and already identified.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Doesn't mean you make it easy for them to bag one obvious leadership group throwing the area into leaderless chaos. I would like to see several "cells" (for lack of a better word) in an area just for the continuity of operations that will have very negative effects on evaluation and assignment of resources by the oppressors. Political activism is great particularly if it works but these people are not very hard to follow, watch, and collect information on their friends and associates, why make it easier? As for me and your 10 year point, I'm toast already and I know it, they just haven't tossed the dirt on the box yet.
One and only one piece of dogma should be endorsed (and in all probability will not) Work at your groups level and abilities to the goal of meeting at the other side then fine adjusting the course we set out on securely amongst friends when the enemy has been defeated.
Other side of what? What's the goal if there is no leadership outside of local groups? Other side of the revolt?
The rivalry and constitutional dick measuring can wait. Until our community gets this solidly in our heads we have a serious problem.
Again, I don't understand the reference.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The crystal ball is hazy as to what. That there are major changes coming I doubt any would disagree. The question of "what?" should perhaps be to what extent will the coming unpleasantness devolve, to what point will the participants be willing to go, how long can the participants hold out, there are just too many variables and unforeseeable events. As I see it in all revolutions peaceful or contested there is more than two sides, allies are found even if they don't want the exact same results, just look to the time and bickering it took after the revolutionary war to come up with and put into effect the short and relatively simple founding documents of this country.
I'm not endorsing any action, these are just my thoughts and speculation. An exercise if you will.
-
Dang it's late, I hope this crap I wrote reads coherently to me when I get up.
-
Just to give you guys some motivation, I'm thoroughly interested in this conversation (in a good way). Please continue.
:popcorn:
-
DVC,
-Are you willing to fight under certain circumstances? (If you answered "YES" move to the next question)
-Are you a member of any militia? (If you answered "NO" move to the next question)
-Do you believe there are more like yourself?
The point here is to hopefully (if you answered the right way) show that there's many more "sleeper cells" then you can count in organized groups.
-
DVC,
-Are you willing to fight under certain circumstances? (If you answered "YES" move to the next question)
-Are you a member of any militia? (If you answered "NO" move to the next question)
-Do you believe there are more like yourself?
The point here is to hopefully (if you answered the right way) show that there's many more "sleeper cells" then you can count in organized groups.
It's also the future disenfranchised, just look to boston and l.a. recently and consider the effects of longer term occupation on the lines of a week or more. The locals are going to be getting annoyed to say the least. The exposure of the regime to sabotage, theft, repair padding, of equipment and personnel (alphabet boys and local law enforcement don't do mechanical work or tire changing, they live in hotels/motels on their downtime, eat in restaurants...
....Mechanical sabotage, bedbugs, and food poisoning could all be risks to unsympathetic thugs acting on behalf of beltway overlords. Consider the further crackdowns and bad attitudes toward joe public when the thugs have to eat MREs and sleep in makeshift barracks or seized homes getting glares from new unwelcoming neighbors. This is not even taking "unfortunate incidents" into consideration.
-
@Kentactic
I see your point and agree there are other Americans that will come to the forefront if pushed too far, but my point is that by the time that happens the battle will be over. The amount of surveillance our nation has, coupled with the "see someone turn them in" programs of past regimes will make organizing impossible if there is not already a structure in place.
OK's are stepping into that void, but I fear they are doing so alone without the backing of the same Americans you speak of which is self defeating. "Pay me now or pay me later" always costs more later.
@Colombo
Thanks for clarification, it made good sense. I do think the best your description can hope for though is random "Patriot Anarchy" without a structured plan and organization to see it through. Just as the US .gov looks for a "faction" to support in other countries when helping promote regime change, the Chinese, Russia, etc. are going to need to find the same and without outside .mil arms flowing in, the .mil on US soil will make quick work of any rebels trying to restore a Republic.
I see the OK's stance as a good chance to keep the local LEO's honest and from corruption by .fed agencies (namely DHS) wanting to carry out the regimes wishes.
Case in point, why are there no local LEOs taking the side of those two 80 year olds being evicted from their home today at Lake Mead (http://www.ktnv.com/news/local/Lake-Mead-Property-Owners-Forced-Out-Until-Gov-Shutdown-Ends-226557661.html) Excellent op for the local LEO to support their citizens from .gov tyranny but without a group of armed patriots to help kick them in the ass by standing up for the old folks, they default to "yes sir, make life miserable till the shutdown is over" mode and do nothing for those they are suppose to work for.
Having a base established in the community that responds to these kinds of injustices with a response that local LEO will not want to confront, and by those that would rather the local LEO did their job so they did not have to, might keep them honest enough to slow the tide of tyranny. Big might... but even if it does nothing other than establish an armed neighborhood watch program it's a good thing for freedom IMO.
Who will get behind it is the question. If you wait until they come for you, chances are most that would have helped have been taken away because you would not get involved when they were taken.
I'm just thinking out loud also, I have no plan or idea of where my line is right now, but I'm thinking about lines for the first time in my life and I did take an oath to defend this nation. My question is does the nation want to be defended or should it get what it asks for?
