The Radicalization of America

Hello Long Lance. Once upon a time, I started an ATS thread about self-defense in an urban setting. Those who are interested in weapons, tactics, and supplies should have a look at that thread. I believe it is still relevant.

reply to post by Justin Oldham

Hello Long Lance. Once upon a time, I started an ATS thread about self-defense in an urban setting. Those who are interested in weapons, tactics, and supplies should have a look at that thread. I believe it is still relevant.

And I have actually been certified as a Geiger counter repair instructor by the Civil Defense Administration in 1959. The US Govt. stockpiled supplies for fourteen (14) days in the very numerous shelters. Fall-out was their only concern then. Each shelter - usually in basements of downtown buildings - was marked with the number of people it provided for. I was never aware but I assume policemen were pre-assigned to each shelter and maybe given letters of authority to enforce the rules and regulations inside those shelters. On a "need to know" basis, I was not.

RED DAWN is a 1984 film by John Milius about an invasion of the United States by the Soviet Union and Cuba, and the resulting guerrilla actions of a group of American high school students in the town of Calumet, Colorado. The movie features Patrick Swayze, C. Thomas Howell, Lea Thompson, Charlie Sheen, Jennifer Grey, and Powers Boothe.

Red Dawn was the first movie to be released with a Motion Picture Association of America PG-13 rating (The Flamingo Kid was the first film to actually receive the rating, but was not released for 5 months after certification.) en.wikipedia.org...

The only way to increase your survival odds under these conditions will be to plan for the eventual seizure of whatever State or Federal authorities manage to find on your property ... if you are still there when they come. Survivalists have long held the notion that food and guns will have one thing in common when catastrophe strikes. As long as you've left something for "them" to find, they won't look too hard for the rest of what you've got tucked away ... somewhere else.

The need to have an off-site cache is real. Eventually, you may have to relocate. Your house could burn, or you could be forced to leave for any number of other reasons. In this age of terrorism, nothing is impossible. Having at least one stockpile located somewhere else can do more than save your life. It can give you a reason to live because it'll take some effort to reach it.

If as in the case of "Jericho," you face having to survive a winter ... you should expect to be visited by a lot of hungry people. You may have enough manpower and bullets to drive them off, but that won't last forever. Eventually, your need to forage for supplies can and will force you from your barricaded home. If you've really just got to stay there ...

Sound familiar? The REAL lesson to be learned is how important it is that we do not allow this kind of scenario to ever occur. We need intelligent and well informed leaders who will not make "quick draw gunslinger" mistakes. No more MBAs or Texas cowboys, if you are serious about your future.

Wow. I haven't thought about that survival thread in quite a while. I got a huge storm of u2's when I wrote it. Most of it positive, but there were some some thought I was off my gyro. Now, when I read this, I'm just a little more glad that I wrote it.

When the media feeds on the radical menace, they'll portray anyone who has a few extra beans and bullets as a vigilante nut.

Does anyone know of other films that are like Red Dawn? I have stacks pf books on similar themes, but Red Dawn and the mini series "Amerika" stand alone as the only two examples of that movie type that I know of.

reply to post by Justin Oldham

Wow. I haven't thought about that survival thread in quite a while. I got a huge storm of u2's when I wrote it. Most of it positive, but there were some who thought I was off my gyro. Now, when I read this, I'm just a little more glad that I wrote it. When the media feeds on the radical menace, they'll portray anyone who has a few extra beans and bullets as a vigilante nut. Does anyone know of other films that are like Red Dawn? I have stacks pf books on similar themes, but Red Dawn and the mini series "Amerika" stand alone as the only two examples of that movie type that I know of.

I’ve tried to explain - warn - the Amend 2 types that despite their Glock .40s they will not be able to prevent the imposition of a State of Emergency if and when dictated by the occupant of the WH. You don’t have to be too bright to see the nightly news shots of our Army and Marine Corps in Iraq, going door to door and shooting whoever they may, to know that could happen here “as easy as pie!” I’ve added to that waning, the further alert that with an all VOLUNTEER Armed Forces, the issue is: To who or to what will constantly propagandized volunteers owe their loyalty? To the man who signs their paychecks and holds their financial future in his hands, or to an historic document hidden away in an argon filled glass enclosure on occasional display somewhere in W-DC?

You know the answer.

