NWO Survival Planning

page: 13
7
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 17 2005 @ 07:24 PM
link   
i plan on fighthing the NWO before it comes. even planning what to do is giving in already. there are more people than ELITE'S so what's the fear. rise up and take over is my survival plan. &*%$ the establishment and whatever they might bring




posted on Oct, 17 2005 @ 10:01 PM
link   
I have read throughout this thread, and on other threads besides, that any armed takeover of the United States would be extremely difficult if not impossible because of the fact that a large portion of the citizenry own firearms. I am afraid that I must disagree with this assumption. I grew up in the bush here in Australia and firearms have always been a way of life for myself and my family. It has been my experience that simply owning a firearm means very little when it comes to your proficiency in actually using one. I have seen a lot of people declare that, when the NWO makes its move, they will grab whatever guns they can and resist the occupation of their lands.

That's great, but unless you actually know how to use a gun, you are going to be killed or captured extremely quickly. If this hypothetical situation were to ever actually happen, you can be assured that you would be facing off against professional soldiers. These are people who probably have many years of training and experience in using firearms and other weapons. If it comes down to a fire-fight between you and your buddies and a group of trained soldiers, I don't think much of your chances. Even if you managed to hold your own and stand your ground, what will you do when they send a tank to displace you?

My point here is that a lot of people seem to be simply assuming that because there are a lot of guns lying around, everybody must know how to use them with some degree of skill. But think to yourself - how many people do you know who would be capable of wielding a gun with a level of proficiency approaching that of a professional soldier? Be honest with yourself. Putting a gun into the hands of somebody who has not had sufficient experience with them is dangerous. Subsequently asking that person to use that gun to kill another human being will probably result in failure, despite patriotic cries of "We'll defend our land to the last person!" Simply put, although you may have a lot of guns and may even be highly experienced with them yourself, most people are unfamiliar with guns and could not be relied upon to use one to kill somebody in the event the NWO attempted to overthrow and enslave America.

Let's face it - if it comes to the point where your only option is to fight or die, you are probably going to die. You may take a couple with you, but you will still be dead. As I said, all the handguns and rifles and shotguns and automatic weapons in the world are not going to help you against a tank, or against mortars, or artillery, or airstrikes.

So, rather than focusing on obtaining guns to fight back in a heroic, patriotic and ultimately very fatal last stand, it would be wiser to concentrate on learning elements of escape, hiding and survival skills. The first thing I would do is run away. There may be more people than elites, but the elites have the guys who know how to use the guns and have other weapons against which you are defenceless.

Simply put, if you try and fight, you will very likely die. Please do not assume that America is safe simply because there happen to be a lot of guns. It means nothing if people are unfamiliar with them or are unwilling to use them against other people. There has never been a country which has not been beaten in direct warfare, and this includes the United States. An armed citizenry is no real defence against a fully equipped modern army, which I assume the NWO would be using.

[edit on 17/10/05 by Jeremiah25]



posted on Oct, 17 2005 @ 11:16 PM
link   
That is a great point there Jeremiah


How many of the people here have even fired a fire arm? I can say I am a very good shot, a good enough shot to actually outperform a buddy of mine who is in the US SEALs on occasion...

Even then, there is a BIG difference between going down to the gun range to snap some shots off with your AR-15, and being in a combat situation, with adrenaline flowing, under fire, where your adversary has extensive training in tactics, has superior equipment, and likely superior numbers.

I mean, in my case, I'd be with about the best group of people you could ever hope for with about as much firepower as you could hope for. I live with 2 ex-marines who have experience in Iraq, and 1 guy who was an all-american target shooter who happens to hold a class 3 fire arms permit. You aren't going to find a better prepared (from a shoot-out view) group of civilians then us. We all own several guns, and have fully automatic rifles at our disposal if needed.

We still wouldn't stand a chance against your average group of soldiers. They'd have kevlar, we wouldn't. They would have a SAW, we wouldn't. They would have grenades, we wouldn't. They would have superior numbers. They would have communication systems to coordinate attacks. They would have reinforcements. Helo gun ships. Tanks. Mortors. Etc.

No, the only fight you could really hope to win would be against other people trying to survive, who want to take what you have. However, that is a very likely situation, and one that is ver winnable.



posted on Oct, 17 2005 @ 11:46 PM
link   
A rag tag civilian army has no chance in the wilderness becuase there is no cover. that is why the insurgents like to fight in the streets is becuase the buildings can hide. it would be very easy to take out a brigade if they were marching into a huge booby trap set in an urban landscape



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 03:29 AM
link   
Who comprises this phantom NWO Army? US Soldiers? Foreign troops or mercs?