-
@DVC, I see what your saying. It is likely that fighting too late in the game will be pointless. Some may fight anyways. The colonists supposidly had no chance but they fought unconventionally "like cowards" and they won. They used their enemies pride against them. If there is a fight to be had in this nation I believe the path will be shown to us when it is time. I need to believe that. Many say our constitution was written with direct influence from god just like the bible. Maybe he can influence Americans today to make this nation great again... where there is still will there is still some way.
-
I'm just thinking out loud also, I have no plan or idea of where my line is right now, but I'm thinking about lines for the first time in my life and I did take an oath to defend this nation. My question is does the nation want to be defended or should it get what it asks for?
This is what bothers me the most.
-
Rah,
Explain
Typos brought to you by Tapatalk and iPhone spellcheck
-
Rah,
Explain
Typos brought to you by Tapatalk and iPhone spellcheck
I was referring to the difficulty in finding that place within yourself in which you become clear regarding how much oppression is too much to bear. The part of you that resolves to take action to stop whatever negative force threatens you and what you hold dear, no matter the consequences. I have yet to find mine.
-
Rah,
Explain
Typos brought to you by Tapatalk and iPhone spellcheck
I was referring to the difficulty in finding that place within yourself in which you become clear regarding how much oppression is too much to bear. The part of you that resolves to take action to stop whatever negative force threatens you and what you hold dear, no matter the consequences. I have yet to find mine.
I pray none of us ever find it. We can draw lines all day. We won't know if they are drawn correctly until they are crossed. Every man who found their line did what they had to. If I find mine I hope it will not have been delayed by fear.
-
To be sure, there are people in certain circles of government who are wondering where that collective line is as well. That explains the domestic surveillance, purchases, and training exercises that use patriots as the bad guys.
-
Yes, the line from an ideological point was crossed 100 years ago in my book with the creation of the Fed and the enslavement it brought to America, then the "New Deal" piled on, and it's just snowballed from their.
Only recently has America even considered that they have been robbed of their freedom because it's starting to become inconvenient for them, but when does enough become enough? My fear is that it's likely when it's too late to change it. I think about the Jews in WWII and how they might have had a chance early on, but by the time they knew they had to fight, they were disarmed and demonized. Both are in play today in America only the "Jew" is the "prepper" these days.
Did anyone see the language change that's happening in the laws? Look at the full title of this HR (https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr1584 (https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr1584)) and put 2+2 together. We can already black site "terrorists" and drone them even if they are a US Citizen, now we are trying to add "domestic" and "home grown" to the language which IS everyone on this board that is a prepper. DHS has already labelled you exactly that in many of their training manuals.
I'd say we are halfway through the poem...
First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.
Then they came for the socialists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.
-
I'd say we are halfway through the poem...
First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.
Then they came for the socialists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.
So DVC, did you stand up for the Occupy Movement too, or did you cheer when the police crackdowns occurred? I have to assume you stood up for the communists, socialists, and trade unionists by your use of Pastor Niem?ller's prose? Or do we just speak out for those we agree with? All in all, seems a bit disingenuous to use that poem.
-
@crudos,
Define stand up? Did I feel they had a right to their 1st Amendment and assembly? Yes. Do I feel "free speech zones" are a violation of the same? Yes. Did I march on Washington and demand that the local LEO do their job and protect their constitutional rights? No.
As far as putting myself on the line, I have not done so outside of the .mil 30 years ago for anything. How about you?
I think that fits in perfectly with the poem as it's THE POINT OF IT!
EDIT TO ADD:
dis?in?gen?u?ous
1. not candid or sincere, typically by pretending that one knows less about something than one really does.
synonyms: insincere, dishonest, untruthful, false, deceitful, duplicitous, lying, mendacious; More
Which synonym where you thinking of when you called me that? Since I fail to see how I could be charged with knowing more than I wrote about the comparison between preppers and Jews of WWII in the context provided? And what exactly did I say to make you think I was being "insincere, dishonest, untruthful, false, deceitful, etc"?
EDITED AGAIN TO ADD:
If you want to bash my character, please open another thread and get it over with, otherwise don't read into what I post past what I post. Please? There is no hidden agenda with me. If my opinion is not acceptable here, say so and I'll move on, otherwise lay off the personal attacks.
-
As usual, Crudos' comments are very astute and apply to everyone, not just DVC. Our whole scene here is about maintaining our freedoms, emphasis on our-- we have shown a lot of narrow mindedness and lack of tolerance for any political group that differs in opinion. The main point is that none of us are going to stand up for the communists or socialists, despite a similar struggle to keep a different ammendment right-- the main reason we may lose this battle.
@DVC
From what I've seen, you are very quick to judge others and attack character, so why are you so defensive of others engaging you in a similar, but in fact, more respectful manner than you engage them?
He who casts stones may find himself plagued by fear of being stoned...
-
:ceaseFire:
Please not the same history again.
If someone wants to bash someone else character, please send him a PM, go to drink a beer and talk it, or arrange a fucking duel but not in this forum threads.
-
I see nothing that resembles a personal attack. thatGirl gets what I'm saying.
:coffeeNews: