It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

EDITORIAL: The Civil War of 2016

page: 2
15
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 11:08 AM
link   
Eventually the will be another civil war. History will repeat itself because of the human variables of necessity. These are the kinds of chaotic patterns that define the state of the future. Humans are creatures of war and savagery, now a days we are just more polite about the dissent woes.




posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by TDawgRex
And you are absolutely certain of this?

Where is your evidence?

And don't bother posting some cop/Soldier brutality vid as I can come up with just as many OWS vids protraying them in a bad light. It does not make them all so.

The actions of a few does not reflect the majority. The sooner we stop thinking along those lines, the better off we will all be.


Evidence?

Like, I don't know... every occurrence ever, when military or para-military are used? It always leads to violence, because.. *SHOCK, GASP*, they're trained and equipped to kill. Who would have thought?!?! No, I suppose you're right, the military is filled to the brim with the happy, peaceful, critically thinking loving father family-type.

They wouldn't "ever" shoot other people, especially their own. It's not like the average military man is easily manipulated or anything, that just doesn't happen anymore.


Also, nice token OWS-jab, please go on and expose your intentions more? Man, that pesky violent OWS, causing so much havoc.. running around and getting gassed and shot at. You should see them when they invade other countries on an annual-basis, killing brown people by the thousands.

Some people just don't know about OWS man, so you tell 'em how it be.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 11:19 AM
link   
We should get Iran and Iraq troops to come and fight the rebels if this were to happen, you know pay back the favors, and we would really just look like a bunch of terrorizing savages wouldnt we...



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 11:20 AM
link   
reply to post by SyphonX
 


You don't get it do you?

I'm not taking a jab at OWS or Cops or Soldiers, I'm just pointing out that the MSM and various YouTube videos easliy manipulate people into thinking that they're all bad, depending upon the individuals groupthink.

But that is what I am talking about....breaking out of the groupthink box.

I left the Tea Party when they were compromised, I left the OWS when they were compromised as well.

I can think and form my own opinions by myself thank you, I don't need others to tell me how to think.

If you don't agree, heck, I'm good with that. I don't hold anything against ya. As far as I'm concerned, you're thinking too. Unless you're spouting left/right talking points.

At which point I blow ya off as inconsequential.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by CALGARIAN


I always wonder truly, regardless of policy and process, what would happen if a Western nation captured a small town or city because of increased police brutaility and said we had enough, destroy a few HQ's and awaiting to be heard nation wide.

The military surely would be deployed, but would they attempt to talk it out or shoot to kill? Would the military even be called the military on the world-stage, or "Obama Forces". lol

www.washingtontimes.com
(visit the link for the full news article)


I could see it happening in Maricopa county before South Carolina.

Joe is pretty headstrong, especially when he is wrong.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by olaru12

Originally posted by TDawgRex

Originally posted by eazyriderl_l
You see everyday what would happen if anyone stood up to those in power.
If they sent in the military to "handle" any situation in these states, whoever they were called against would be murdered. Then they might even burn down the complex just to avoid any pesky evidence. The kids they will send in against any will shoot first and probably not even ask questions later.
It happens everyday. Military, police, cia, fbi. They will put 3 in your center mass and not think twice.


And you are absolutely certain of this?

Where is your evidence?

And don't bother posting some cop/Soldier brutality vid as I can come up with just as many OWS vids protraying them in a bad light. It does not make them all so.

The actions of a few does not reflect the majority. The sooner we stop thinking along those lines, the better off we will all be.


Ruby Ridge
Waco
Kent State
edit on 11-8-2012 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)


Two of which took place under Democratic rule, one Republican.

Which pretty much means...nothing. Unless you count the left as more bloodthirsty to make their ends meet.

I have yet to meet a service member who would open fire on his fellow citizens unprovoked.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by TDawgRex

Originally posted by olaru12

Originally posted by TDawgRex

Originally posted by eazyriderl_l
You see everyday what would happen if anyone stood up to those in power.
If they sent in the military to "handle" any situation in these states, whoever they were called against would be murdered. Then they might even burn down the complex just to avoid any pesky evidence. The kids they will send in against any will shoot first and probably not even ask questions later.
It happens everyday. Military, police, cia, fbi. They will put 3 in your center mass and not think twice.


