Cities closed off, what about rural areas?

A common topic nowadays is how the government will step into major cities to inforce laws and push people into camps and what not.

What about smaller cities and towns, or rural areas? Would the government "invasion" of a city like New York or Los Angeles serve as a warning for us in the Fly Over States? If it was to happen, no matter what the explanation, I hope I realize that would be the time to enact SHTF plans.

reply to post by dave_welch


There simply is not enough manpower to hit all of the cities and disarm/kidnap all of the people they would need to.
They would use a chart of high priority targets and systematically take people by the dozens.
This should allow for the prepared to adjust accordingly.

that's what i was going for, i only hope that if it does happen, that i will take the warning

Property taxes, land use regulations, fees and permitting, centering "assistance" in urban areas, framework for Agenda 21, are all working to get as many people as possible into urban centers.

When that has reached saturation they will no doubt do a "polite" relocation of semi-rural areas banking on ignorance, fear and likely age going from neighborhood to neighborhood encouraging people to move for their own benefit but that can only go so far and the most rural homes will be largely left alone.

From that point forward expect the rural to be played off the urban as "terrorists" or "subversives" who either hate or envy the super-city way of life.

The US Tribal Region.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

I would estimate the "war" is on.....The goverment proceeds apace with all kinds of agendas that culminate in the loss of freedom.
The time to resist is NOW.
We need to get organised to make a maximum impact on goverment policy now................
There will be a plan for everybody , no doubt...rural or urban we will be dealt with.

Originally posted by dave_welch
A common topic nowadays is how the government will step into major cities to inforce laws and push people into camps and what not.

What about smaller cities and towns, or rural areas? Would the government "invasion" of a city like New York or Los Angeles serve as a warning for us in the Fly Over States? If it was to happen, no matter what the explanation, I hope I realize that would be the time to enact SHTF plans.

This is a good question. The answer can be found, by and large, in how the great depression of the 1930's affected the populations of both urban areas and rural areas. During college I discussed at length with my professor if the depression had less of an impact on rural communities than it did on urban centers. The answer is intuitive and logical and history proves it. It had less of an effect. You can eat a squirrel, you can't eat a sidewalk.

I've said for about 2 decades now that it would take 3 days or less for an urban environment to turn almost barbaric due to the cut off supplies it is dependent on. Katrina in New Orleans hinted at how bad it would get quickly, although there was help on the way. So the effect of the degeneration of society couldn't completely be witnessed in the New Orleans incident because they still had hope. In a situation where a city is cut-off, either by natural disaster, break-down of society, or by intentional means....things are going to get ugly quickly, in my opinion.

On the other hand, when you look at the great depression record, the rural communities just got by. Now you had a double hit in the Kansas/Oklahoma area that caused more of a problem to rural communities because of the dust bowl days happening at the same time. So you had the whole "grapes of wrath" exodus occurring in that region where people up and moved to urban environments and starved and concentrated right along with the rest of the areas. But at the same time, those refugees from the plains area affected by the dust bowl disaster tended to go westward and do work the large majority of people already in California simply didn't want to do...harvest crops. That's why they were looked down on and called such things as Steinbeck coined as "Okies".

I know I kind of wandered off track to your main question a bit, sorry, but in summary...it would be real hard to round up people in the rural communities. We tend to have hidey holes already picked out. We hunt, we fish and we know the surrounding land and the places of best opportunity to survive. It gets hard to catch us. That...and we have guns.

I would have to agree that, yes, it will serve as a warning.
BUT...
The tools have already been set into place to push the people of the rural communities into more urban areas.
Look at the housing and unemployment "crisis". More and more families are moving in together, and the younger community is flocking to the city to find work. No one wants to "fix" the economy because it is helping "them" with their higher agenda.
Yet another reason I am glad we never "got our act together" in the days that everyone else was "prospering". We know how to survive without "them".

Originally posted by avatar22
I would have to agree that, yes, it will serve as a warning.
BUT...
The tools have already been set into place to push the people of the rural communities into more urban areas.
Look at the housing and unemployment "crisis". More and more families are moving in together, and the younger community is flocking to the city to find work. No one wants to "fix" the economy because it is helping "them" with their higher agenda.
Yet another reason I am glad we never "got our act together" in the days that everyone else was "prospering". We know how to survive without "them".

There are a great number of people who, originally from rural areas, left for urban cities that have returned to their rural areas already. I am one. I'm a degreed professional and I have returned to my rural home area. I know several others that were in larger metropolitan areas and chose to take less money in order to relocate to rural areas.

Curiously many of those I know were in those metro areas at the time of 9/11. It impacted a lot of people who had rural origins. They decided an urban environment was not where they wanted their families.

There was one more thing I wanted to share with the OP. My hubby and I had had the discussion a few days ago about whether people would "hesitate" in rural areas to protect themselves when things started getting jicky. In other words, you have your job, you need your income, things are getting scary...you witness things in urban areas taking place...would people in rural areas be complacent and talk themselves in to staying put and maintaining their income on hopes it all smoothed out?

