31 October 2012

20 Million Deer hunters, guardians of freedom?

Aesop has left a couple of comments that have provoked me into further thought on the subject of 20 million deer hunters.  A lot of people who believe that 20 million deer hunters are a credible threat to tyranny seem to have the "Underpants Gnome" plan for success.
Step 1. 20 Million Deer Hunters!
Step 2. ?
Step 3. Victory!

What this conversation really boils down to is how you get from step one to step three.  Expecting 20 million people to self organize into anything is, in my opinion, expecting a miracle.

I think the disconnect is that you seem to keep looking at "20M hunters" and seeing 10,000 potential regiments, needing the requisite uniforms, rations, drill, and coordination into a unified command - which I'll grant we'd need in the Fulda Gap in 1983. In the Shenandoah Valley in 2013 not so much.
Actually I see 20 Million deer hunters and I start whittling away the ones that won't fight, can't fight, or are in the wrong geographic location to do anyone any good.  A deer hunter in rural Wyoming, New Mexico, or Alaska is in a position to maybe cause some trouble with a railroad or oil pipeline, but not really going to be all that effective at ending the siege of New York or Miami.  Successful insurgencies are population centric, and the bulk of our population is urban/sub-urban.

Whereas we'uns see them as 10M+ potential sniper teams, free to shoot or not, as and when they will, and show back up at work in the morning, indefinitely.
If you give people the option NOT to do something, guess what most people are going to do?  Hey Joe, want to grab your rifle, low crawl two miles to get into the one good spot to make a shot at some random guy in uniform, then run like hell hoping we don't get killed by return fire/helicopter/air strike/indirect fire, and then go back to work the next day if we aren't maimed, in custody, or dead?  What do you think Joe is going to say?  Always expect individuals to act in their own best interest, and usually that involves some level of staying alive or risk aversion.

You see 10 million sniper teams, I see 10 million deer hunters that "zero their rifle 2.5 inches high at 100 so they don't have to compensate for drop out to 250 yards" and at least 90% would wash out of an actual sniper school.  20 million individuals who don't have a mission plan, target packet, or other support needed to make sniper missions a success even if they did have the skills.

In Southwest Asia, the insurgency there hangs on for a draw for over a decade, partly because they were never any sort of marksmen, but precisely because they refuse to become the main force units our military dispatches with ease. (Incidentally, what's the current avg. ratio of rounds/tons of ordnance per insurgent kill from 2003-yesterday, and how many *decades* will it take the U.S. at current rates to produce 2M, let alone 20M, times that quantity?)

The insurgency in Iraq failed to drive out the Americans, and right now is failing to topple the Shia regime that is in place.  They are stuck in the same rut as the IRA is in Ireland, still willing to be criminals, but the population doesn't really like them or care for their politics.  Also the insurgencies in southwest Asia have been much less successful at killing Soldiers than Aesop's projected casualty rate for the 20 million deer hunters.  Iraqbodycount.org lists just over 100,000 Iraqi's dead from violence, where last count for Coalition deaths was just over 4,200.  With that ratio of kills to losses the 20 million deer hunters would be killed by 1 million occupation forces.  Not a good comparison though, since a lot of the Iraqi deaths were caused by insurgents using IEDs.

The insurgency in Afghanistan has only one play in their playbook, but it's a really good one and it worked on Alexander the Great, The Mongol Empire, Britain, Soviet Russia, and now the USA.  Wait until the empire gets tired of wasting money on the backside of nowhere, eventually they will take their ball and go home.  In Afghanistan US casualties after more than a decade of war are a bit over 3,000.

Between Iraq and Afghanistan the coalition body count is still under 8,000 as of the time of this post.  The .mil can sustain that level of loss indefinitely.  So using SW Asia as an example of insurgents lacking coordination to stay in the fight is a bad example of a successful insurgency from a lethality perspective (and there are actually very well defined insurgent networks in both countries at this point).

Remember I'm not saying that 20 million deer hunters couldn't fight, I'm saying that they can't just fight and expect to win.
That military if turned inward won't have a safe rear area anywhere here, won't have secure interior lines of transport nor stable, unlimited, or even sufficient supply, and will still face all the same disadvantages it can't overcome now, and at 20 times the opposing strength over 10 times the territory. And that's on Day 1. I doubt .mil lasts until Day 100 under those conditions.
(Unless they simply nuke the entire battlespace outside their bunkers, which defines the word "pyrhhic".)

That's why these ants don't want to become an elephant.
Logically this makes sense, until you realize that not all terrain is key or decisive terrain.  The occupation forces do not need to control all terrain, only key terrain that allows a marked advantage.  Why didn't the insurgents in Iraq strike the ports in Kuwait?  Because they didn't think to fight outside their own neighborhoods and provinces.  What freedom fighter from Idaho is going to go execute a raid on the Portland docks?  Terrain dictates tactics to a large extent.  And expecting the occupation forces to be stupid about terrain is a bad plan.
I think long before then, while the option for a do-over still existed, the troops would be recalled to their barracks and told to sit on their hands, while the Pentagon brass quietly visited the opposition leadership to lay out 20,000,000+ reasons why an impeachment, speedy trial (with the 82d AB Div pulling exterior security), and public hanging of a tyrant or three, ahead of a restored constitutional republic was in everyone's long term health interests.

Failing that, I think they'd simply shell the Death Star into rubble, and then oversee a restoration themselves, because they can do the math, but mainly because no one in our military sees either Custer or Benedict Arnold as role models.
A military coup has never been a viable option in American history.  And if it ever did get to the Roman model of military matters, you can bet that Congress will simply stop paying Soldiers (although with 1.4 billion rounds of ammunition purchased by DHS and other gov agencies, I don't see the .mil being used as an internal security force).  How many soldiers would show up to fight without getting paid?  Who would issue the movement order to get the 82nd Airborne anywhere?  The .mil is under civil control precisely so we don't have a threat to the existence of the Republic, so we can avoid the military dictatorship of Rome.

One thing I have learned from studying successful modern insurgencies is that "they don't just happen" and it takes some sort of minimum level of coordination to win from the insurgent perspective.  I could be wrong about this, just because it has never happened before doesn't mean it won't happen next time.  But hope is not a method, and it sure as hell isn't a plan.

If anyone has a plan that can lay out how to get 20 million people to fight for freedom, and then lay down a stable Republic behind them, I'm all ears.  Expecting 20 million individuals to conduct unorganized and random acts of violence and get some sort of political result just strikes me as wishful thinking.  Don't fall into the "underpants gnome" logic and skip step 2, if you really believe that you have conditions for success, plan it out from start to finish and lay it out. 

69 comments:

Anonymous said...

Its not 20 million. Its more like 100 million. You know. The number of people buying assault rifles,cammies field gear, body armor, NVDs and boots over the last few years. This has been a fun little Psywarop, y'all been runin',but I think you gave up way more than you got. And Sir what do you think that your men will do if you give the order to Murder Mom& pop,& the kiddies. In THIS country. Shoot them? Or shoot YOU?

AM said...

Ok Anonymous, you are right back to the Underpants Gnome level of planning.

Step 1: 100 Million Gun Owners!
Step 2: ?
Step 3: Freedom!

You need to articulate step two just a little more, explain how it will work, explain how it will be supported, and explain what the hell your "freedom" really looks like.

LFMayor said...

you know sir, just how many of these inferior deer hunters do you think wore the uniform in the past, even did your current job in the past? In some cases, before you had hair south of the equator.

Your career choice seems to be letting a bit of pride seep into your logic. Dangerous that.

Anonymous said...

Ok, I'd like to see 50 nations ,free of central government. Liveing as they see fit, In peace. Will the federal military dictatorship in DC allow Peacefull change? OH HELL NO. The republic is dead. Our rights are gone, and the scum that think they run things assert the "right" to do with us as they will. Including kill us. ON A WHIM. AMERIKA is a military dictatorship,phony elections and all.What is STEP 2? CIVIL WAR and nothing we do can stop it. For DC belives that we are property,SLAVES to be used and gotten rid of as they see fit. Myself I should much rather die a free man than live as a slave. What happens after? Who knows? Who cares? Its time to clean out the outhouse.

Anonymous said...

AM now you are just being cruel, I understand your frustration, but I think there are better ways to deliver a better script to people with no abstract thinking skills.

The Appleseed script is fine, its just not politics. Seperate marksmanship and politics and synthesize them in a later essay.

When that time comes don't forget to add that counter insurgency is a bean counter's war.

RobRoy

Anonymous said...