I'm sorry I just can't see average american men & women slaying civilians and locking up their countrymen by the millions.

If it's foreign invaders, the number of troops required to secure the US would be in the hundreds of thousands, with MASSIVE logistics and transportion support.

As to the idea of locking up civilians in detainment camps.....why? I mean, what is gained by moving people from one location to another. It sort of makes sense if you are trying to 'filter' out a portion of your society, (Jews in Germany obviously, or Japanese-Americans in US) but moving everyone?

It seems like you guys are seriously considering the outcome of something that is totally remote.

However, learning survival techniques seems to be a prudent use of time, as I myself believe the emergencies/catastrophies you speak of can and will come about. I just think the cause will be more along the lines economic collapse rather than an armed invasion.



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 03:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ray Davies
It seems like you guys are seriously considering the outcome of something that is totally remote.


Its not as remote as you might think. If America is faced with Natural Disaster on Biblical Scale, or Attacked by another country... There would be one hell of a clean-up job. If this event crippled the American and World Economy then America would look for other way to afford the clean-up. America is in serious debt right now, and Americans themselves are in serious debt. Perhaps, people unable to pay off their debts would be put into work camps to repair the nation.

But the previous poster is correct, the battle will come from your neighbors in search of your food and jewelry. Because their would be massive food shortages and paper money will be worthless with the hyper inflation. People will form into misfit gangs and wage war within your own community. This is a battle you can win. Forget about fighting the American Military Directly.

Hypotheticly, If this were to go down the only way to fight the American Military is basing your operations within Major Cities where the military can't overwhealm and control the populace. and Assasinating the Leaders and Generals of the Take Over. Cut the head off the snake and the snake dies. If you meet them on the field of battle, you will die.



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 08:52 AM
link   
In lieu of what we're learning about the weather wars, do we change any plans? Seems like if you live in the country you may escape a roundup altogether. They just want to kind of starve and drought and wild-beast and earthquake and roadless you out of wherever they don't want people. This map shows it.

propertyrights.org...



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jeremiah25
...
Let's face it - if it comes to the point where your only option is to fight or die, you are probably going to die. You may take a couple with you, but you will still be dead. As I said, all the handguns and rifles and shotguns and automatic weapons in the world are not going to help you against a tank, or against mortars, or artillery, or airstrikes.
...



lots of vulnerabilities there - would be wise to understand how to kill a tank, wouldn't it? not that i'd remotely recommend trying it, but if you're going to die anyway, why not?

simply put, what about fire vs tanks (useful on most anything except asbestos
), do you know how to make and use thermite? you mentioned mortars and airstikes, well, althtough i'll come off as cruel, IF they have to kill you with $100K - a piece - cluster bombs, you won the game in a way, because imagine how often they can do that before running out of supplies and resources.

of course, they won't get you with mortar fire or a/c as long as you're on the move, planes are scarce limited to subsonic speeds when carrying much A-G ordinance, mortar grenades don't travel instantly, offering you valuable time. if your zone gets hot, run, i'm certain the military won't abandon the 150lbs-of-semi-useful-stuff-per-soldier doctrine, so unless you're a walking Wal-Mart yourself (or weigh in at 400lbs
at which point you should be considered mobile cover) you shouldn't have any trouble outmaneuvering them on foot.



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Long Lance
you mentioned mortars and airstikes, well, althtough i'll come off as cruel, IF they have to kill you with $100K - a piece - cluster bombs, you won the game in a way, because imagine how often they can do that before running out of supplies and resources.


Not entirely accurate, a CBU-87/B costs $13,941 ($ FY90), which I'm sure any government (world or otherwise) would be willing to spend in order to rid themselves of a "minor annoyance." Conversely, it takes at a minimum, 15 years for a human to grow up to be a marginal threat to trained police/military unit. How much does that cost?

Perspective Monkeys, not just for looking through the wrong end of the telescope anymore...



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 10:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Long Lance
lots of vulnerabilities there - would be wise to understand how to kill a tank, wouldn't it? not that i'd remotely recommend trying it, but if you're going to die anyway, why not?


Sure, it would be wise to understand the capabilities and potential weaknesses of your enemy. You personally may even decide to take on a tank if you thought there was no other choice. But how many other people would be willing to make the same decision? The problem with engaging in offensive manoeuvers is that you endanger those people in your group who are unable or unwilling to effectively engage the enemy. You are only as good as your weakest member. Running is the ideal choice here. Of course you can teach your group how to kill a tank, or a person for that matter, but that does not mean that they will actually be capable of doing so.



simply put, what about fire vs tanks (useful on most anything except asbestos
), do you know how to make and use thermite? you mentioned mortars and airstikes, well, althtough i'll come off as cruel, IF they have to kill you with $100K - a piece - cluster bombs, you won the game in a way, because imagine how often they can do that before running out of supplies and resources.