And you are absolutely certain of this?

Where is your evidence?

And don't bother posting some cop/Soldier brutality vid as I can come up with just as many OWS vids protraying them in a bad light. It does not make them all so.

The actions of a few does not reflect the majority. The sooner we stop thinking along those lines, the better off we will all be.


Ruby Ridge
Waco
Kent State
edit on 11-8-2012 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)


Two of which took place under Democratic rule, one Republican.

Which pretty much means...nothing. Unless you count the left as more bloodthirsty to make their ends meet.

I have yet to meet a service member who would open fire on his fellow citizens unprovoked.


Ruby Ridge
Waco
Kent State

and why did you bring that false democrat vs republican bs? they are all the same. they will all put a bullet in you to save themselves. and they are more than happy people perpetuate that nonsense while they rape and pillage the planet.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 11:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Another_Nut
 


It's not false.

I see both parties as two sides of the same coin.

One just works faster than the other to further reduce our freedoms.

Kind of like a death by a thousand cuts vs. a stab to the heart.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 11:46 AM
link   
Here is the online story from the Small Wars Journal. Click Me!

I understand that this is an outlandish scenario, as far as I know, the TP is not a radical movement affiliated with militias. Based on what I read and the bios of the authors, this is a civil war type of scenario, I do understand why they make up these scenarios and write about them. What I don't really understand is this.

The authors would be in big trouble if instead of using the TP they used, for example "militant muslim's" or the "Black Panther" movement or even Occupy. If this was to be a hypothetical scenario, why did they use the TP instead of using a hypothetical non-existant group? In my opinion, these authors should have not been making any sort of political statements.

Also, is it not the National Guard for that state that holds the job of quelling "insurrection" in that state? Does not the Governor or the legislature have to make formal request to the President for help by regular armed forces? Are those forces still not subject to Posse Comatatus?

In my opinion (and I am sure some will give me grief for seeing it this way), I don't think that the majority of servicemen and women would stand for this. What would be the penalty/punishment for refusing to take a position of force against fellow Americans?

If a situation like this would come up, I think that the Feds would hire PMCs (they did for Katrina and that wasn't an insurrection type of scenario), probably from other countries. Was a very thought provoking read and subject to research. Thanks OP.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 11:53 AM
link   
reply to post by SyphonX
 



Like, I don't know... every occurrence ever, when military or para-military are used? It always leads to violence, because.. *SHOCK, GASP*, they're trained and equipped to kill. Who would have thought?!?! No, I suppose you're right, the military is filled to the brim with the happy, peaceful, critically thinking loving father family-type.


While we are trained to kill - we are also trained, most critically, how to not kill.

We spend more time doing training and filling out paperwork showing that we understand the inherent right to self defense, the justification for the use of force and deadly force, the safety features and concerns of weapons, the impact of collateral damage, the situations where use of deadly force is authorized (no higher weapons release authority is necessary), etc than we spend on the range.

Hell - trips to the range can be downright comical. I've yet to understand how you can miss a man sized target from three yards away with a 9mm... but people do it.

They can take that 9mm apart, clean it, tell you its maximum ranges, recite the definition of deadly force and the justifications for it by heart (and snap through hypothetical scenarios with flying colors)... but if they ever actually had to use the damned thing - they'd be better off throwing it at the threat.


They wouldn't "ever" shoot other people, especially their own. It's not like the average military man is easily manipulated or anything, that just doesn't happen anymore.


I have no doubts that there are a few within our command that would jump for joy the day someone in senior leadership gave an order that could be perceived as grossly unlawful and to place those individuals in restraints. I'm not quite so vindictive toward our chain of command - but I'd tell them to bite me if they ever gave me an order amounting to the detainment of my countrymen without just cause (IE - if you had the neo nazis going bonkers and killing ethnic groups - that's uncalled for).

They sit in their air conditioned trailer while the rest of us pack our # around and do what needs to be done. We need them to officially sign papers. The military is run largely by E-5s, 6s, and a few 7s that glue departments together. You're going to be hard pressed to get your E-5s and 6s on board with such a plan (you may be able to delude some of the younger booters) - they are the ones with families who often have a re-enlistment under their belt and their eyes on retiring to spend time with said family.