Probably a lot would. However, one advantage to rural areas is how far away you can relocate and still maintain your job and stay abreast of how things are going. In urban/surburbia areas, people are accustomed to LONG commutes. Let's say your commute to your job in the LA area is an hour. You can be a LONG way from any population center in a rural area with an hour drive. Thus, taking the inconvenience of a long commute, the bread winner of the family could continue to work and monitor the situation while having their family secure at another location.

reply to post by Valhall


Glad to hear you have returned. I tried the city for a short stint, several years ago. HATED IT!!! I need my mountains! Unfortunately, I have not seen the return of others in the area I am in. But, the main issue we have here is not that people are leaving for the cities as much as families are coming back together. I don't see that as a bad thing necessarily, in fact, I have been glad to see it. In our particular instance I feel that our home is complete again. And, it doesn't hurt that my husband and step-son are both ex-military. I feel quite safe at night knowing they are both here...

It's all about control. TPTB will first take control of the areas wit high population density (cities and major urban areas) and any outlying areas with key infrastructure or strategic assets (dams, power stations, manufacturing, distribution, etc.) . As mentioned, there is only so much manpower available and the concern will be to keep large concentrations of people under control. The availability of food, water, medicine, etc. will have a rapid and immediate impact on how populations behave (think Katrina). So keeping them calm and controlled will be a tactical priority. That operation will take several days at a minimum to even begin to get set-up. How far it extends from there will likely be determined by how much of a 'threat' other areas present.

Find a place or methid to hide or stand up and fight. I am not going to any camp, if they take my family I will do my damn best to break them out. And god help anyone who stands in my way.

Just my feelings on the matter.

Originally posted by avatar22
reply to post by Valhall

 

Glad to hear you have returned. I tried the city for a short stint, several years ago. HATED IT!!! I need my mountains! Unfortunately, I have not seen the return of others in the area I am in. But, the main issue we have here is not that people are leaving for the cities as much as families are coming back together. I don't see that as a bad thing necessarily, in fact, I have been glad to see it. In our particular instance I feel that our home is complete again. And, it doesn't hurt that my husband and step-son are both ex-military. I feel quite safe at night knowing they are both here...

That's probably another advantage that rural people (and when I say rural people I mean people born and raised in rural areas and who have either stayed there or returned there) have. We tend to have extended family that would be considered within "driving distance" of each other. They may not live right where we live, but they are within a couple of hours. And when you have a network like that, you have SOMEONE who is already living in a safe area. At least one person. So it is the existing familial network that comes into play in a pinch.

Im in a rural area, extremely rural area. I have water beneath me and for a lake 5 minutes walk. Our wild life is abundent this is why I picked this home with a little land. I also know where the secret safe places are. And I dont worry to much about the Urban people make it to my area because there is 150 miles of harsh desert between me and big city life. near border, I know for my own facts this small rural community isnt in line of mass movement of us people out here, I wont reveal how i know because firstly i doubt any of you big city dwellers would believe me, secondly I dont want to bait myself for any power that be

One of the surprising things about the Great Depression in the USA is how few people actually died, once you disregard infant mortality rates. The death rates did go up slightly, more so in the countryside--people freezing to death when they were cut off from help/rescue--- a bit like the Donner Party, but no hard evidence...

A number of the freezings were hoboes who fell asleep on trains, and just never woke up because of the cold. Others were minorities, immigrants and appalachians who had moved north (cleveland/toledo/detroit/chicago) and were not prepared for the cold.

Unlike our generation, air conditioning was practically unknown. Probably, the people who would have died in heatwaves had already done so before the GD hit, and so they aren't noticeable in the statistics.

Food was much more local 80 years ago; even "city people" had gardens, or at the produce of truck gardens just outside the city limits. The same was true in the soviet union during its collapse. The American infrastructure has truly massive redundancies built into it (a feature of a free-er market), but currently has no real provision for local food. Economic collapses are slow enough to give urbanites a chance to take up gardening (as happened in Moscow and its suburbs in 1991). But a massive shock, like a continent-wide drought, can only have one end.

And that's the whole problem with famines, really. They don't creep up on you; you just go to the store and are told that the suppliers have all suspended deliveries. By the time you put your own family relocation plan in place, you will have probably already missed several meals. The people around you may not even be capable of developing a plan.

On the other hand, there are truly vast reserves of "feed grain" in america's granaries. It is not legal to serve it to humans. I have eaten it, as a lot of folks around the world have. China routinely buys feed corn in the US to feed its people. Were talking tens of billions of bushels---some of it 2 or 3 years old---but all of it some form of starch or protein.

Which brings it all back to a question of distribution. The same reason that people starve in Ethiopia and Somalia. We have the food. But often, there is no physical way to get the food to them.

people have made a lot of good points so far, a few things i would recommend picking up would be a .38 or .357 revolver, either one will shoot .38s. a common rifle, like a .30-.30 or .270. several boxes of ammo, also, reloading materials and knowledge of how to do it. buy as many vegetable and fruit seeds as you can get your hands on make sure thee are not montesanto frankenfruits, as you will need them to reproduce.

reply to post by dave_welch

Would any of these plans change if suddenly there was no power or communication?
Think that should be in all your plans, not knowing whats going on 30 miles away.
We have been separated into small areas already, your television station reach how far?

A battery powered or wind up radio will keep you informed, and I have a small generator plus some solar to keep some power on. All in all, I wouldn't worry about it.Here in Canada,the area is far,far to vast for the government to even begin to try to round people up.