So what do you do? Yes, a “stash” or cache hidden away might be good for a temporary aid in staying out of “protective custody.” But that is going to be difficult to arrange. If you go out onto some remote Federal land and bury a foot locker of WW2 genre, excluding water you could put enough dry food and canned goods to feed 2 people 2 weeks, IMO. Oh, try to keep the cache in walking distance!

In a second foot locker you could store camo clothes - hey, we still want to be in high style - pure wool blankets, nylon tents, arms and ammo. For arms I’m thinking of a stainless steel Ruger 10/22 Carbine. Maybe toss in a Ruger Standard .22 pistol. For ammo I'm thinking 10 or 20 boxes of 100 rounds each of CCI .22 LR hollow point bullets. AND, I’d surely want 2 late model gas masks and refills. Every 3-4 years you’d want to renew the items subject to deterioration.

Water is something else.

The human body is anywhere from 55% to 78% water depending on body size. To function properly, the body requires between one and seven liters of water per day to avoid dehydration; the precise amount depends on the level of activity, temperature, humidity, and other factors. Most of this is ingested through foods or beverages other than drinking straight water. It is not clear how much water intake is needed by healthy people, though most advocates agree that 8–10 glasses of water (approximately 2 liters) daily is the minimum to maintain proper hydration.

Medical literature favors a lower consumption, typically 1 liter of water for an average male, excluding extra requirements due to fluid loss from exercise or warm weather. For those who have healthy kidneys, it is rather difficult to drink too much water, but (especially in warm humid weather and while exercising) it is dangerous to drink too little. People can drink far more water than necessary while exercising, however, putting them at risk of water intoxication (hyperhydration), which can be fatal.
en.wikipedia.org...

[edit on 2/23/2008 by donwhite]

I appreciate your point, but I don't subscribe to the notion that its pointless to resist a power-hungry government. I would point out that insurgents around the world are known to work with very little. Troops and tanks can't be everywhere, and resistors don't always have to pack heat to be effective.

I would remind you that Iraqi insurgents do their dance of death with U.S. forces on a shoe-string budget. Taliban zealots suffer through a lot to fight in the mountains of Afghanistan. why should we NOT expect the same thing here in America?

Politically motivated terror groups will take to the hills, or the underbellies of our largest cities. In the event of a revolt, we should expect anti-government forces to do the same. The dynamic of an "American insurgency" will differ ony in one respect. Because this hypothetical throw down happens inside a first world nation, the rebels will be better fed, better equipped, and better lead than their third world counterparts.

It's true that 96% of rebellions fail. This has been the net average for the last 2000 years. that doesn't mean that oppressed peole will stop trying to be free. For a relatively small investment, the United States backed anti-Soviet fighters in Afghanistan. Who's to say that one or more nations might not decide to supply U.S. insurgents?

I'll be the first one to recognize that its possible that our Federal government might assume total power over us without having to fight for it. Incrementalism is insidious. It would not surpsie me to see that the average guy simply decided to live with it. The simple truth is that most populations don't rebel as their governments becomes dictatorial.

Our founding fathers had no way of knowing what the technological progression of military capability would be like, but they did understand that a society which gives up its ability to offer resistence is...doomed.

Error.

[edit on 23-2-2008 by Justin Oldham]

reply to post by Justin Oldham

I appreciate your point, but I don't subscribe to the notion that its pointless to resist a power-hungry government. I would point out that insurgents around the world are known to work with very little. Troops and tanks can't be everywhere, and resistors don't always have to pack heat to be effective. I would remind you that Iraqi insurgents do their dance of death with US forces on a shoe-string budget. Taliban zealots suffer through a lot to fight in the mountains of Afghanistan. why should we NOT expect the same thing here in America?

I do not see Iraq and Afghan as being synonymous to our situation, or even to be analogous. Since the time of Tamerlane, Afghan’s capital city has often been overrun but Afghanistan has never been conquered. As it was in Vietnam, we cannot leave Kabul after dark even in 2008. We are watching as Afghan becomes the Number 1 producer of the world’s illegal supply of heroin. And we cannot do more than wring our hands in feigned concern.

As for Iraq. Our leaders were not even playing the same game the local Iraqis were playing. As we had built the fortified villages in Vietnam, so we are building the most colossal monument to failure since the League of Nations headquarters at Geneva, or by the Kings of France at Versailles.