Sending them on a raid through the theme park they wanted to take their kids to isn't going to be a very popular order. And it might just be the last order you give.


Some people just don't know about OWS man, so you tell 'em how it be.


That movement got hijacked pretty early on.

It's really pretty simple, and these groups haven't figured it out:

Have your demonstration. Be peaceful. Don't argue with the cops (even when they are wrong) and mind your Ps and Qs. When asked to leave - do so in a polite and orderly manner. Point has been made - no one got hurt - and maybe a few people had to deal with an overzealous police officer. Big deal. You can all come back and do it again tomorrow if you feel like it and no one has justification to stop you.

If you plan to argue with the cops - you may as well drop the act, grab your rifles, and stage a friggin' coupe.

If you can't resolve to that action or coordinate it to be effective - then you don't have any business leading large groups of people to antagonize police forces.

Don't be a pain in the ass. Be a force. Peaceful or violent - it doesn't matter, but have a clear idea of what force you are going to use and have a very clear goal that you plan to accomplish. These protests that lead to individuals antagonizing the police and then running like little bitches when they get hit with tear gas and LRAD are just ridiculous. Even if they were intended to be violent - they would accomplish nothing but putting a bunch of people in the hospital for getting hit with crowd suppression measures.

It does nothing but breed further anger and discontent to hold pointless rallies aimed at being obstinate toward law enforcement. Be peaceful - or be forceful. Either way - accomplish something other than masochistic displays of incompetence. It's getting annoying.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 11:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tindalos2013
Eventually the will be another civil war. History will repeat itself because of the human variables of necessity. These are the kinds of chaotic patterns that define the state of the future. Humans are creatures of war and savagery, now a days we are just more polite about the dissent woes.


I believe much as you do.

My worry is as to what side I will side on though. The waters are kind of murky.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 11:56 AM
link   
You know what I think?

That if the military brass ever gave orders to regular old army folk to start detaining and hurting American citizens on American soil, you'd find a bunch of dead officers, generals and any other brass that dared make the demand of them.

Sure, you have those who are brainwashed enough to go through with it, but I think they'll be few and far between when the SHTF.

I don't believe for one minute that the army would turn on it's own. For decades they've used the whole " The Troops are Protecting Your Rights" argument for military intervention in other nations. What do you think they were telling the army.

' You're here to protect America.'

Their 'programming' or attempted programming of soldiers, will probably end up being their own downfall.

~Tenth
edit on 8/11/2012 by tothetenthpower because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 11:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Aim64C
 


You need to run for office.





posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


You’re summarization pretty much hits the nail on the head.

Would there those who would follow that order…yes. But their time would be short lived.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 12:03 PM
link   
reply to post by pwndnewb
 



In my opinion (and I am sure some will give me grief for seeing it this way), I don't think that the majority of servicemen and women would stand for this. What would be the penalty/punishment for refusing to take a position of force against fellow Americans?


Honestly depends upon who "wins."

If you took up arms against U.S. Citizens who later succeed in replacing the current government (one can only hope it to be a reasonable one) - you would likely be prosecuted for some variety of war crime, depending upon public sentiment. Wouldn't want to be that guy. That presumes they are decent enough to give you a trial. Mob justice would likely be fairly common in the years of and immediately following such a revolutionary/civil war.

On the other hand - if you took up arms against the established government and the insurrection (or whatever) is defeated - you easily face incarceration and, depending upon just how large the war became, may find yourself facing mob justice in the lack of established systems of law.

Doing neither would not earn you many points with whoever won - but you would probably not be treated as a criminal (though that, again, depends). You may, however, be something of an outcast - accused of being a fence sitter of sorts. Though you would be less likely to receive this type of treatment if you had a family (people can empathize with not wanting to get involved because you have a family to look after first and foremost).

It would largely be an idealistic war, however - and those are quite nasty. I would expect, if it developed into a full scale war, that it would be very, very nasty (even though it would likely not involve the military by that point - it's ideals of the population clashing in a contest of dominance).

Though I could be way off the mark and it will simply never develop into much of a war - just a "oh, hey, everybody seceded and no one is willing to kill enough of them to convince them to join back up... game over."