Even if you know how to make thermite, how many other people do? How are you going to get access to the materials needed if you are in a state of constant running and hiding? I know you are not saying otherwise, but my point is that complicated offensive plans are doomed to failure against a modern army. You should run, hide and try to keep as many people alive as you can. As for how long could they keep up a prolonged air assault - who knows? Some have suggested that the NWO could use American troops and resources, in which case I would expect they could keep it up around the clock. You may be on the move, or hiding in a forest, but that won't stop them from carpet-bombing the area.

My point here - and again, Long Lance, this isn't directed at you at all, but is a general statement - is that dreams of forming some kind of heroic, patriotic resistance guerilla group that would live off the land and conduct a hit and run campaign, wearing down the enemy, are grossly misplaced. In reality, such a group would almost certainly be found and eradicated. It is better to remain innocuous and hide. Ensuring the safety of your people should be your only priority. If the enemy wins the battles, then they win. That is out of your hands. Keeping people alive is a more important victory in the immediate aftermath of such a scenario.

[edit on 18/10/05 by Jeremiah25]



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 10:40 AM
link   
Jeremiah25 > thumbs up on a most realistic view on the flight or fight argument! Throughout my various discussions regarding this topic I've tried to make people understand its in their best interest to avoid confrontation at all reasonable costs and conserve those precious bullets for game, but I guess some never will grasp that idea


A rag tag civilian army has no chance in the wilderness becuase there is no cover.


I'm not trying to flame the post of the above comment, but its completely incorrect statement. Last hunting season for an experiment I removed my blaze orange clothing while within sight of my hunting party and they were unable to locate me due to the cammo I had on. The woods are quite easy to blend in to when you pick the right backdrop and have some cammo on. Urban settings have their own distinct advantages and disadvantages, but I wouldnt go so far as to say its easier to leverage the advantages.



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 02:43 PM
link   

A

I'm not trying to flame the post of the above comment, but its completely incorrect statement. Last hunting season for an experiment I removed my blaze orange clothing while within sight of my hunting party and they were unable to locate me due to the cammo I had on. The woods are quite easy to blend in to when you pick the right backdrop and have some cammo on. Urban settings have their own distinct advantages and disadvantages, but I wouldnt go so far as to say its easier to leverage the advantages.


Can you evade thermal imaging?



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by scienceguy94


Can you evade thermal imaging?



Yeah, didn't you see the movie Predator? Where the Governator covers his face and chest with mud!




posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 03:44 PM
link   
scienceguy94, thermal only shows a heat signature. It doesn't say if it is a friendly or enemy unit.


Also, you can get a hold of thermal, night vision and motion sensors if you look into it and they can't escape them either. The whole point is, if you are forced to fight make sure it is on ground you know.

Iraq is a good example, however I would suggest landscape where they have to be on foot and you are able to set up traps, etc. [I showed before how.]

Once you have taken one out, you have the same equipment as them and then it is a level playing field. That's what people forget, if you are in their uniform, with their equipment they won't know you are an enemy and you have the upper hand.



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 08:11 PM
link   
I like this dicussion. I think its healthy, whether you are on one side or the other doesn't really matter IMHO, at least you are thinking about it. I like the quote from the guy early in this thread (para-phrasing here), "If you are prepared and nothing happens, you are still happy and alive. If you are unprepared when something happens, you are dead (or worse).

Personally, I think as far as a NWO is concerned, our "takeover" may come from within our own country, or in collusion with the EU on an economic and subversive political front. What is the point of taking over a bunch of prisoners? Wouldn't you rather control "productive" people who would contribute to "society"? Basically, "they" want compliant sheep. Fortunately most people on this board probably don't consider that a life. Live free or die seems to be the standard of the day and I consider this a good thing. I think any sort of violence will be spun in the media to look like those who don't follow societies liberal rules need to be put in camps or something for re-education and the "safety" of other fellow citizens. These attacks will be isolated for the most part and against mainly Chrisitans and conservative types and militiamen who don't believe in relative humanistic morality like liberals, and follow their "God" and His principles.

I am a Christian and believe that this will be the time when the few Christians will recognize the endtime and be separated from the rest of the "marked" society following the coming world government. Just my $.02. the pathway to Heaven is narrow and the road to the gates of Hell are wide.

