Originally posted by Observor
5. You claim to fight not for the piece of paper, but for the people. It is not very clear which people. Evidently it is not for what the majority
believe in, because the majority seem to be with the government or at least don't care either way. Perhaps it is for an idea? If so, you need to be
clear that the idea you are fighting for is the same as that of the others who are fighting or at least those believing in your idea should be in
control at the time of victory or the replacement for the current enemy could be worse than it.
Agreed. It would likely be a hum-dinger, in the onset at least, with so many differing factions competing for supremacy that one would need a score
card to keep track of them. The people I would fight for, were I in any sort of fighting form - which I'm not any more - would be the people where I
am. Family, friends, neighbors, etc. A man can bite off more than he can chew by becoming over-ambitous and fighting for ideals much farther away than
the end of his arm.
The "don't know, don't care" crowd doesn't concern me much. They'll follow along with whichever leader presents himself in the end, and not squawk.
Until then, they won't be much trouble for either faction involved in the fight. Contrary to what our history books tell us, not everyone was raring
for liberty during the first Revolution, either. Then, as now, some few had opinions either way, and the majority was seized with ambivalence. Had the
rebellious Americans waited for a clear majority to jump into their wagon, we would still be paying homage to the British Crown, and living under
I can't think of anything much that was ever done by a clear majority, but then I'm not a big fan of Democracy anyhow, so I've not really studied up
on it. Most change is effected my a minority, but a minority with fervent opinion. Nearly every little war that springs up and brings change, even
just the change of the name plates on the government offices, is hatched and nurtured by a fairly small segment of society.
The rest just follow the leader of the day when the dust settles.
You are absolutely correct about keeping a weather eye out for which faction is at the top of the heap when the dust settles. I learned that hard
lesson in Nicaragua many years ago. The communist faction, although a vanishingly small minority of the Sandinistas, were at the top of the heap when
the dust settled, even though most of the fighters weren't in favor of them. Still, a small core of them mobilized a lot of people with pretty
promises and fudging facts here and there, and keeping their politics to themselves, and we got what we got down there. Eden Pastora, alias
"Commandante Cerro" was REALLY thrown under the bus by the victors, even though he was supposed to BE one of the victors. He wasn't too happy about
that, but it's a matter for the history books now. Last I heard he was quietly living out his days guiding fishing expeditions on the coast, or
something like that.
And the band plays on.
6. Regarding the self-sufficiency of the bases that the Afghan Mujahiddeen are operating from, I didn't mean they were self-sufficient in fighting the
invaders, I meant the Afghan country-side is self-sufficient (for their way of living) that an economic seize doesn't work. But it is a different
story in the case of US country-side which is where the "rebellion" is expected to start.
You're right to a degree, but there ARE places here that are fairly self sufficient. Also, because of the nature of guerrilla operations, it would be
hard to starve out the guerrillas without also starving out the populace, and thereby making even MORE guerrillas. That's another pillar of irregular
warfare - get the government to act harshly, during which action the hammer comes down of the guilty and innocent alike, breeding more cannon fodder
for the rebellion.
Urban areas will be the worst - they are death-traps just waiting to be sprung. Much easier to button up and control an urban population, because of
their concentration and the fact that everything they need has to come from somewhere else. Everything flowing into a city can be easily controlled by
a few, and restricted or even cut off altogether at will. A fairly small force can "Audi Murphy" an entire concentrated population and effectively
"flank" them using those means, and still keep itself fairly concentrated with backup not too far away.
Urban areas are not recommended for any sort of "revolution", especially in the beginning. Rebels have to build numbers, alliances, and logisitics
first, before tackling urban areas, which is why cities always fall last to rebels, and are secured first by their opposition. The only actions
possible in urban areas at the outset are underground activities - intelligence, sabotage, and that sort of thing, and it's a mighty dangerous game to
play, especially these days.
The bottom line is regardless of how much you hate them, those in-charge are not going to oblige by giving an explicit excuse for rebellion.
You're probably right here. It's a dangerous game THEY would be playing to overtly make a grab. For several years now it's been the boiling frog
scenario - since at least the days of King George Bush the First, if not longer. I've noticed an acceleration of heating the water up as time goes on,
but a carefully controlled, accelerating, simmer all the same. Every so often, someone appears to bump the burner knob a bit too much, and some of the
frogs get jittery, and that's what I believe we are seeing at present.
The only way anything would happen is if a few too many of those frogs jump and say "I'm clean enough, and this bath is OVER!" - it's not likely to
come from the government side, since I believe they are aware of just how fragile and precarious their situation is should they over-reach
There seems also to be a game afoot to convince the populace that they couldn't win anyhow - "we got tanks, we got drones, we got all manner of
glorious tech that will eat you if you don't behave!" Like the monster in the closet, that advantage is illusory. That stuff don't run on magic, it
doesn't operate or maintain itself. They know that, but are trying to convince us of that the boogey man is REAL. If you can beat a man in his own
mind, no fighting ever becomes necessary to accomplish your goal - he defeats himself at your command. Sun Tzu said "the highest art of generalship is
to gain victory without ever fighting a battle".
That sir, seems to be the name of this game currently.
edit on 2013/1/7 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)