AM,
Tsk tsk. The fallacies, they burn us.

The total population of Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as the area, coincidentally, is almost exactly equivalent to Texas and California. With half the U.S. Army, and no small amount of USAF, Marines, and Navy/CG assets tied up, we still not only don't "control" any great sum of either, and in fact those ineffective insurgent raggamuffins waltzed onto an airbase, killed a squadron commander, and rendered a USMC squadron combat ineffective indefinitely, which hasn't happened...ever.
So if you had the *entire* .mil, you could, at best, give Florida and New York, along with CA and TX, a level of "security" that would be the envy of Beirut, what with the level of artillery fire, strafing, firefights, IEDs, and random ambushes that go on over there. How, praytell, will that play in Peoria, and the 45 states you'll have to conceed - provided you strip all our troops from Germany, Italy, the U.K., Korea, Japan, every ship at sea and every stateside base outside the 4/5ths of the U.S. you won't be able to secure? And that's just the paper drill portion of the exercise.

"Also, the insurgencies in southwest Asia have been much less successful at killing soldiers etc. etc. ..."

Well, yes. *Might* have something to do with listening to someone who told them combat marksmanship was inconsequential. Having a main battle rifle that they can't hit sh*t with at 300m - when they use the sights - probably doesn't up their odds much either. Of course, all those crappy undisciplined deer hunters will have will be bolt-action .30-06s with telescopic sights, and by your admision, a nodding aquaintance with exterior ballistics somewhat greater than that of the honor grad of the 3rd grade Kabul madrassa. I can see where having the same equipment as Marine snipers in Vietnam would be a handicap to an insurgency.

Then there's that risible set of "body count" statistics. Firstly, you assert that losing approx. 2 guys a day is something the military can tolerate "indefinitely". Yes, *over there*, when you can recruit replacements *from here* normally. How's that going to work when the recruiters are the first couple of thousand guys shot? Or will MRAPs and IBAs become standard issue for trolling for poolees?
Let's also not forget that for each of those killed, there are x3-4 wounded.
And please, count apples to apples. Those 100K Iraqis killed count ALL Iraqis, not insurgents. So, how'd'ya figure 90K civilians "collateral damage" in Texas, CA, FLA, and NY will aid my insurgency recruiting drive? How you going to make sure none of them have relatives on a base, working in a .gov agency, or {gasp} serving in the military that, oopsie, fragged them?
And you have no earthly idea how many insurgents there are in SWA, nor does the CIA, DIA, NRO, or Chloe's Psychic Friends Network. Yes, there are some. Some unk. % of that 100,000, which included everyone that bodycount group could stuff in to make Uncle Sam look bloodthirsty.But 5%?10%?25%?It's pure SWAG guesswork. For all we know, the ratio is 1:1, and clearly no better than 25:1.
So at the most pessimistic marksmanship for the hunters, and the most optimistic casualty ratio, we'll run out of hunters just about the time we run out of troops.

(Continued due to space constraints)
-Aesop

Anonymous said...

Why target the military when there are an abundance of domestic enemies. Many college professors, politicians, commie organizations (code pink, ACLU etc), employees of certain government agencies would seem to be the way to go.

Bring the doom down on the people who are causing the problems. Why should they be able to sleep safely in their beds at night while they are destroying our country?

Rainman

Anonymous said...

So what chance would you have given Geo Washington and co.?

Myname least I be mocked.

AM said...

Aesop,

You made my point, an Army doesn't have to control the whole country, just key/decisive terrain.

Also, you need to come up with your plan to show how your 20 Million will work to achieve something, not just randomnly kill people.

How are you going to get them to agree on a political endstate and then achieve it? A few comments up one of your Deer Hunters said that the endsate was no FedGov just 50 states. Can you sell that vision to 20 million people? Is that even YOUR vision?

So Aesop, what is your endstate? Work back from there, explain it to me step by step.

AM said...

Anonymous lest he be mocked,

The American Revolution had a few things going for it.

1. A shadow government in the form of the Continental Congress. (Something the Taliban has in Afghanistan)
2. External support from the nation of France. (Something the Taliban has in Pakistan)
3. Popular support of a large segment of the populace (preachers serving up freedom from the pulpit, a copy of "Common Sense" circulating widely) (Something the Taliban has in the Mosques and fatwahs)
4. Geographic isolation, the Empire had the Atlantic Ocean delaying information and logistics. (Something the Taliban has with being in the backside of nowhere).

None of this is classified information, the conditions that a successful insurgency (or counter-insurgency) are pretty well known.

Anonymous said...

(Continued)
And hey, let's ease off on the "Gnome Underpants" Strategy. It was military policy in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and *still is* in Afghanistan. Plug in the variables and check my math.

And yes, humans will try to slack off, goof off, and self-preserve. In fact, that was my experience of most grunts, tankers, gun bunnies, rotorheads, and jet jockeys in the military. I certainly won't be charging any MG nests just for a non-existant piece of ribbon.
But I'll happily take a shot at a guy sitting in a turret like a staked goat on a checkpoint if the ball starts. And from just as far away and hidden as I can get and still make the shot. But there isn't much need for low crawling 2 miles to anywhere in my little megalopolis. A walk in the stormdrains, maybe.
And if I can count on some quick counterbattery IDF, I'll be happy to set that mortar tube up on a railroad switching yard, or beside a defense plant. After I drop that one round and motor away, I pity the .mil's logistics complications after the splash though.

"Why didn't the insurgents in Iraq strike the ports in Kuwait? Because they didn't think to fight outside their own neighborhoods and provinces."

I'm going out on a limb and going with a couple of Navy carrier groups factoring into their OODA loop.Of course, being offered the crack troops of the Transportation Corps (sorry boys & girls, no offense, but you're not Delta Force and those trucks are about as agile as hippos on skates), along routes that were never 100% IED-free once in 10 years could have been another important factor.

"Although with 1.4B rounds...I don't see the .mil being used as an internal security force."

Well, bust my buttons, that's the money quote!!
AM, let me thank you for taking all that realtime sat intel, air cover, artillery, gunships, drones, tanks, and pissed off Rangers with NODs right off the table. You might have said that up front, and saved a mess of electrons both ways.

So now our 20M Elmers only have to contend with - generously - 1M feds, Barney Fifes, and Boss Hogg? The guys who solve less than half the 30,000 homicides in *peacetime*, whose HRT was stymied by 60 women and children in Waco, and who can't find 90% of the drugs, stolen cars, and illegal aliens who move across the borders in broad daylight, 24/7/365.

Jesus, Mary, and Joseph, if that's all I've gotta whittle down, I may have to recruit some blind guys and retards to keep from being accused of piling on.

"Our government is designed for a religious and moral people. It is wholly inadequate for any other type." - John Adams

The only reason our law enforcement system works as well as it does now is that 90-something% of us are law-abiding. Once the gloves come off both ways, the L.A. Riots are what LEOs will wistfully refer to as "the good old days". Please, let those who care to reacquaint themselves with the YouTube highlights of how a division-sized contingent of LAPD, LASO, CHP, and even CaNG units covered themselves with glory while a metro area of 8M was looted and burnt at will for 4 days and nights, because a fraction of 1% of the citizens were mildly cheesed off at police antics.

If you're serious, we won't need ammo and night vision, just bananas for tailpipes, and some donuts. To recap
1. 20M deerhunters
2. American Graffitti
3. Victory

Best Regards,
-Aesop

AM said...

LFMayor,

Please prove me wrong and write out the plan. I did not come to this position lightly nor without reflection.

20 Million Deer Hunters, less than half of which are NRA members. That tells me that around 50% don't really care about politics enough to get involved.

If we assume that the "Threeper" belief is correct, and apply every deer hunter into the 3% we are looking at 9 million deer hunters.

List your assumptions, such as "the military will be paralyzed from desertion" or "every shot will be a hit" or "Each of my 9 million deer hunters is willing and able to take a human life."

I've written my piece about why people need to organize. You write the piece why they don't, please prove me wrong. Much easier to stay unorganized and claim to be doing something.

Anonymous said...

AM when your done could you please post the SDM qual course in brief. And if you are going to be buttered up by the folks at Remington about the new rifle can you suggest to them to make a version for the .308 family and with a stock not so damn fey looking. I'm thinking fixed, attached to the chassis with none of that adjustable doodaddery but can be modified or changed out to personal preference (AR type attachement to a receiver extension but as comfy as my Weatherby syn) Thanks

RobRoy

Rick said...