In a different scenario, I think it is plausible that we could be attacked from terrorists, or China/Russia and begin a nuclear pissing match and then have to survive in the following holocaust and rebuild our society, or possibly face and overthrow.......there are lots o' Chinese out there and live in a police state.

I don't know what will happen in the future, but I know one thing. History tends to repeat itself and NO country on this planet has ever escaped devastation and war and it is only a matter of time before a disaster strikes again, be a natural disaster or a self imposed one. The only real question is are you going to be prepared? I realize you can't think of every eventuality, but you can sure tilt the odds in your favor and sticking your head in the sand or being oblivious to world events is just begging for disaster. I choose to believe in my Bible and listen to like minded people and prepare myself as best I can to protect my family and live free (wherever that may be....in a cave...or the desert.....or in a suburb).

............I was feeling rather verbose wasn't I? I guess this is the 1st opportunity to talk in a forum and let out the things that have been bottled inside me for so long.

Cheers,
Dan



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 08:31 PM
link   
Again, Jeremiah25 and Alternateheaven have it right here.

You are going to be with a small, undertrained, under equiped group of people going up against fully trained soldiers, backed by mans greatest technology.

Simply put, if you mind your own buisness and get out of dodge and into the wilderness, any type of NWO or invasion force most likely wouldn't care about you. They would have what they wanted (cities, resources, whatever) and wouldn't waste their time with five or ten rouges.

If however a group of bandits (to them) start becoming a pain in the arse, they will dedicate themselves to hunting you down. In this case you stand absolutely ZERO chance. You may take a few people with you, but eventually, you'll die.

The only time you want to take on a bunch of soldiers is if they are going to kill you anyway. If they start firing on you, then yes, protect your selves. But don't go looking for them, because if you do that, they will have a reason to come after you.

On a side note about tanks...

Without the latest anti tank weapons, you have little chance of actually killing the occuppents of a tank. Your best bet would be to dissable it, by blowing off a track.

Bullets will bounce off a modern tank (hell, most modern APCs) like tennis balls, as will most RPGs unless you get very lucky. Throwing malotovs or lighting them on fire won't due much either. In GWI, there was a Challanger (UK tank) that was dissabled in the middle of the dessert alone. About 30 Iraqis shot at it with RPGs and what not through out the night. However, modern armor rendered those weapons useless. They wouldn't come close to it because the tank has machine guns that can be fired by the crew inside without exposing themselves.

The point of the story...

Tanks > you



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 08:57 PM
link   
But many tank design have a soft underbelly. if you can get a decent sized sized charge underneath the tank yo might be able to take it out.



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 11:30 PM
link   
Dear MyATS: You said

Live free or die seems to be the standard of the day and I consider this a good thing.


It is on this particular thread perhaps. But most people are happy to go along to get along, and I don't see any major upheaval about all the liberties that have been taken away in a very short time. And the liberties that were taken one by one even before Bush came on the scene -- are there many who care that much? We've been slicing and dicing the babies in the womb to the tune of 1.5 million a year now for over 30 years. Why have the people allowed this, turned a cold shoulder to the babies? We've sent the kids to the government schools and allowed them to be indoctrinated to Groupthink, to nihilism, to Tolerance of Intolerance will not be Tolerated. The young people today are thoroughly brainwashed into believing the world is overpopulated and that if most of the people on the planet are killed that's a GOOD THING. The NWO has already happened essentially. It's just a matter now of cashing in the chips.



posted on Oct, 19 2005 @ 12:24 AM
link   
we already live in the new world order.



posted on Oct, 19 2005 @ 01:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by scienceguy94
But many tank design have a soft underbelly. if you can get a decent sized sized charge underneath the tank yo might be able to take it out.


Where are you going to get a "charge"?

Seriously, think practically here. You need to leave your house, and walk on foot every where at the end of this week. Using commonly available things, how are you going to make a "charge", get it underneath a tank, and then blow up said tank, all without getting yourelf killed?

I want to know, step by step. Tell me all the materials needed, where/how you would aquire them, how to build it, and the tactics that you would use to place such a device under a tank in a fire fight.

Hell, my roomy can get C4 if he wanted, and even then we probably couldn't make anything that could practically be used to take on a tank. This doesn't even mention the fact that all of that stuff would take up room/wieght that could be used for vastly more important things.

BTW, if you just want to "take the tank out", and not destroy it and it's crew, why not simply go for the track? Much more vulnerable target...





top topics
 
7
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join