As seen on the internet:
This is the ugly truth.
I don’t think anyone in our military or in politics has actually considered what an asymmetric civil war would look like.
We keep seeing platitudes like “what will your AR-15 do against a tank/F-22/Reaper?”
In the past, I’ve mentioned how the answer to that is armed civilians won’t attack the tank or F-22 in head-on battle like it’s WWII.
The more effective method of combat is to kill the ground crew that does F-22 maintenance or the refueling crew that keeps an M1 Abrams from being a 60 paperweight. In very short order, every heavy weapons platform the military has, tanks, planes, helicopters, etc., will be uselss due to parts breakages and being out of fuel.
But that is still fighting with a certain level of honor and dignity, i.e., still attacking uniformed troops, even if you are attacking maintenance and support units.
Reality is much, much uglier.
Nearly every soldier in the military has social media.
When some pilot kills somebody’s kids, or grandkids, or nieces/nephews, siblings, etc., do they think that the civilian population won’t return the favor?
What happens to the morale of some Woke battalion commander when he finds out that the Trumpers he’s preparing to assault have doxxed him, and murdered his wife, kids, parents, siblings, fishing buddies, and family pets?
When after some military brass or politician talks tough on Twitter and the kid they have in college out of state ends up swinging from an overpass?
Why should we fight an organized military force when we can send every soldier AWOL rushing home to protect their loved ones.
I have said before that I don’t believe in proportional response.
You want to murder my children, I will return the favor in spades.
What I would give to watch one person in a mask sit before Congress and testify:
“Look, if you kick things off with us, very quickly the entire effort of the US Military and Federal Law Enforcement will be used as bodyguards for the extended families of politicians and bureaucrats until the troops and LEOs run home to protect their families because if we can’t take out your tanks and drones with our AR-15s, we’ll take out your families. Just read up on the history of how the IRA or Mexican Cartels became so feared so fast and then extrapolate that to 70 million Trump supporters.”
I honestly don’t think that any of the talk tough Leftists really, truly understand just how ugly a new American civil war will get, and if they did, they would shut the fuck up and beg for forgiveness.
One of the reasons the progressive project has been so keen to get the officer corps converted to their side (other than it being a cushy job for the second-sons and -daughters of beltway families who can’t hack it in Big Law or Big Banking) is that they know damn well that if things ever did dissolve into Civil War 2.0, the majority of the United States military would side with the People and not the Federal government.
It took about two generations, but now they’ve got West Point graduates openly wearing the hammer and sickle as part of their graduation regalia… So now they’ve begun to purge the enlisted ranks.
They’ve learned from Stalin, Mao, and Castro. They’re “slow walking” the revolution.
And this is why we need to protect and honor the 2nd Amendment. A subverted officer corps won’t help them when honest citizens remain armed.
If we let them disarm us, we’re lost. Just as the honest citizens of Russia were when Lenin and Stalin did that to them, or as the Jews were when the German authorities did it.
It starts with bodies swinging from the overpass. It only gets darker from there. The rate we’re going, we’ll have Reavers sometime before 2050.
Actually, as was pointed out elsewhere (earlier in this blog I think), an effective yet non-violent starting point is anonymous letters showing the supporters of tyranny what could happen to their loved ones if they persist — without actually doing anything just yet. There’s value in not starting right away with a violent response; give the other side a chance to back off.
2050? I’m thinking 2022.
If any of that happens today, in this environment, the outcome will be the opposite of what is expected. Those who are dehumanizing their opponents MUST fire the first shot.
Any action, that is threatening in any way, against the establishment WILL be taken as further proof that the biggest threat to the country is right wing extremism, Trumpism, White Supremacy, etc…
As soon as a note shows up in the woke battalion commander’s mailbox saying that if any action is taken against the citizens of the US, his family will be on the chopping block, and that BC will instantly become the face of our downfall.
Do not give the enemy the rope they need to hang you.
Well, ok then, so other than surrender what option is there? Jim suggested “respond by attacking”, I suggested “respond non-violently but with an unmistakable threat”. If any attempt to push back will be propagandized against honest citizens, then we really are already lost, aren’t we?