It just isn't worth trying to plan because as soon as the first bullets start to fly the plan goes out the window. I have heard this countless times in military planning. Have a backup plan and another backup plan for the backup plan.
I hope we just don't have to find out who is right. If we're all wrong then we're all right. Who knows what the future holds. Just hope for the best but plan for the worst. The worst being that you'll have to do some shooting as some other human being for some reason that you feel strongly enough about.

AM said...

Rick,

You actually wrote, "It just isn't worth trying to plan because as soon as the first bullets start to fly the plan goes out the window."

I'll quote GEN Eisenhower, "I've found plans to be worthless, but planning to be priceless."

Think about that for a bit, then explain why not having a plan could possibly be better than having a plan. Seriously.

AM said...

Aesop,

I won't touch on your grasp of military history, suffice to say I have an alternate view of events.

If that is your plan, roll with it. I still want to know what your endstate would be, restored Constitution, restored Articles of Confederation, no Federal Gov at all, a Monarchy, a Republic, an Oligarchy, a limited franchise.

What will people be fighting for?

Anonymous said...

Your antagonists might be channeling the plot from John Ross' "Unintended Consequences." Basically a bunch of POed people jump on the bandwagon of shooting FedThugs after a terrorize the populace raid goes wrong. A loose confederation of folk start potshotting fed goofballs when they try and crack down and in the end the FedGov gives up its futile quest at gun control and goes back to safely building up pension credits. Not a bad book, 1000+pages of gun culture minutae spiced with decent battles. RR

Anonymous said...

If "controlling key terrain" is what we're calling 10 years in Iraq and 10+ yrs in Afghanistan, I've already won.

If any govt. expends the amount of ordnance on Pittsburgh and Atlanta as we have on Fallujah and Kabul, with 200K civilian casualties, the entire populace would rise up, hunt that army down to the last man, stuff their genitals in their mouths, string them to lightposts from D.C. to the Golden Gate, and set them on fire while still alive. Then they'd get medieval on their @$$es.
Even then we'd probably have to hold Amish, the Swiss, and the Salvation Army back forcibly to keep them from joining on the insurgent side.

BTW, randomly killing the minions of a police state would absolutely achieve something. Especially if even so much as 10% of those 20M undertook it.

As you, others online, and a century or more of historians have noted, Rule 1 of an insurgency is :Show Up.
Rule 2: Don't Lose
Tactics at that point are pretty simple:
Tyrant X sucks.
You work for Tyrant X.
Have a nice faceful of lead, M---F---.
Lather, Rinse, Repeat.
I'm going to figure 90% of my deer hunters won't shoot them today, maybe not tomorrow or the next day. But after a week or 2, 10% of them will. 10% of those connect, and that leaves the Empire minus 20,000 stormtroopers. That's not nothing, it's Gettysburg every month, with Pickett played by the Forces of Evil. And my guys, with no chain of command, have just eliminated near 20% of the opposing army, and they only have another dozen volleys in their original box of .30-06. Big Green can't sustain *that* level of casualties for 1 month, let alone indefinitely.

I already pointed out that a simple return to a constitutional republic wouldn't be too great a strain; we also seem to have a Tea Party, Constitution Party, Libertarian Party, and even a scattering of Democrats and Republicans who wouldn't kick up much fuss at the prospect of setting the wayback machine 1/2 or 1 century or so, give or take. I'm sure they could work out a compromise in committee.

Meanwhile, a month's passed.Their side is down another 40K, while my side is out 2 more rounds apiece. Sadly, half - of those who fired- of my guys are dead. Leaving the score at the end of the second inning:
Big Green. 420,000
Deer Hunters 19,900,000

I can't understand how they can go on with only a 40:1 advantage over the world's premier ground combat force, and only a 20:1 advantage over the combined law enforcement of the entire country, but they're plucky.

By month 3, the Internet propaganda campaign to "Hit A Smokey For America" is wildly successful among the 2,000,000 long-haul truckers, and local law enforcement is running out of cops, which is fine, because they don't have many vehicles and no gasoline except what they can siphon from seized vehicles, when they dare to show their faces on the streets.

The military has circled their troops on bases, after a plethora of civilian drive-thru raids on the pitifully armed base security contingents. The military's only ammunition plant at Lake City Arsenal was an early casualty, leaving the .mil critcally short-stocked. Random groups of hunters "requisitioned" every round they could get from Winchester, Remington, and Federal plants before rendering the lines inoperative to keep them from the Empire.
Smaller companies are running multiple shifts in various places to supply insurgent demand, and even more troubling, the .gov is finding out that there are millions of reloaders providing "home-grown" loads to Elmers - many of them match-grade.

Do I really need to keep tightening this noose?
-Aesop

Jimmy the Saint said...

The "Underpants Gnome" argument only makes sense if it assumes that the domestic insurgency expected to win immediately or at least very rapidly. The IRA fought for close to 30 years. Even our own Revolution lasted for 8. If it happens here, it won't be an overnight thing.

There's also no real guarantee that the military would even be directly involved in any armed conflict here. When Yugoslavia fell apart, the JNA was as much an observer as a participant. It could easily be the same here - local militias based on racial or political lines being the primary forces, with the military largely sitting it out. It could be National Guard units, augmented by local auxiliaries, fighting local actions within a breakaway state.

It's all a big hypothetical at this point anyway. Until we know what the fight is over and how it starts, we can't really tell how it will be fought, or who will fight it.

Rick said...

@AM
We don't have a plan and can't have a plan because we don't know what the threat is, specifically.
Can you define that SPECIFICALLY right now.
Can you tell me that there are troops rolling into Somewhere America right now, with this, that and something other hardware, specifically for the purpose of doing something to someone or some group. The only specific intel that anyone has is speculation at best. We see signs that quite possibly mean something that we fear but may be totally for something else that we haven't even the slightest inclination of. So plan for that if you can. Granted you have much more experience than I will ever have but if you can plan for that and have a backup plan and a backup plan for the backup plan, then you are truly the planning God and I bow to your superiority.

AM said...

Jimmy the Saint,

Good point, what would you do to prevent the Balkanization of the USA?

Or is that preferable?

Aesop,

I'm assuming that 300 million minus 100 million (gun owners) = 200 Million citizens that you have to deal with. Are you going to give them the vote? Kill them? Are you going to starve them like Stalin or Mao? How are you going to deal with those that actively supported the FedGov? How are you going to end the fighting and get back to a state of peace?

In other words, how are you going to hold it together and keep from falling into the "perpetual revolution" fiasco? Will you get the Libertarians, Republicans, Greens, Democrats, Communists, Socialists, all agree to a limited form of government? How will you tell the 50 million food stamp recipients that they are cut off?

It is fine and dandy to talk about a "restored Constitution" but so far no one is talking specifics that matter.

If we can't even get Ron Paul elected as President, what luck are you going to have building political consensus with your 10 million sniper teams that have no command and control?

Rick said...

@AM
Additionally, having a plan now to attack some part of government, if that is who the boogeman turns out to be,and posting it on this blog is a sure fired way to end up in the graybar hotel with a bunch of your friends and associates charged with conspiracy to overthrow the US Government, and it will probably stick.
I think the best plan to have right now is plan on how you will all reconnect if the SHTF, access your cached supplies, and bring the fight to the boogeman one day at a time. Then you can start planning for real activities based on real circumstances that you have eyes on.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps I'm completely off here, but why hasn't Switzerland been dragged into any European war over the last few hundred years or been taken over by corrupt governments? The Swiss are generally well cared for and the government actually built enough fallout shelters for every citizen. They aren't a nation of deer hunters, but they do have a long-standing tradition of being well armed.

Perhaps deer hunter/mall ninja vs. .mil argument is missing a bigger point?

-AS

AM said...

@Rick,

It isn't my job to make your plan.

Start with your endstate, whatever that may be.

Then commence with IPB and define where the fight needs to be to achieve that endstate:

Where are the political seats of power? Official and unofficial?

Where is the key infrastructure for water, power, sewage, medicine, transportation, food?

Where are the choke points you need to hold to control movement?

Once you've done that, then you know exactly how many men/units you need to hold that terrain and achieve your endstate.

Otherwise you are just waiting for X million people to decide to get pissed off at the same time.

AM said...

AS,

Switzerland has a geographic advantage that we don't. They also have an economic advantage. They also have a political advantage of recognized neutrality going back to the Napoleonic era.

Sweden didn't get pulled into WWII either, but they had to work harder to stay neutral than Switzerland did. Sweden didn't do it by having a "citizens militia" but a large standing Army.

But exactly how does Swiss neutrality in WWII have anything to bear on an internal insurgency?

