Rules of Engagement

The second American civil war is coming, we can all feel it. With that in mind, I thought I would share some information that will be important then. We do not want to target genuine civilians and true non-combatants, BUT there are some "civilians" who are in fact legitimate military targets because they materially contribute enemy combat capabilities. Politicians, police, and even Boeing or Lockheed Martin employees would all be legitimate targets; while their families would not. Obviously Lawful Combatants are acceptable targets.

A lawful combatant is an individual authorized by governmental authority to engage in hostilities. A lawful combatant may be a member of a regular armed force or an irregular force. In either case, the lawful combatant must be commanded by a person responsible for subordinates; have fixed distinctive emblems recognizable at a distance, such as uniforms, and carry arms openly.

Thus members of the police, FBI, BATFE, DHS, TSA, and other groups are legitimate targets. Many of these agencies are already engaged in operations against American citizens.

Military targets are those that by their own nature, location, purpose, or use make an effective contribution to an enemy’s military capability and whose total or partial destruction, capture, or neutralization in the circumstances existing at the time of an attack enhance legitimate military objectives.

This is where I ascertain justification for the legality of targeting "civilian" employees of arms and munitions producing companies. These people would be directly contributing to the war effort against us. "Just doing my job" is not an acceptable excuse for arming the forces of tyranny against patriots.

Military Objectives. Objects that, by their nature, use, location, or purpose, make an effective contribution to military action are legitimate military objectives. Their destruction, capture or neutralization is justified if it offers a definite military advantage. There must be a nexus between the object and a “definite” advantage toward military operations. Examples: enemy equipment, munitions factories, roads, bridges, railroads, or electrical powers stations.

Civilians. Prohibition against attacking civilians or civilian property. Presumption of civilian property attaches to objects traditionally associated with civilian use (dwellings, school, etc.) (GP I, art. 52(3)), as contrasted with military objectives such as industrial facilities such as munitions factories, which remain legitimate military objectives even if manned by civilian workers.

Keep in mind that any civilian building occupied or in use by military forces is a military target.

Both the Hague IV Convention and the laws of war permit attacks upon valid military targets at any time or place.39 What is included in the category of “targets,” however, is broader than just troops in the field. Noncombatants and civilians can be designated a valid target if they are sufficiently involved in the war effort.40 For example, any civilian who directly participates in hostilities would be equivalent, for targeting purposes, to a combatant. Although the exact level of involvement necessary for a civilian to become a valid target has not been fully defined legally,41 it is usually viewed as being a decision in practice based on context. Civilians who work directly to conduct the war, or occupy a role normally held by a soldier, are valid targets. There is also a legal consensus that a civilian head of state who serves as commander-in-chief of the armed forces falls within this category.42 Other civilians who occupy positions of special importance or significance—such as weapons development—that are more valuable to their government in their current role than any contribution they could have made on the front lines, are similarly subject to attack.43

With this in mind, many senior members of government are legitimate targets due to the nature of our system in which the civilian government actively controls our military forces.

It is important to note that the Article 23(b) ban on treachery does not preclude the use of either stealth or surprise, and does nothing to change the basic rule that combatants are still legally subject to attack at any time or place. The most recent revisions to the principle are also “not [intended] to foreclose activity by resistance movements, paratroops, and other belligerents who may attack individual persons.”46 Scholars such as JM Spaight echo these conclusions, pointing out that “treachery must clearly be distinguished from dashes made at a ruler or commander by an individual or a little band of individuals who come as open enemies.”47 It must not, he continues, “be confounded with surprises, stratagems, or ambushes, which are allowable.”

As distasteful as this subject may be, we all need to think about what revolution/rebellion really means. Sides will be chosen. It will not be pretty, it will be dirty, miserable, messy, and will cause serious mental and physical anguish to all of us forced to participate. This is why many patriots have patiently endured for so long. We do not want war, but the choice is coming. Will we fight for liberty? Or will we bow down to tyranny. Best of luck to all. The day of decision swiftly approaches.

This is a very ballsy thread to create.

Originally posted by inivux
This is a very ballsy thread to create.

It must be discussed. Our future demands that tough choices be made.

I don't disagree, but I would probably not post something like this on the "regular internet".

Originally posted by inivux
I don't disagree, but I would probably not post something like this on the "regular internet".

It is the people on "the regular internet" who need to read and think about it most.

Originally posted by DarthMuerte

Originally posted by inivux
This is a very ballsy thread to create.

It must be discussed. Our future demands that tough choices be made.

I agree. We have not been set on this path by our own actions or words - our government has chosen this for us. We need to be prepared.

A note to LEO and military - When the moment comes, I'd personally like to see you doff that uniform and join the right side of the law. It would make for a very short war.

Originally posted by AwakeinNM

Originally posted by DarthMuerte

Originally posted by inivux
This is a very ballsy thread to create.