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 12:21 PM
link   
reply to post by TDawgRex
 



My worry is as to what side I will side on though. The waters are kind of murky.


This is true.

The thing that worries me is how quickly many of these movements are hijacked by people who want to ride the tide to power. It makes it very difficult for me to put my support behind them.

The trend is for a group to start with some kind of focus (whether I agree with it or not) and they start a little movement. Before long - it turns into the equivalent of frantically flailing about without clear purpose, direction, or awareness. It's just a bunch of disgruntled people expressing how angry they are but rarely knowing what they are angry about, much less coming up with any kind of method to solve it.

Then they start casting worrying ideas around. "Hey, let's go protest the people who are content and happy - the ones who have money or just look like they do." It's the god damned good idea fairy making rounds.

They don't think things through and they don't have much in the way of resolve (unless a line of police officers show up - God Forbid the law take note of three thousand chanting people - I'm sure they can -always- be trusted to behave reasonably and to not endanger the lives of others).

Which is why I honestly think the best way to go about changing the way we do things in the United States is to focus on the state and local governments and, if so motivated, push for secession from the union.

I think, largely, America is too interconnected and interdependent for there to be much of a military war that results. I doubt it will be seen as effective to employ the military (though principle can be a powerful factor in such decisions). The military, itself, will absolve into something of a contractor (it still provides a necessary function and even a dissolved union of states would recognize the importance of maintaining it - and the system for doing so would be most interesting). And the Federal government would largely disappear or become a regional district of states (with other districts over other states forming later and eventually leading to a loose federation).

Or we could all bathe in each others' blood.

I like the more peaceful idea... but do have to admit that I'm young and stupid enough to find the whole civil war prospect exciting. Probably need to be committed to a psychiatric ward for it - but what can you do?



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 12:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Aim64C
 


I agree with you on every point.

I served 19 years (medical DC in 03) and we had this conversation more than once.

I was the section chief of the medic section in a F/A HQ unit. We got a brand new O-2 PA who was prior service SF, he was a Mech Sgt on a SF A team. Said he realized there weren't many job skills for later life and put in for PA school at Ft Sam. This was pre 9/11 btw, I'm pretty sure Xe would pay him more than the clinic he works for now.

Anyway, we were talking about seizing guns from citizens one night after drill while having a few beers. The LT says "I've been to Doc's house, after seeing what he has in his basement I'm scared to death of trying to do any type of gun roundups".

He was talking about my basement, I collect military weapons.

The funny thing though is that last year we sold our McMansion and paid cash for a smaller foreclosure. All part of my prepping for the coming financial collapse, debt free and all my money is now in easily traded commodities.

So after getting to know my new neighbors I met the guy behind me, who I had met a few times out pheasant hunting, so I knew he had at least a few guns. He takes me over to his house saying he saw me carry all the gun cases and ammo cans and wants to show me something.

I was blown away. I thought I had a lot of guns, pfffft, my hundred guns are nothing. His whole upstairs is guns, 3 bedrooms full of guns. He even has a class 3 license and has quite a few full auto guns, 3 belt fed.

We've been shooting a few times now and he knows how to take down and repair every gun he owns, he can also shoot.


When the time comes, the Army will not be our biggest problem.


I also want to echo what others have said about the TP and OWS. I was an early TP member, but when Fox news took it over I bailed.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
You know what I think?

That if the military brass ever gave orders to regular old army folk to start detaining and hurting American citizens on American soil, you'd find a bunch of dead officers, generals and any other brass that dared make the demand of them.

Sure, you have those who are brainwashed enough to go through with it, but I think they'll be few and far between when the SHTF.

I don't believe for one minute that the army would turn on it's own. For decades they've used the whole " The Troops are Protecting Your Rights" argument for military intervention in other nations. What do you think they were telling the army.

' You're here to protect America.'

Their 'programming' or attempted programming of soldiers, will probably end up being their own downfall.

~Tenth
edit on 8/11/2012 by tothetenthpower because: (no reason given)


Completely bogus.

Look no further than Hurricane Katrina, where Military and Contracted Mercenaries were ordered to detain people and confiscate weapons, door-to-door.