Anonymous said...

Good discussion, AM. Gets a guy to thinking. Nice responses Aesop.

Daniel

Jimmy the Saint said...

@AM: "Good point, what would you do to prevent the Balkanization of the USA?

Or is that preferable?"

I don't know. It may be that political, racial, or what-have-you differences may be too great and parts of the nation will leave. As to whether or not that's a good thing, I suppose it depends on where you live - if you're among similar, like-minded folk, it's probably ok. If you're a distinct minority in some fashion, probably not.

Don said...

AM- I don't believe for an instant that a significant number of military will turn on the American people, no matter what the orders. It absolutely goes against the attitudes, education, and training (not the same thing) of American troops.

Recall the survey given to Marines at 29 Palms. It created such an uproar that many Marines refused to fill it out. I know for a fact that I would have refused to follow orders such as that. No doubt some would. But I believe it would be a small minority.

My oath was to the Constitution, not to the government. If I think the government is becoming a tyranny, and I do, I will do what I can to "support and defend the Constitution, against all enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC".

God willing, it won't involve a shooting war.

Anonymous said...

Hello AM,
I'm not specifically discussing WW2, but rather the overall history of a continent at war and a tiny nation getting to "choose" to be neutral.
Geography does not matter in the case of how the Swiss are governed internally. Why hasn't the government of Switzerland abused its citizens as we claim is being done in the US?
The second amendment was patterned after the Swiss model of an armed citizenry, so the benefits have been known for a long time before the USA was yet a twinkle...
The point being missed is that when you have parties of equal or near-equal power, they tend not to fight openly. Perhaps there are specific abuses here and there, but the overall equilibrium is maintained.
The military needs boogeymen to exist. When there are none to be found, you create some! Perhaps that is a reason many veterans returning home are being labeled potential terrorists?

http://fabiusmaximus.com/ -> several recent articles on the state of the military.

-AS

Dov said...

Maybe we should just hope we get invaded by deer, then we will all be ready.

Rick said...

@AM
All good starts but even having most of the IPB worked out, which I have tried to do and have a pretty good picture currently, getting 50 or 500 men into the plan without getting caught up in a 'conspiracy' is not going to happen right now. Probably making your point...
But then, even after the SHTF and having a million really pissed off heavily armed men and women, you still won't be able to turn that into an effective fighting force to go head to head with any professional army, so don't do it. But you can go out with your deer rifle or your whatever you have on hand, and decide to shoot one of the tyrants down. Then if you survive, go home and go back to work. Doing that just 500000 times will defeat just about any army in the world, which is my point. Live to fight another day. They are people just like everyone else. They bleed and die just the same way.

Anonymous said...

200 million unarmed citizens?
Decisions, decisions.

I know, let's let anyone over 18, not insane or incarcerated for a felony, vote. Pretty much like next Tuesday. Except we'll demand picture IDs, and limit Democrats in Boston and Chicago to only voting once, provided they actually have a pulse.

Now, how to keep the peace amongst the 200M unarmed...
Maybe let them vote on...new mayors and police chiefs? Enact local ordinances complicit with state and federal law, arrest lawbreakers, stuff like that.

Naturally, we can't count on *all* of them agreeing on limited government. Fortunately, the Constitution does, and they're welcome to book passage elsewhere if said document doesn't accommodate them in the manner to which they've become accustomed. Dropping any arms, and swearing an oath to support the U.S. was good enough for Lee's Army and the South in 1865, so there's little cause to demand more should occasion arise anew.

I'm thinking that when no welfare check arrives the month after things settle down, or the month after that, the former recipients of the public dole won't need to buy a vowel to puzzle it out.
For the rest who get pushy about The Man keeping them down, they can suffer in silence and get over it, or start a ruckus. In which case, they can have free pink underpants, green bologna sandwiches, and thirty days pushing a shovel for the county to reconsider their game plan. It seems to work for Sheriff Arpaio.

And I look at not electing Ron Paul as a feature, and not a bug, in this or any system.

But you've finally moved onto a real issue. In any insurgency that lasts long enough, Phase II is Transition, and Phase III Conventional Warfare.

Phase II is the time during which your insurgent forces can see (and participate in selecting) political leaders to represent their viewpoint(s).

It seems self-evident that those 20M guys wouldn't have picked up their rifles without an opinion, and they won't keep shooting if you ignore it, nor put them down afterwards unless they've accomplished what they set off to do.

That's why you include them politically, and absorb them operationally, but not until the enemy has been sufficiently weakened, and your side can sustain conventional forces as something more than a juicy target.

Then you can begin Phase III Conventional Operations.

Nota bene that it was over a year from Lexington to Declaration Of Independence, and twelve years from Yorktown to a functional Constitution.

To my recollection, nobody mustered on Lexington Common in April 1775 possessed a Bill of Rights or a "G. Washington for President" button on their lapel, nor did the mustering officer address them to "Aim anywhere, it doesn't really matter, because we'll never defeat those magnificent military SOBs anyway."
Imagine the novelty.

Best Regards,
-Aesop

Anonymous said...

At the strategic time, the System will trot out a bunch of retired admirals and generals, in uniform, puffing their chests with a foot of salad, looking like Super Patriot Killer. These fellows will talk the restless proles down. Most of the proles, being patriotards and power groupies, will lay down.

The more aggressive proles will be hired as informers and provocateurs. They love a mission first, and meeting the big guys in secret. They love it. They'll rat out their communities and families.

In the meantime, cable TV will amp up. The couch nation will get lots of Iwo Jima. The proles will set their deer rifles down and watch, eating microwave popcorn. Patriotism will overwhelm them.

The few hardcore resisters of heart will be in desperate situations, very lonely and psychologically up a tree. Their inert, sold out, dumb and timid countrymen will depress them.

As I read history, the smartest resisters have simply avoided the reaction of System to herd and stepped aside, cutting here and there if the opportunities present.

Works every time.

Dave
Baltimore

Pericles said...

Lets look at it from the other side. It basically works like this:

Regime forces have as first priority trying to control as much of the population as possible by clamping down on major cities in order to "safeguard" the population from "insurgent" attacks. The annoyed at the regime population heads for the hills and sets up camp. The propaganda wars get underway as both sides try to establish / enhance their legitimacy with the population.

The regime forces try to consolidate the major cities and expand their footprint to smaller towns, and finally the rest of the population. Meanwhile, the other side has to show that it can control territory and prevent regime forces from operating in rural areas. The ability ot lack thereof of the regime forces to gather, allocate, and move food and other supplies from place to place and feed the population becomes the "battlespace". If the regime forces can not feed and care for the population in the big cities, they lose credibility, and the population eventually turns, in favor of letting the other guys out in the countryside to run the place.

In Texas, think of the Interstates as they tie in the ports and major Naval base in with the major cities. Houston to DFW along I-45, back down I-35 to San Antonio, and over I-10 back to Houston is the area that will be the "triangle of death". This will extend down I-37 to Corpus Christi, I-10 and I-20 to El Paso (Ft. Bliss and 1st Armored Division), and from Temple on US 180 to Ft. Hood (III Corps). That area also covers most of the 36th Division (TX National Guard).

Add to the mix of the Interstates being the MSRs (Main Supply Routes) for military movement as well. And you have a strategic imperative or two. For example, 80% of military small arms ammunition is produced at the Lake City Army Ammunition Plant in Missouri. How do you think that ammunition gets to the soldier with the M4? Supply convoys traveling long distances over Interstates that will require convoy escort (I actually expect much of the drone activity over the Interstates to monitor for IEDs and convoy ambushes) which is an additional drain of tactical units ....

At curremt OPTEMPO, the military has about a 7 month supply of small arms ammunition (5.56, 7.62). Going full bore, with every unit on patrol and the entire Guard and Reserve called up will triple the OPTEMPO, and even both ammo plants going 24 X 7, I don't think they can produce enough of the M855A1 5.56 round to keep up with the usage rate.

Ft. Bliss is actually closer to CA than it is to Dallas, so with only 2 or 3 Marine regimental sized units in CA and no real Army presence, those troops are headed west. Just for DFW and Houston area, you have a population of over 10 million, and if you allot 8 brigades there, each brigade having about 1500 riflemen (or one per 9000 population), the amount of force deployed dissipates rapidly.

There is still the panhandle area (west of I-35 and north of I-20) that remains untouched .... the ammo has to make it from Independence, MO (Lake City plant) to Texas somehow ... tactical drones have a short operational range, so they get hit on the ground ....