It must be discussed. Our future demands that tough choices be made.

I agree. We have not been set on this path by our own actions or words - our government has chosen this for us. We need to be prepared.

A note to LEO and military - When the moment comes, I'd personally like to see you doff that uniform and join the right side of the law. It would make for a very short war.

That is my fervent hope as well. I would also hope that civilian employees at defense contractors would strike and refuse to supply government forces for the duration of the conflict.

ohhhh look.....

Another “Rambo Thread”

there are some "civilians" who are in fact legitimate military targets because they materially contribute enemy combat capabilities

Justifying the targeting of civilians like this is flat out wrong, I would say your thread should be shut down for inciting violence and if I had my way I would even report you to the FBI.

Yes the some of the changes being considered just now by Washington are wrong, I don’t support them but I am fed up with all these guys who abuse the second amendment by using at a means to constitutionally ensure their penis enlargements with all this macho rubbish about the “second American civil war”.

It’s just rubbish, it’s a bunch of guys who grow up watching too many action movies and then discovered that in real life they don’t have what it takes to join Chuck Norris in Delta Force and are destined to spend the rest of their life’s selling cars and hanging out at a gun range fantasising.

I mean really these people are just idiots, sorry OP but inciting violence against civilians is just stupid on a public forum. What do you think is going to happen, a bunch of you and your buddies are going to shoot up a police station, then what, you’re going to come face to face with highly trained SWAT officers or if your very unlucky HRT guys who are better than you at this stuff in every way. They will kill you, you are not Burse Willis you won’t stand a chance.

This is just extreme propaganda that is probably going to wind up with you arrested.

Originally posted by inivux
I don't disagree, but I would probably not post something like this on the "regular internet".

I can't speak for Darth here..but I can make an educated guess by my own attitudes and how they've developed on all this.

For those who have been outspoken and out speaking it for years now? Well.. what's the point of being all touchy and careful at THIS late date? Is anyone going to believe I turned a new leaf of desire to make nice nice with Obama or ANY Government based legal tyranny? Errr..... I could pretend they haven't been noting the loudest out here for years already and haven't been watching long before Obama came to town....and I'd be happy in that little delusion . . . for awhile.

If they are coming to take me or 'us' away, changing what is said now isn't changing that outcome one bit except perhaps to hasten it if black letter lines are crossed ...and most who talk it know where to stop it or they aren't talking for long.

Like Darth does mention though, the information and thought generating suggestions the out-spoken ones can toss into the kitty may as well get tossed to help the vast majority who haven't made a name of living right on that ragged edge of saying too much for so long already.

After all, if all dissidents shut up out of fear? Well, the wrong side wins by default. That's not something many are willing to see happen without SOME challenge ..and if that means arrest? Well...it was coming anyway, as noted.

* A note to clarify... My points are supporting the right to say whatever.. My position on non-violence outside of defense of self or others at that moment hasn't and won't change. Only crazy people look to start this nightmare.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


I would suggest you cower in your home until the all-clear is sounded.

Thanks.

reply to post by DarthMuerte


Congratulations, you just demonstrated how a terrorist justifies his "rebellious" actions.

Originally posted by AwakeinNM
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

 

I would suggest you cower in your home until the all-clear is sounded.

Thanks.

Why is it that you now bother writing that, I am a realist not a fantasist nor am I a coward as you just implied.

I am also British so thankfully when if you “enthusiasts” do start shooting people in police stations, TSA at airports, and storming the offices of civil servants I will be sitting back on my couch with a glass of whisky watching you all get shot up by guys who actually know what they are doing on the evening news. A group of say 10 or 15 “patriots” who say strop an office block won’t win against a trained HRT team smashing through the windows. It’s all fantasy.

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin

Originally posted by AwakeinNM
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

 

I would suggest you cower in your home until the all-clear is sounded.

Thanks.

Why is it that you now bother writing that, I am a realist not a fantasist nor am I a coward as you just implied.

I am also British so thankfully when if you “enthusiasts” do start shooting people in police stations, TSA at airports, and storming the offices of civil servants I will be sitting back on my couch with a glass of whisky watching you all get shot up by guys who actually know what they are doing on the evening news. A group of say 10 or 15 “patriots” who say strop an office block won’t win against a trained HRT team smashing through the windows. It’s all fantasy.

edit on 19-1-2013 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)

You mean like the Colonial Revolution against King George was a fantasy?

Enjoy that hooch, friend.

Originally posted by Nevertheless
reply to post by DarthMuerte

 

Congratulations, you just demonstrated how a terrorist justifies his "rebellious" actions.