With cost overruns, I’m sure it has cost the US taxpayers more than $2 b. It is large enough to house a reinforced USMC brigade - 3,000 strong - out of sight of the international dignitaries who will frequent the place and marvel at its completeness. Made complete of necessity because the Embassy’s guests cannot leave the premises lest they be dramatically whisked into the next world by an IED. With or without virgins. Your choice. Say Hello, Saddam!

Here at home, OTOH, we must face the fact that 80%-90% of all police or FBI arrests are made possible by INFORMERS. Every new cop on a beat is instructed how he must accumulate a network of informers. Aside: this is a major problem with policing, as the informant are generally themselves criminals. Informants want “protection” from arrest in exchange for info on other criminals they for one reason or another want to see “off the street.” So who is working for whom?

Which brings me back to my 1960s memories. Blacks then - and now - have always been shut out of mainstream America. That’s what Michele Obama was recalling when she made her most notable confession of truth. The truth will out.

It is America’s black community that will preserve, protect and defend the United States of America from all its enemies whomsoever. Odd isn’t it, that we may find ourselves someday depending on those we have unjustly punished - maltreated - for nearly 400 years? Reminds me of the line from Casablanca, when Capt. Louis Renault (Claude Rains) protects Rick Blaine (Humphrey Bogart) by ordering his men to "round up the usual suspects." You know who that was. And yet they - America's blacks - LOVE this country to the extent I have no doubt they will come through in a pinch! So let’s be nice to the black guys and gals. They are the guarantors of our future.

[edit on 2/24/2008 by donwhite]

A word of warning watching a movie and eating popcorn is great fun but it is very far away from reality . Lets look at all the post war insurgency's for a moment. None of them lead to the freedoms that the author seeks. All of the insurgency's were purely idealogical driven this is why they received so little training .

Only in Malaysia and Borneo did the insurgents fail because those country's did not fall to communism. So should a civil war break out the only end result can be the wholesale destruction of American society and the presence of foreign troops on US soil . There is no way the world would do nothing while the US nukes stood idle during a civil war.

The insurgents wont give a dam about the welfare of the USA or the Republic despite what there propaganda says.

All of this leads to one important point. Find political solutions to the problems . Those who follow Don and my postings will know that there are options out there that can be look at it. In this case the process is more important then the result what matters is that Americans sit around a table and devise solutions. It remains to be seen if Americans will sit at the same table and come up with new political model once again or adapted a current one.

If the politicians do enough "stupid," we might just end up in a position hwere it becomes possible or even desireable to implement a new model of government.

reply to post by Justin Oldham

. . we might just end up in a position where it becomes possible or even desirable to implement a new model of government.

Q. How am I going to recall the word seigniorage which as far as I know has no synonym.

My complaint about our governmental institutions are they react too slowly to the expressed decisions of the electorate. What was OK in the 1700s and 1800s when it took 2 weeks to get from Richmond to New York City and 2 months to cross the Atlantic, is not working today. Not good when we have nearly instant contact with half the world without regard to their physical location.

If you call the ‘06 Congressional elections a vote of NO confidence in Bush43, then why do we have to wait two and a half years to install new leadership? January 20, 2009. America is effectively cutting itself out of the world leadership role for a hiatus all too long.

I like NZ’s MMP plan for a unicameral legislature and a parliamentary system of leadership. Maybe we could ask the Queen back to be our Head of State, a job she has done without peer since June 2, 1953 with unequaled aplomb.

[edit on 2/25/2008 by donwhite]

Originally posted by donwhite
Maybe we could ask the Queen back to be our Head of State, a job she has done without peer since June 2, 1953 with unequaled aplomb.

Given the depth of anti-Bush feeling, I'm glad we can't change leaders very fast. We would be inviting chaos if we could. the "signals" sent during the '06 elections have clearly been missed by the Republicans now in office. If they had understood the point being made by the average voter, they would've tried harder to clear up their act.

Please also bear in mind that if we could change leaders in a faster way, we would also bring on more of that radicalization much faster. We owe it to future generations to avoid the use of violence for as long as we can.

Some additional thoughts on why a civil war isnt the answer . It is my understanding that while Lincoln took measures that would be considered unacceptable today he was also very forgiving of the south . I venture that the victor in any possible future conflict wont be as forgiving .

Also wide scale economic hardship and destruction also provides a breeding ground for extremists or the sort of extreme left or right wing dictatorship. This was seen in post war eastern Europe where the Soviets declined Marshall aid. If you think China owns the US now just wait until they are the main provider of aid that is used to rebuild the US as a nation.