That doesn’t seem right.
To clarify, I don’t think we (i.e. sane people) need to start dropping bodies. I agree that even intimidation tactics (even though I think it’s no more than reminding people what’s obvious) WILL be used against us. To win at the moral level we cannot initiate the violence. However, we can certainly be better at administering it.
What was I was trying to say was that once the violence starts (and not the street LARPing kind) it will get ugly really fast.
He is correct, responding non-violently with an unmistakable threat will simply be used against anyone sending it. Fingerprints, hidden printer codes, etc will soon be used to catch the sender.
That doesn’t mean that surrender is the only option. What it means is that violence is inevitable. It is important that the other side be the one to initiate it though.
You’re a lot late to their violence, slick.
The reality is that any actual threats, anonymous or not (and nothing is anonymous anymore) WILL be used as propaganda and ammunition to go after conservatives, and we all know it.
If Americans turned out en masse to support firearms ownership, in the way BLM did, and did so armed (and unlike BLM/Antifa, did so peacefully – and it would be, because that’s who we are), don’t you think for a minute that the media and the Democrats (redundancy alert) wouldn’t propagandize that instantly as right wing “insurrection,” and begin taking names, pictures, and so forth of the marchers. Those marchers would then be targeted for anything the democrats could find. We’ve already seen that war being fought.
There is a time to actually fight. We’re not stocking up on AR’s and ammo for nothing. But we’re not there – yet; the 4 boxes aren’t entirely gone – yet. There is value, however to remind people that real insurrection in the US would be nasty and has a reasonable chance of success. That message has to be sent, regularly, with evidence and, at times, snark. Sarcasm is a powerful weapon.
I think other parts of that same response should be more subtle, steady, and consistent, with this message: I will not comply. Want me to register my gun? I will not comply. Have to “register” my pistol w/ brace, made legally? I will not comply. Make no mistake – quite non-compliance has more impact than nearly anything else. There is a long and consistent history of non-compliance with firearms law in the US (and elsewhere, though they don’t talk about that). And non-compliance is more just the act of non-compliance itself. It has an active component. What happens, for example, when juries begin to nullify firearms prosecutions?
I get that an actual insurrections is nasty and brutish. That’s how insurrections are fought, and have been so fought from the beginning of time. And I don’t have any problem with conservatives telling the left, repeatedly: be careful what you wish for. You won’t like it.
The leaders on the left know it, even if their lackeys and moronic followers don’t get it.
Why do you think they’re working so hard to disarm you?
Exactly. Do not be the one that instigates it. Do not escalate it. Always strive for de-escalation. Right now, it is a lot of words, with little to no violence (relatively speaking.)
Sending threats, even if can be done anonymously, gives your opponent the incentive to escalate. A much better approach is implied in the cartoon above. As the pilots who successfully bombed some US Citizens who where deplorable land, informing them their family is now dead (including their pets) will do more to prevent the next bombing than sending a preemptive threat.
GMC70, to elaborate a bit on your 1st 2 paragraphs, no one is talking about the ways they will come after us while they try to disarm us. Use the Jan 6 Capitol event as a blueprint. If you are recognized acting against the state, you will be hunted down and found in between protests, interrogated and likely jailed. On a larger scale, you will have to worry about friends and neighbors turning you in if they suspect you of anything. Your bank accounts, 401k, your house, everything you worked for can be seized and taken from you, either for punishment or to force compliance. Employers will side with the state, or they will be forced to close or be fined. Only after a tipping point is reached, and mass resistance ensues, will they have trouble fighting back. From there it could be months or years until one side loses.
An article by Matt Bracken alluded to the same scenario Jonesy
https://www.americanpartisan.org/2021/03/the-digital-gulag-why-team-tyranny-wont-need-door-kickers-to-enforce-the-coming-gun-bans/
This has already been done.
See Mexico.
The gov’t sent in the Army.
The cartels sent in their men and took army families hostage.
The Army went home.
Not the family pets. They can easily be deprogrammed.