Not at all. By having an open and frank discussion of acceptable rules of engagement, I hope to avoid the targeting of real civilians. We are all Americans, I want to limit the number of casualties to the absolute minimum. I don't want a re-enactment of Sherman's march. I would not countenance an attack on hospitals, churches, parks, libraries, schools, buses, trains, etc.... unless they were being used in a military capacity. You will not see me advocating the use of suicide vest accoutered children against a market place. I am trying to get people thinking about the reality of civil war now so that decisions are not made in the heat of the moment. The federal government has chosen our path. This was not my choice. I would prefer to be a farmer truth be told. Have my land, raise my own food and rear my children. However, I cannot bow to tyranny, especially when so bowing leads to a life under said tyranny for my children.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


Hey OSOT,

While I agree with your sentiment. I don't see it as much inciting violence as informing "both sides" of who verifiable targets are. The problem I have with your theory however is that most of the ones who will be rebelling aren't just armchair warriors with weapons. They are once Highly Trained SWAT, Special Forces, Marines, Army, Navy, Air Force, Current and retired National Guardsmen. I would challenge to say that there are just as many fully trained and capable citizens as there are HRT teams to come in and try to clean house. Where things get crazy is when those fully trained capable citizens make other non military veterans fully trained and capable which you can bet will happen prior to all the crazy stuff happening.

Please don't take offense to my next statement. With the breadth of influence and personnel the U.S. has all over the world I think it very foolish to think that it won't roll over into your neck of the woods. A U.S. rebellion may start in the U.S. but may soon engulf a much larger region.

reply to post by DarthMuerte
To be totally honest Darth, I hope your thread does the opposite of your stated goal. As opposed to preparing people to plan for this to happen.... I would hope it would discourage those who may think rash things with delusional expectations of what will happen.

Manson justified what he did by saying he intended to start a Black vs. White race war that would consume the world. I think he actually believed his own hype too.

Timmy McVeigh justified what he did in the context of collateral damage and mere casualties of war. The day he breathed HIS last was a positive day for the nation too, IMO.

So, there are undoubtedly people out there further along in the feeling of being pushed to action than you or I or anyone posting openly. My wife and I were talking about this last night and it's a sobering thought.

If we're as pissed and moved to act as WE are...and we're rational, intelligent people (We figure), what about those we'd call unstable in even good times? Err... yeah.. I hope the frank discussion here coupled with others and one I'm working on myself for later this weekend spurs the thinking toward the reality of violent conflict .....not with some foreign force we can mentally demonize and rationalize as "Them" but fellow Americans who look, speak and think the same as we do.....and we may even know.

I think some people have a romantic illusion fed by Hollywood. I believe the reality, if God forbid, it should come, will be one we *ALL* would give *ANYTHING* to have never seen start, once we're living it.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

I think some people have a romantic illusion fed by Hollywood. I believe the reality, if God forbid, it should come, will be one we *ALL* would give *ANYTHING* to have never seen start, once we're living it.

I agree with the romantic illusion of which you speak. By posting this, I hope to dispel said "romance" and inject a little harsh reality. However, we have already given too much imo. The more we give, the more they take. Somethings are worse than death or the horrors of war. For me, living under a tyrannical dictator is one of those things.

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
The federal government has chosen our path.

You are the federal government. It is your duty to vote properly.
If you don't like "the options", you can create your own. You don't need guns for that.

This was not my choice.

As a collective, it looks like it was.
Will you take your gun out because the majority is wrong, and shoot you way to change, attacking the police and everyone else because they are not "on your side"?

I would prefer to be a farmer truth be told. Have my land, raise my own food and rear my children.

Then buy some land and be a farmer?

However, I cannot bow to tyranny, especially when so bowing leads to a life under said tyranny for my children.

ehm, okay, so keep not voting the way you'd like and/or ignore democracy and shoot people instead.

this thread should not be acceptable on ATS, period

reply to post by DarthMuerte

I'll agree with that. As much as I am determined to avoid conflict at almost any cost...I'll also bow or take a knee for no man. Period. Life is a condition that is, in the end, 100% fatal. Everyone dies. No exceptions. All we really have in our control, perhaps, is how that comes about and whether it happens for good reasons, bad reasons or something we can feel was worth it all in the final thoughts.

Of course..most will kick the bucket of illness or a bus running them over in a random visit by Mr Murphy. However, I hear ya..that doesn't mean we submit liberty at the individual level of daily life to anyone ..for any reason. There ARE lines and limits, even for those like myself. They're just in much different places, I think.

I'm also looking at this as something we're going to have come whether we do a thing to help it along or not. 17 trillion in debt ...with absolutely NO sign of slowing, let alone stopping or reversing ...means collapse isn't questionable but inevitable. It's happened before and will again.

With that above fact in mind, I figure all the conflict, strife and struggle to live we each can handle will be arriving well before anyone would like it too, no matter what we actively do ...so why hurry anything? In my life, I have nothing so bad that I am anxious to see that come beyond one simple fact. I really don't want this to start when I've grown too old to be an effective protector to my Son, who'll need one.