I'd hate to be the DCSOPS guy at the 5 sided rat cage who has the job of coming up with the martial law plan.

Mt Top Patriot said...

Am Merc you said:
"Don't fall into the "underpants gnome" logic and skip step 2, if you really believe that you have conditions for success, plan it out from start to finish and lay it out."

I think the reality is, step 2 isn't going to happen until some sort of black swan event.
What I'm trying to convey is, step 2 is not impossible, but it isn't possible right now.

But, you got to start somewhere, and your writings on your blog, and others like you, who in one fashion or another are spreading the gospel of liberty and unconventional warfare/redress.
Now maybe I'm being too hopeful, but it sure seems to me over my half a century of life, I ain't never seen so many people gearing up and thinking 2nd Amendment remedy.
Look at things from the regular guy, the "deer hunter" perspective.
Most right now got to pay the bills, fill the fridge, pay for a vehicle and fuel to get to work, and all those mundane but important basic necessities of life. Then you got to grub up the greenbacks to kit yourself out with decent battle worthy gear. In essence, you got to start someplace. Something to point out, and I'm "hoping" it is not too far fetched to contend in general, having in ones possession a mighty fine battle rifle, kit and ammo load out, is an empowering thing. It conjures up visions of our founders, of valiant and brave patriots, it brings home the stark cold hard reality, once the shooting begins, it is going to be a world of bad shit.
Well, no ones asked me to kit up, or think hard about the prospects of armed redress, what will happen to my family, my home I've worked a life to procure, this very country I call my home. But no one had to ask me, it is my duty, I'm as honor bound to that oath of fealty to the Constitution as any military man. I have to do it. There is no choice far as I'm concerned. But that is me.
I'd die for the opportunity to get some down and dirty basic training that would make me at least an iota of a fighting man with chance to live long enough to become a seasoned combat effective fighter. Mr. Mosbey's classes are a wonderful opportunity, reality is the expense and time from work I'm finding difficult to overcome. But regardless, it ain't going to stop me from entering the breech if I can't get that training, I just train on my own best as I can with the info guys like you so generously provide.

How many guys, and girls ever think about it like that I wonder?

I know, step 2 or not, I'll still do my duty.

I hope there are lots who think similar, and maybe all many need is a practical and cost effective way to get training and time with like minded folks, and from there things begin to evolve and take the shape of step 2?

I know at first, I felt isolated and alone about these matters, now hardly at all. And that is due in great part to all these great guy's like you Am Merc and Mr. Mosbey, TL Davis, and so many more who have opened my eyes and created I think a movement towards Liberty.
So thanks you guys.
My hats off to you.

AM said...

Aesop,

Lexington and Concord wasn't the start of the Revolution, just the start of active shooting. The Boston Tea Party, various meetings of the Continental Congress, publication of Common Sense, all happened BEFORE shots were fired. Heck, even those Minutemen Militia types were part of the organization of the resistance. Just saying a successful revolution doesn't spring up at Lexington and Concord. Much like it didn't spring up at Ruby Ridge or Waco.

Pericles,

Good analysis except for the fact that you didn't figure out all those tactical victories by the freefor would be coordinated. On the internet it is fine to pull effective units out of thin air, in reality it is harder to do so.

Secondly don't forget ammunition plants in Mexico, Canada, Great Britain and Israel. Unless the dollar is totally worthless the Empire will have a source of ammunition.

If California goes to an insurgency, will it be to deer hunters, or to La Raza? If you don't have a plan in place to exercise power once you've seized it, expect someone else to seize it.

You have to think through a solution before you can execute it.

Pericles said...

@AM

Have not covered the FreeFor side yet - that is on the way. Hopefully, I didn't waste my S-3 time for nothing.

wirecutter said...

I did a post on this not too long ago. I also pointed out that of those 20 million hunters, most of them have less than 1 box of ammo per weapon.
We're gonna have a standing army of 20 million hunters armed with fancy clubs after they shoot their box of ammo.

Anonymous said...

A.M. I found the flaw in your thinking. Gurrillas Have no need of camand&control. Big Army needs it. C&C makes a pattern that the "think tank"boys can use to hunt down the gurrilla. Like E-Commo and computers, radios and cell phones. I causes more problems than it solves. You think like a staff collage man. WW2, BIG ARMY, FYI thats WHY the US LOST Vietnam Iraq And the 'Stan. And you DID lose. Y'all made all the same mistakes Over and over and over. THE only group that needs central government is BIG ARMY.

Mt Top Patriot said...

There is a lot of merit in what this guy has to say about deer hunters:

"And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?... The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If...if...We didn't love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation.... We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward." — Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

Remember, those who forget the past take the dirt nap first. I'll never say die.

And oh ya, when democracy turns to tyranny, deer hunters still get to vote.
By cartridge box.

Anonymous said...

AM,
So at the end, all you've got to come back to is that the Revolution needed impetus and underpinnings, and where are ours?

Geez, if only there was some means to see if people disagree with the rise of big government and the slow strangulation of American freedom.

If only there was a balanced TV network, some means like maybe radio for people to share conservative thought, someone who would publish the works of freedom-loving people, and some magical way for millions of people from all walks of life to communicate directly minute by minute on everything from Grand Strategy to tactics at the level of blades of grass...oh wait, I forgot, there's Fox News, about 100 conservative radio hosts, 50 feet of bookshelves in every Barnes & Noble with everything from Locke, Jefferson, Hamilton et al to Pat Buchanan, Ann Coulter, and another 100 authors, all available as well on Amazon.com on the Internet (thanks, Al Gore!), where one is left with...what, 300 million blogs, including this one, where we're all chewing the fat over your virtual cracker barrel.

I'm thinking we've got it covered.

And past, present, and hopefully future goverment minions have tippie-toed around events like Ruby Ridge & Waco precisely so as *not* to give birth to a Lexington and Concord event,IMHO precisely because they're far more concerned with the marksmanship of 100M gun owners than you or Oleg Volk are. Why else all the dissembling, lies and coverups over those two events, and Fast&Furious now?

Come the day, I don't care whether they're concerned, worried, or wetting themselves, as long as they realize that a helluva lot more of us than them will be happy to show up the minute they hit the next version of the road to Lexington, and that we can, indeed, and *will* do so given sufficient cause.

I grant that on the day after that, I'd *love* a million A-teams even more than 10 million sniper teams, and the day will come when we'll need main force Bns, Bdes, and Divs. But historically, you can't jump from the Boston Tea Party to Yorktown without Lexington. And maybe it's simple gravitational physics, but it seems like everytime you get a unit together like Lexington or at the Alamo, that's what sets things off that both sides dance about trying to avoid.
So I think the table is set, and that whatever number of folks that show up will be exactly the same as two divisons' worth of LGOPs in Normandy at 0darkthirty on June 5, 1944.
There won't be a lot of cohesion, there will be a ton of confusion, but there'll be one ungodly amount of priceless scatterhell unleashed far and wide, and God help anyone who gets between us who land there and the nearest crossroads.

-Aesop

Child of the Trillion dollar wasteland. said...

First- excellent discourse,and i commend you all for staying amicable. Lots of great ideas being tossed around.
It seems to me that local government, not being part of the larger problem, could continue in its function to a certain extent. Some services would suffer, trash collection, snow clearing, but if you have enough people stay around the major services like water, power and sewage could continue to operate. Temporary city employees could volunteer time to help manage until actual city government is back up. An elected sheriff to help tie the county together, possibly regional governors or a state governor pulling together to keep the state running while things are rough.
To me, it seems like there is no reason why we can't having people training in city services anyway. Wouldn't that fall in the prepper category- being prepared for anything? Take an active interest in your local government. Learn about the different councils and cabinets. You don't have to be an expert- there are plenty of those already. I know people are already stretched thin on training. Make it a group effort with your tribe. Jim- learn about the city sewage system- pipeline maps, where supplies are kept for repairs, who orders them, where do they ship from, what grid do the sewage plants operate off of? Do they have backup generators? Coal? or like around here- nuke power? How do they handle backups? Where is it flushed to?
Have a person doing the same for the local power grid, instead of the big box grocery store- have a member get close with the local farm co-ops to be able to set up a home-grown grocery store capable of sustaining your town. Have any members familiar with voting procedures? It would be slow, but paper voting by address and photo ID could be done. There is more than one way to do things. Maybe we need start focusing on that as well as the three Bs.
Who is going to organize a committee or something like that, from the top leadership of the patriot movement, If we can't choose those individuals, then maybe just start with the founder of each individual blog/movement/website and go from there? Lot's of people complaining that nothing is happening, lets take steps to get it started. We won't have the luxury of time and freedom forever.