They had absolutely no problems doing it. It was done with complete apathy and expediency. One of the biggest cover-ups this country has ever seen was during Katrina. Untold number of bodies riddled with government or merc lead, buried or lost.

It basically works like this:

The soldiers don't receive "direct orders" to go kill or "round up" people. They're given very vague orders to "police the area" or "keep the peace", etc. They are then placed in a place deliberately setup to boil over at any moment. Suddenly, the "innocent" soldiers are faced with a situation where the people are not calm and are not cooperative. They don't understand why, because they only just got there, and well.. they didn't do anything to these people so what's their deal anyway? So everyone not cooperative is seen as a combatant. The soldiers just react in a manner in which they have no control over.

It's never direct, it's always indirect.

Macro being Iraq.

Micro being Kent State, or Katrina.
edit on 11-8-2012 by SyphonX because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by SWCCFAN
You mean something like this going down?



This is what our right to keep and bear arms is for.

Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!


Great clip on the Battle of Athens! Well I searched all over for this full movie and could only find it on VHS on Amazon It's calls "An American Story" I could not even find it on the torrent sites. So here is the conspiracy of the day; did the PTB scrub the internet of this movie? If anyone knows where I can get a torrent of it Please PM me...



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by SyphonX
 



Completely bogus.

Look no further than Hurricane Katrina, where Military and Contracted Mercenaries were ordered to detain people and confiscate weapons, door-to-door.


A little context goes a long way.

You are looking at an area that was largely unpopulated and there had been local gang lords causing problems.

Soldiers were told to go door to door to look for survivors and to secure unsecured firearms.

It wasn't "go take the farmer's guns." It was "go make sure those ass clowns raiding the relief trucks don't whip a .50 cal out of some enthusiast's collection."


It basically works like this:


Buddy, don't tell me how my job goes.

Petty Officer Second Class, Mobile Expeditionary Security Squadron Eleven (... which will become some Riverine detachment before too much longer - the good idea fairy at work again).


The soldiers don't receive "direct orders" to go kill or "round up" people. They're given very vague orders to "police the area" or "keep the peace", etc. They are then placed in a place deliberately setup to boil over at any moment. Suddenly, the "innocent" soldiers are faced with a situation where the people are not calm and are not cooperative. They don't understand why, because they only just got there, and well.. they didn't do anything to these people so what's their deal anyway? So everyone not cooperative is seen as a combatant. The soldiers just react in a manner in which they have no control over.


That might work in a world where soldiers are summoned from another dimension like this is Final Fantasy.

Doesn't work when we read the news, call home, get letters, and have access to the internet.... or just, you know, generally have cognitive function.

The problem is that you presume everyone is innocent - that people don't naturally resort to violence.

Enough of them do. Following Katrina, there were gangs going door to door ransacking minimally damaged houses, killing survivors (or otherwise intimidating them), and even going so far as to tear up tile from grocery stores (not exactly sure what the plan was, there... probably wasn't one).

People weren't camping out in their back yard singing Koombaiya with their neighbors (may have been a few, I suppose). They generally fell into two categories - survivors waiting for word from officials and radicals running around taking advantage of the more passive survivors.

I was there to clean up on a few mission trips. I talked to the people who were there. Several counties had, within the span of days, become third world nations with, literally, warlords pitting their gangs against each other and the people who were standing by.


It's never direct, it's always indirect.


And yet, somehow these people are so spun up that they will provoke the use of lethal force from military personnel.

Sorry - it takes more than a crowd of pissed people to provoke a reaction like that. In an AOR like the United States - you can walk up to an ECP with a rifle in your hand and so long as you don't point it at anyone - lethal force is not authorized.

Depending upon the Status of Forces agreement - I could take a person out on a ridge and shoot him/her in sight of a military compound and they can't do squat but call in the incident to the State.

We've been drilled in stuff like this. The only way we start shooting you in those types of AORs is, basically, if you start aiming a rifle at us or try charging the gate with a bomb.

Now - sure - in areas like Afghanistan - walking within two miles of a convoy with something that looks like a rifle is grounds for them to start putting rounds in your direction - but in a region like the U.S. we'd be doing things more like how we do them where I'm at now - where our entire chain of command will get sent to jail if one of us hauls off and shoots someone without a very, very damned good reason.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join