I wont go into MMP on this thread because I don't want to go off topic but if anyone wants my thoughts on this matter feel free to U2U me.

reply to post by xpert11

It is my understanding that while Lincoln took measures that would be considered unacceptable today he was also very forgiving of the south. I venture that the victor in any possible future conflict wont be as forgiving.

1) Yes, due to the exposed geographical location and the political significance of maintaining the nation’s capital - on the Potomac between Maryland and Virginia - Lincoln had pro-slavery newspapers publishers in Maryland locked up summarily. Lincoln believed if Kentucky and Maryland - both slave states - were to secede he might not be able to prevail. For Lincoln ‘Job One’ was preserving the Union. No union, nothing to argue about.

2) Everything we know about Lincoln presaged a moderate approach to the southern states AFTER they had done their duty in freeing the slaves and in restoring civil order for all its citizens. Andrew Johnson, the Tennessee senator Lincoln picked for his Vice President, a War Democrat, was vehemently anti-Negro. Then as now, VPs were really not of much force n politics. They had nothing to give away or bargain with. Lincoln was sworn in for his second term on March 4, and on April 14 he was shot and he died the next day, April 15. 42 days.

3) Civil wars often degenerate into either ethnic cleansing or genocide. Our own Civil War - officially the War of the Rebellion - was a case of the Union winning the war but losing the peace. More than 4,000 black men were lynched from 1865 to 1964; 10,000 were beaten so severely they were never able to resume a normal life; and 50,000 black homesteads were burned out. The era symbolized by the Ku Klux Klan.

By the bye, 11 blacks were burned to death including 3 women. A few black women were lynched when pregnant. One white man was lynched for being too friendly to blacks. Lynching means long and slow strangling to death, not the nice way of state sponsored hangings where the neck is snapped resulting in quick death.

. . wide scale economic hardship and destruction also provides a breeding ground for extremists or the sort of extreme left or right wing dictatorship. This was seen in post war eastern Europe where the Soviets declined Marshall aid. If you think China owns the US now just wait until they are the main provider of aid that is used to rebuild the US as a nation.

I know where you’re going Mr X11, but China has so many problems inside China that I do not believe it will be helping anyone off the mainland in our lifetimes. China has devolved into TWO nations, the COASTLAND where 300,000,000 are off the Mao Little Red Book line and are now serving as cheap labor for a couple dozen Chinese Walton clone billionaires. Watch out Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, the Chinese are coming!

The INTERIORLAND is saddled with 1,000,000,000 poor Chinese formerly called Coolies (also spelled Kuli and Quli and etc) but I think that is not now PC. Average income on the Coastland is about $3,000 and in the Interiorland about $500. Plus China has destroyed it environment, and is now adding ONE new coal fired generating plant each week until 2010. If we have not already passed the tipping point in global warming, we will soon. And there is nothing we can do about it. This world ain’t gonna be nice by 2020.

reply to post by donwhite


You have raised some good points about China . If China didn't offer aid some other country or group of country's would. There could well end up there being to many fingers in the pie. Either way in today world of globalization the US would not come off any where near as well post war Japan and West Germany .

In my published work, I make the case for a prelude to civil unrest by no earliers than 2014. It's quite likely to be the case that we don't go to full-blown civil war. the proper term to use might be "insurrection." My suspicion is that a small fraction of the country's population wil be sufficiently disaffected to take up arms.

If the insurgents can't seel the cause to enough people to get the ball rolling it will fail. because radical terror groups will be taking to the field at the same time as patriotic forces, it will be hard to tell one from the other. The media may not care. That's why I have outlined a series of measures that American militias must take before things go too far.

reply to post by Justin Oldham


Have you taken a look at the counter insurgency handbook ?
It can involve people being relocated or being told where they can and cannot live by the government . Other measures include putting a group of people behind some kind of wire and interrogating them.

The problem is that these restrictions may not be lifted after the enemy has been dealt with. If the US had to combat a home grown insurgency the measures or powers that the Federal government would take would make the current ones that put in effect post 9-11 look like child's play. Now if that happens state governments will exist in name only.

New Orleans seems to be a place a mixture of poverty , government mistreatment could be a breeding ground for the political unrest . This may not be radicalization as described but the outcome could be the same.