Pericles said...

Now, to look at operations from a FreeFor perspective. Looking at most scenarios, many come to a point at which a government decides that public safety demands that citizens be disarmed. Other scenarios posit urban violence as a catalyst. In any case, we end up with a government trying to maintain what it considers to be proper order over a citizenry that finds such efforts repugnant to the point of armed conflict.

To call FreeFor any kind of force in the initial stages is trying to put a happy face on a FUBAR. Very likely, the spark that sets off widespread violence will come from an incident unrelated to FreeFor personnel, but some one or small group of individuals who decide to fight. This find the FreeFor in everything from organized units, to collections of friends, to individuals with AKs and websites, to any number of armed citizens who decide to strike a blow for liberty in some form. The only thing binding FreeFor together is an ideal – the time has come to enforce the individual liberties guaranteed by the Constitution.

Initially, various FreeFor entities will pursue various operational goals. Organized units, led by vets, will assemble in rural strategic locations, and realizing that their units suck, will use the time of chaos to organize, build, and train their units. Groups of friends will activate bug out plans, and some will look to actively engage guerrilla style, and others will go survivalist mode. Various individual players will go rural and hide initially, or may be convinced that they are fish that can swim in the ocean of a metropolitan area.

Various other activities will tend to happen concurrently. On the southern border, cartels will see this as an opportunity to make inroads into weapon smuggling and expand their operation in the US, urban gangs may align with cartels (some already have) to try to control certain urban neighborhoods, and will contribute to the tendency of certain parts of the population to engage in riot and looting. These elements will also be in conflict with government forces for control of urban areas.

Any attack on government forces will feed into the anti FreeFor propaganda effort, and as tyrannical regimes tend to believe their own propaganda, will serve to strengthen the resolve to maintain control of urban areas. This gives the rural based FreeFor the time window needed to organize politically, establish a governance model (based on a strong Constitutional basis) and form alliance with the organized militias, which will be the nucleus of the organized FreeFor. (Insert Freedom Camp stories here).

Running parallel to the political and military organizations, will be the creation / link up of an intel / underground network in areas not under FreeFor control. Not every FreeFor operative will be part of the organized effort – that is the nature of the beast. The good news in that the “loose cannon” activities server to keep regime forces off balance and putting effort into eliminating opponents that do not represent the loss of a unit to the organized FreeFor. The bad news is some of those “unorganized” FreeFor actions may run counter to the operational strategy and tactics of the “organized” FreeFor.

End Part 1

Pericles said...

The more organized FreeFor units have selected AOs out of the immediate reach of regime forces, based on the organization structure of the BCT. This structure makes it impossible for battalion sized units to conduct independent operations without drawing from the BTSB and BSB, so in order for regime forces to reach FreeFor controlled ares, the BCT has to conduct at least one tactical refueling operation. As the trains area, will be subject to ambush, either the RSTA SQDN or one of the two BNs will have to provide security, weakening the combat power available to chase down the organized FreeFor units, who will be hoping to set an ambush. Meanwhile, it will be the duty of other less structured FreeFor units to locate the trains, and attack by fire, one the main force in 60 to 90 minutes away from the trains ares, in order to catch the operation units in a decision to risk running out of fuel if they continue to chase a militia unit, or return to the trains area to ensure they can return to their operational base. (With a worst case strength of 100 BCTs available for regime forces, using a BDCT on this activity, means some other patrol area is uncovered, and thus an opportunity for FreeFor offensive action)

FreeFor “guerilla” type units have specific missions of taking out aircraft on the ground, C2 assets, and POL assets. Other FreeFor units will be conduction convoy ambush, the occasional IED just for grins, and other harassing operations to support the more structured FreeFor units. The operational goal is to isolate urban areas from supply, until their populations conclude that the regime can’t feed and control them, making the survivors agreeable to a change in government. Additionally, FreeFor units will have to control the border and eliminate “land pirates” in order to protect the citizenry from those who would abuse them. The FreeFor political structure also provides the framework needed for the logistical support of the organized FreeFor.

End Part 2

DAN III said...

AM....I could take this dialogue in another direction after your.reference to.the NRA and your comment tbat only half of of all deer hunters are members. Thus the other half of non-NRA deer hunters are asleep at the wheel.politically. I'm an NRA lifer. I'm tired of the NRA inundating my snail-mail and e-mail in boxes with pleas for me to buy NRA wine, NRA life insurance and offers of NRA trinkets made in Red China if I "contribute" more to the NRA. I'm tired of the NRA giving $5,000 to anti-freedom scoundrels like Harry Reid. I'm tired of this little twerp LaPierre making a six figure salary and immense perks on the backs of NRA members. I'm tired of the NRA failing to send me postcards addressed to my Reps for me to send expressing my and other gun owners concerns, as Gun Owners of America does.

You need to back up accusing non-NRA members as being politically disconnected. How dare you ! Many are members of local and state gun organizations and national organizations like Gun Owners of America. Unlike the NRA who regularly sides with Washington D.C. elites who work to destroy our freedom.

You lost me when you denigrated those who aren't members of the biggest 2d Amendment facade going....the National Rifle Association.

DAN III

DAN III said...

Aesop....you are MY kind of American !

DAN III

AM said...

Dan,

Really? You don't like an example of political participation and decide that everything else I wrote is invalid?

Good for you, drive on with your bad self.

MacBeth51 said...

AM said "20 Million Deer Hunters, less than half of which are NRA members. That tells me that around 50% don't really care about politics enough to get involved."
I am a Deer Hunter, I am interested in politics, but I, along with many others, am not a member of the NRA. The NRA has, in my opinion, and in the opinion of many others I know proven itself to be "the nations largest gun control organization." Past leadership of the NRA was instrumental in getting GTCA '68 passed, when it was foundering, and current leadership has not impressed me any more favorably.

Anonymous said...

AM,
Stop while you are ahead my friend. Stop trying to convince these guys they have to do anything more than hit the range with their deer rifles once a season an call themselves an insurgent.
This is the flip side of out of the box thinking. I am all for the concepts of 4G warfare and "leaderless" resistance. I am all for the ideas of training in unconventional ways. You cannot however take those solid concepts and use them as an excuse to not train or not organize or not plan.
20 million deer hunters are just that and that alone. 20 million deer hunters.
Aesop you are living a fable here, your making a classic mistake. You are looking at a single peice of data and drawing a conclusion from it that has no basis in reality.
You then expand this to 300 million guns purchased and draw the same conclusion. Your conclusions do not account for the myriad of other variables. Many of those 20 million deer hunters are over 60 or under 18. Usefull but not as combat shooters. Many of those guns purchased were multiple purchases by the same individual. Many many many of those 20 million deer hunters are Fudds who have no problem supporting bans on some types of guns. Many are union members who have no problem with collectivist ideals as long as they benefit from them. Many are die hard rural democrats who think anyone even contemplating insurgency must be racist anti-american thugs.
These people will be your enemies not your allies.

20 million deer hunters will not magically morph into 10 million sniper teams ready to strike as guardians of freedom and liberty. Thats so far from reality its not even a starting point to the Underpants business plan. Lets at least get to a place you can start to conceive a plan.

Step 1. Some number of gun owners who may or may not be hunters
Step 2.?
Step 3. Freedom

Now we are at least at a place you can begin to fill in Step 2.
Oh wait planning is counter productive.

Personally I would rather put my faith in the rotting corpse of General Lee. His body will rise up and lead us all to victory against the Federal storm troopers. At least that plan has about as much a basis in reality as the army of Deer Hunting Ninjas.


Grenadier1

A Reader said...

Aesop -
Regarding the underpinnings, which I heartily agree we need, and which I also think we have in part already, it is important to be discerning. We have the Tea Parties, and the Constitution Party, and 9-12, and other groups. There is lots and lots of discussion going on. The assorted radio hosts discuss the warts of the government, though each focuses on the warts that matter to them. No one provides the whole picture. One could even be excused for doubting the strength of their contact with reality. There are, as you said, books to fill miles of shelves. All that is not bad. I find it moderately encouraging, in fact. However, we still have the question: so what? Does all that listening, reading, and talking amount to critical thinking? I know I am working at it. Since you're here, I guess you are, too. Are the readers, listeners, and talkers turning from the corruption which has brought us to this state of affairs and turning their backs on the people and ideas that enable that corruption?
Or, are they merely consuming entertainment and being channeled into pseudo-solutions and secondary crises? An example of a pseudo-solution would be a local Tea Party group that is a catch basin for dis-enchanted Republicans. If it makes no waves and drives no reform, what good has it done? Alternatively, consider the time some groups spend on studying and opposing creeping sharia. Sharia is a problem, certainly, so the time is not entirely wasted, but the fiscal cliff is a much bigger problem. If that same Tea Party group is so frightened of the D that they will get behind any R, what good have they done?

I am not trying to be discouraging. I am merely trying to point out a problem I see, which is that some of these right wing media franchises are dead ends unless the target audience outgrows the franchise. Absent independent thought on the part of the audience, all of them will be, in fact.

The only solution that I see is to engage each group locally and to ask impertinent questions in the most polite fashion possible in order to try to find who else is thinking and to get the non-thinking thinking.

kletzenklueffer said...

I've tried engaging a local collection of deer hunters on the topic of freedom and liberty, the seizure of rights, etc., and it's been mostly a waste of time. Maybe 1 out of 20 have a clue. As long as they are permitted to go hunt and watch football, they don't give a shit. They're sheep. I'll continue to work on separating the wheat from the chaff, but won't waste time on educating from the ground up. If you don't get it already, I have little hope for you.

Anonymous said...

@AM

I think you are putting the proverbial cart before the proverbial horse. The "why" should be addressed first. Unless you have a better idea, the odds on favorite for the spark that starts the civilians shooting is gun confiscation. With that as the "why," the most well thought out response for the 20M is found in the novel Unintended Consequences, i.e., feds doing the round up, their local lackeys, and the politicians and media behind the confiscation will be targeted. A few hundred dead confiscators will cause a reversal of the ban. The US empire will therefore remain intact and the vassal states will remain undisturbed servants. The chance of a complete break up or the need for a new govt, IMO, is remote.

Anonymous said...

Grenadier1,

Ah, Aesop/fable...I get it! How brilliantly original!

But you make serious points, and deserve serious consideration.
First of all, let's be clear, the notional "20 million deer hunters" was something Oleg Volk (who, as a tactician and strategist...is a splendid photographer) pulled out to make his misbegotten point in asserting that marksmanship is unimportant, and that therefore Resistance Is Futile.
I've fed deer, chased deer, and made leather items out of deerskin, but I've never hunted them, nor possess a hunting license. The only thing I've hunted after was men. I simply left the original premise "as is".
I also never "expanded" this to 300 million guns, nor extrapolated anything therefrom. Go back and reread this for yourself.
And contrary to your assertions, I accounted for all the variables you did, and far more. In fact, you might notice that I extrapolated *downward*, not upward. From that notional 20,000,000 I went down to 1/10 of 1% ( 000.1% for math majors) in postulating that for any number of reasons, only 20,000 would decide to stand up and take a shot at Zombie Mutant Jack Booted Thugs, come the day. I'm biased, but I think throwing out 99.9% of my notional "army" was pretty darned magnanimous of me.

Then we come to you trying to drag me to a "plan", kicking and screaming. You'd think you and AM were either Communist farm commisars or Harvard MBAs, both of whom share an irrational fetish for planning, and usually with exactly the same results.

My only plan is what I'm going to do, i.e. raise 60 kinds of hell wherever and whenever I can. I would, if asked, urge all and sundry to do likewise immediately upon noticing that whatever your Trigger Event* is has transpired.
(* I'm assuming it's something consequential like "The Bill of Rights has been suspended, they're rounding up gun owners and dissidents, and they're selling Republican women into slavery" as opposed to "this guy on Coast To Coast said the aliens have landed in Philadelphia and my cat is controlling my mind"; if Choice B is too close to home for anyone, they should seek professional help).

I'm doing this because
A) It'll have effects far beyond most people's idea
B) It won't get you killed in 4 seconds
C) You, me, and 99,999,998 other gun owners are the most cranky, cantankerous, quarrelsome, opinionated SOB herd-of-cats you'll ever meet, and you could sooner crap diamonds than get them to agree on anything that didn't involve a charging grizzly bear 10 ft away, and
D) even if C was surmountable, and we all thought as alike as the Borg, unless you also have 20 years to train everyone from pvt to 4-star generals, and a spare 400-ship navy, 10,000 4th gen fighters, bombers, & helos, 8,000 tanks, 20,000 APCs, artillery, bombs, rockets, machineguns, mortars, and a shit-ton of ammo, MREs, gas, oil, grease, and shoe polish, and a constellation of satellites to coordinate them, and you've trained with them until you're hella good,
ON DAY ONE THAT YOUR FIRST "UNIT" IS STOOD UP, YOU'RE GOING TO BE SPREAD LIKE WATERMELONS AT A GALLAGHER SLEDGE-O-MATIC SHOW.

At about Day 1, @ D+00:00:04.
Go to YouTube; search things like "Taliban Unit", "Shock & Awe", and "Kuwait - Highway To Hell".

I'm sorry if the facts hurt your feelings. But I didn't insult your mother, kick, your dog, call your daughter ugly, nor demand you elect me Guerrilla King and build me my secret lair.
So I urge you to get over it.

Regards,
-Aesop

Hefferman said...

How many of that 20 Million are like me? I am government trained, already. I can go right now and put my ghillie suit on, I use it for hunting. I can grab my rifle, and crawl 2 klicks, or two miles if needed.
I did it in the Corps, and will do it again if needed. I don't want to, but by God I will if that is what it takes to ensure freedom and liberty in my country.
There are many in that 20 million, just like me, or even better skilled, and equiped than I am.

AM said...

Aesop,

You've said your piece, and nothing I've written will change your mind. Drive on.

Hefferman,

There were lots of veterans in Russia in 1918, in Germany in the 1930s. History says that having a large population of armed veterans isn't a deterrent to tyranny. I wish it were, then we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Anonymous said...

i think the author really misses the point of the common meme that there are '20 million weapons'....yada yada yada. george washingtons troops were not crack special ops forces...they were farmers. they learned. they were united. go to a country like peru and check out all the weapons the civilians own...? they dont own any. they get to throw rocks.

i keep coming across these 'the military guys are the only ones that know sh&t' articles and it is really telling...too much tv and movies where the '10 seals take on a 1000 idiots and win movie'. 20 million monkeys shooting wildly usually cause quite a bit of damage.

Anonymous said...

I can't believe the smug arrogance of Aesop. There are so many flaws with his reasoning I hardly know where to begin...

First off there are many of those hunters who would never have any interest in joining the fight and there are a few more who would join in on the other side of things. Truth is though damn few would be willing to get up off the couch and risk their ass. Of those who do many will suffer some form of PTSD and without the support networks and conditioning of the military it will be worse. One of the many acceptance tools of the soldier is the legitimacy of command and the lone insurgent doesn't have that at all. You also forget, or are simply ignorant of, the signifigance of forensic evidence that will trip up most of your insurgents. In Iraq and Afghanistan (and I've spent time in both) they have little or no modern forensic capabilities and even if they did their justice system doesn't really provide any real punishment to their insurgents. Do you really think that the feds will be as lenient? Do you really believe the surveilance systems we already have in place will allow you to slip around town with your bolt action rifle and do as you please?

I could continue but this attempt to educate Aesop is likely an exercise in futility. I suspect he is firmly entrenched in his fantasy.

Jake 98c/11b

DAN III said...

Jake....Aesop is well informed, well-read and most accurate in his reasonings. You make good points but because you do so does not make Aesop's comments, reasons, explanations, etc., invalid.

When I read silly statements like non-NRA members are politically indifferent I have to wonder about the origins of such reasoning. When I read your annoyance with Aesop I don't question your reasoning. Rather I question your outright dismissal of Aesop as, more or less, irrelevant.

I find Aesop's commentary to be much more stimulating and thought provoking than yours. Your points are fine. Aesop's are exemplary.

DAN III

AM said...

Dan,

You've asserted that not all non-NRA members are politically inactive. Now prove it.

I will accept membership in the Second Amendment Foundation, JPFO, or even a militia as proof of political activity. Unfortunately those organizations don't have enough members to make up for the difference.

Remember I'm not talking about an individual being completely ineffective at the tactical level, I'm talking about winning a political insurgency. Generalities are important when talking about large groups of people. Exceptions to the rule are just that, exceptional humans who are not representative of the "norm."

And please don't think that I'm holding up the NRA as a bastion of liberty, I'm using it as a proxy for at least a basic level of political participation (because the membership numbers are a known quantity). If you choose not to participate based on your beefs with the NRA, then by all means show membership in the JPFO or 2AF.