Hopefully it never gets beyond a point were law enforcement and if needed special forces cant nip the problem in the bud. The US military has never been particularly good at counter insurgency warfare although there appears to be signs of progress. Plus I don't the US military out on the streets conducting counter insurgency operations.

reply to post by xpert11

You have raised some good points about China . If China didn't offer aid some other country or group of country's would. There could well end up there being to many fingers in the pie. Either way in today world of globalization the US would not come off any where near as well post war Japan and West Germany.

Like America at 3 million plus square miles, China is too large for any other country on the planet to even consider invading. Including Russia. Even if that was done, it would be impossible to occupy the country. I say Russia because it is Asiatic Russia (Siberia) that borders China and that is about as remote and under developed a place as is equatorial Africa. Only "insiders" can "capture" and "occupy" such large countries. Like China, America is only valuable for what each does best - produce or consume. Symbiotic.

Post War 2 Japan and Germany are special cases that are almost always misunderstood when offered in comparison for any kind of nation state building, IMO. For two reasons only out of many, those two countries are both easily self-regimented and are extremely industrious people. Whether free or captive.

[edit on 2/26/2008 by donwhite]

reply to post by xpert11

New Orleans seems to be a place a mixture of poverty, government mistreatment could be a breeding ground for the political unrest. This may not be radicalization as described but the outcome could be the same.

New Orleans is ETHNIC cleansing, American style. The 9th Ward is too valuable to give it back to its original black inhabitants. FEMA types see office parks alternating with high rise condos and shopping malls. “Sorry, folks, but there is no plaice for you here. Have you tried Houston?” Made all the more lucrative to “private investors" who plan on getting US Tax Funds to do the HEAVY LIFTING of installing the new infrastructure. The best of both worlds, bad guys OUT, good guys IN, OTHER guys pay! Sweet Jesus! Pinch me. Have I died and gone to Heaven? I do so much LOVE America and REPUBLICANS.

Nothing so big as this FIASCO happens by chance. It is all well planned to get rid of THOSE people by wearing them down and forcing them out. It is a tragedy worthy of Euripides.

[edit on 2/26/2008 by donwhite]

reply to post by Justin Oldham

If the insurgents can't sell the cause to enough people to get the ball rolling it will fail. Because radical terror groups will be taking to the field at the same time as patriotic forces, it will be hard to tell one from the other. The media may not care. That's why I have outlined a series of measures that American militias must take before things go too far.

Militias? I do not believe there are any militias today. The Skin-Heads and Idaho Separatists are the closest to a militia I am aware of. And both are staffed with strictly fringe elements.

Xpert11 asked: Have you taken a look at the counter insurgency handbook ? If the US had to combat a home grown insurgency the measures or powers that the Federal government would take would make the current ones that put in effect post 9-11 look like child's play. Now if that happens state governments will exist in name only.

How far is it from Fallujah or Basra to Phoenix or Baltimore? This is why I’m a strong advocate for a DRAFT Armed Forces and not of a VOLUNTEER Armed Forces whose loyalty may be suspect. Loyal to their leaders over the US Constitution? Remember it is a DEATH penalty case to disobey a lawful order in the time of battle. Who wants to gamble on what is “lawful” especially when it is the same generals who gave the order who will decide!

I have already posted the Posse Comitatus Act which is totally worthless. So do not offer that as a legal block to the domestic use of the US Armed Forces against civilians. But here it is again for easy reference. The Posse Comitatus Act is a United States federal law (currently 18 U.S.C. § 1385) passed on June 16, 1878.

20 Stat. L., 145, June 18, 1878

CHAP. 263 - An act making appropriations for the support of the Army for the fiscal year ending June thirtieth, eighteen hundred and seventy-nine, and for other purposes.

SEC. 15. From and after the passage of this act it shall not be lawful to employ any part of the Army of the United States, as a posse comitatus, or otherwise, for the purpose of executing the laws, except in such cases and under such circumstances as such employment of said force may be expressly authorized by the Constitution or by act of Congress; And any person willfully violating the provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction thereof shall be punished by fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars or imprisonment not exceeding two years or by both such fine and imprisonment. www.dojgov.net...

Highlights are my own.

[edit on 2/26/2008 by donwhite]

Actually, I would argue that a conscripted army would be most likely to obey unlawful orders. A volunteer force may have a brain-washed officer corps, but there will always be dissenters in the non-com and enlisted ranks.