Call me lazy, be offended all you want. But there is no such thing as proof through vigorous assertion.

Anonymous said...

Aesop,
I never said anything about training a unit to be a conventional ground ,air, naval force.
I dont know what your game is but you seem to be an either or kind of fellow. Either FreeFor is nothing more than a million individuals that blast off whenever they want too or they are to be a conventional ground force with regiments and brigades. You apparently have no ability to see the middle ground between those scenarios.
The good thing is YOU dont have to. You can do it anyway you want to and I am not going to tell you otherwise. As for me an mine we will plan and we will organize.


Grenadier1

DAN III said...

AM,

First off I don't believe in the "offended" mentality. "Offended" what is that ? Can't sleep at night ?

Now....you want me to "prove" that all non-NRA members are NOT politically active. I cannot do such and you know it. On the other hand you claim that NRA membership alone qualifies one as politically active. Hogwash. If you define holding a current NRA card qualifies one as "politically active" then you are correct in YOUR assertion. Then again Michael Moore, the leftist Hollywod director, is an NRA member and I would say he is politically active. But not in a way that is supportive to liberty and freedom. But he fits your mold of only NRA members are politically active.

The factnof the matter is that MANY non-NRA members are politically active. To challenge me to "prove it" to you is right out of Alinsky's handbook. If I gave you one thousand names or one name of a non-NRA member being politically active you would tell me that I'm a no-go at his station. Your "prove it" question only can be qualified by your standards of what you call "proof". What is your definition of politically active; of politically inactive ? One can certainly make the argument that anyone who participates in the voting process is politically active. Certainly not every voter is an NRA member.

The NRA has thrown gun owners under the bus many times since its inception. Are they better than nothing. Yes. Are they the only answer to 2A protection ? No.

If you like the NRA being contributors to Harry Reid and them hawking wine, life insurance and Commie Chinese trinkets with NRA emblazoned on them, then I guess NRA is your 2A savior.

You want proof of non-NRA members being politically active ? Just look at the 53% of Americans who installed the unconstitutional soetoro-obama in the.West Wing. I'm certain all of them were not NRA members and they WERE politically active. I'd venture to guess there were a large number of card-carrying NRA members who were politically active and helped install soetoro-obama.

So, can you prove all NRA members are "politically active ? And by what definition will you define political activism ?

DAN III

AM said...

Dan,

Good obfuscation. And good for you for referencing your mentor's handbook. You come to my blog, comment on my posts, and totally focus not on the topic at hand, but on the NRA. Steering an argument away from the one at hand to one that doesn't matter is also one of Alinsky's tactics.

People like you are impossible to please, which is why I don't try. You can agree to everything I write except when I use NRA membership as an example of minimal political participation then you toss the baby out with the bathwater.

Political participation is easiest measured by a tangible asset like "money." And all those people buying overpriced wine or insurance through the NRA are putting their money where their mouth is. You can argue that they are fools for trusting the organization, but they are participating.

In terms of participation NRA members may be the fattest joggers on the track, but they are lapping the ones still on the couch.

DAN III said...

AM,

Oh....sorry....it is YOUR blog.

You made an extremely ridiculous remark about only NRA members being politically active. The remark was asinine. I didn't deviate from the topic. I only remarked on a comment you made as part of your topic commentary.

You have a public blog. Perhaps you should restrict comments to moderated comments. I always am amazed when you bloggers cry and whine that someone who replies at "my blog" pees in your Wheaties and challenges part or all of your commentary.

I questioned and challenged a most ridiculous statement you made about only NRA members being politically active. You are the one who refused to acknowledge reality and retract the error of your statement. You want to blog your thoughts on an open, public forum then you should be man enough to take the HEAT rounds when you throw out untruths such as you did with your NRA remark. That remark of ignorance or naivete detracted from the substance of your commentary.

Your hypersensitivity to my remarks about the NRA seems quite immature. Too bad you got your panties in a bunch over it.

DAN III

AM said...

Don't feel proud Dan, I've been trolled by much better trolls than you. Don't feel bad either, I'm sure your mother still loves you, and will be so proud when you leave the basement and finally strike out on your own.

Anonymous said...

Jake,

That would be the same forensicly awesome law enforcement that fails to solve 50% of the homicides, 98% of the burglaries, or catch 90% of the illegal aliens, drugs, and anything else you'd care to name, in peacetime, with the support of 95% of the population, and minus the stigma of running anything like the police state nightmare we'd expect to see before anyone would rise up.
I'm quaking in my boots.
BTW, how well does surveillance work on stocking masks, and how long did it take them to catch the DC snipers?

@Grenadier1
As laid out for you elsewhere, a conventional military force with only 75% of the capabilities on suffering 75% casualties.
Google "Iraqi Army 1991", and "Iraqi Army 2003", and get back to us on why the "middle ground" isn't a synonym for "Highway To Hell".

Second rate militaries make first class targets. The nearest "secure area" you could train would be some other continent, as long as Leviathan has current capabilities. That's about as likely as invading Mars.

I plan to degrade those capabilities, not group up and wear a laser designator on my head. If you're stuck on picking uniforms for your groups, I recommend body bags. Maybe someone could sew little footies and sleeves on the seams, and call them Dirt Nap Snuggies.

-Aesop

Anonymous said...

Aesop

Yes, the same forensic capability that helps to solve a full 50% of the murders that are often conducted by criminals, on criminals. Often in neighborhoods where no one speaks to the cops. Murders that are without any political connections. Murders that take place in areas not currently under martial law. Murders generally commited with cheap and concealable handguns that the users view of as disposable, single use, tools.

As for those surveilance cameras and ski masks... As I understand it they work very well when they can track you back to your car and read your license plates. Given that the sort of things you are alluding to are generally in high security areas and upscale neighborhoods. Cameras are becoming far more common in society today and if there were some reason to do so the governments, federal, state and local, would add to that number dramatically. As it is we are already doing that and not just in fixed positions, maybe you have heard a bit about these things we call UAVs. Since you seem blissfully ignorant of these I will explain it to you, a UAV is an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. They have been in the news a lot over the last few years for their use overseas and more recently because of their proposed use domestically. You see, with one of these things they could be used to moniter and track movements in areas of interest. These areas of interest could be in areas of known activity or to cover high profile people who are deemed at risk. It's possible that these could be used to track suspicious activity around a possible targeted individuals home or workplace and follow those people back to wherever it is they came from. We seem to have a lot more of these things all the time and with our recent activities overseas we have a great deal of experienced operators who know how to use these things to their potential. Even if these operators aren't all that fond of the powers that be I have reason to believe that many of them would rather not have a real shooting type conflict here at home.

Jake 98c/11b

Anonymous said...

Jake

Thanks loads for that info. I wasn't aware of any of that, having lived in a cave in the woods since 1972.

I was completely unaware that the police in a police state like the Soviet Union (which is what we'd have to become) or the police in a police state like the UK (which is what they've become) did such a wonderful job with their assets, that there's no Mafia whatsoever in Moscow, and that London couldn't ever possibly be wracked by days of rioting, looting or violence, because they have 1 security camera for every person in the UK.

And those UAVs sound fantastic! If only we'd had them in Baghdad or Kabul. We'd have triumphed in six weeks, and all our guys would be home now, right?

What really sucks for my position is that they work so well against single individuals in a sea of hundreds of thousands, but prove *totally useless* when deployed against small, organized bands of people carrying weapons.

You've clearly totally undermined every point I made, and forced me to acknowledge the total superiority of the idea to organize into groups.

Hey! Everyone! Jake told me, no sh*t, groups are invisible to UAVs, and no one reports them to the cops! They only notice *individuals*! Isn't that cool? So, where's the muster meeting?

Guys?

Anyone?

Beuller? Bueller...?



-Aesop

AM said...

Aesop,

You should look into British Intelligence penetration and surveillance of the IRA. It is interesting reading, supporting both your position and Jake's.

The real problem is that both you and Jake are arguing tactics. Tactics win engagements. Engagements are meaningless if you don't win the war.

Anonymous said...

True, but bad tactics get you killed. The first result of which is that you don't give a sh*t, because you're dead, and the second result is that whoever wins, you won't be there.

I'm moderately aware of British counterintelligence ops, as the stories of training SAS men in particular Irish county accents are pretty well distributed in open sources.

Once again, it argues that it's pretty hard to penetrate a 1 or 2 man team, as opposed to a 20-man group or a 100-person network. There are tradeoffs in any approach.

One thing I assume is any enemy will fight assymetrically, and try desperately to adapt to whatever tactics one uses against it.

-Aesop