Replies

JB - You probably know that I'm a reluctant CW-II participant. By this I mean that I hope for the best, while observing signs that seem to indicate that conditions could digress into an environment which is ripe for a civil conflict on a larger scale.

There are a lot of people like me I'd imagine. These people observe and mentally calculate conditions, and odds, and the total number of factors which might make the environment either more or less conducive to a civil conflict.

I believe there's a subculture here in America that exists which is like no other on this planet. In spite of the best efforts of the Marxists over the decades, there are still "Patriots" who I'm quite sure are willing to fight and die for the U.S. Constitution, whether the enemy be foreign, or domestic. But as I've stated before, I also believe that this subculture is fractured at worst and at best exists in tiny groups which aren't able to communicate or coordinate effectively as a whole.

Beyond this is the issue of logistics. Some of us have experience in the area of logistics in large scale conflict. Most people have no idea. To put this into perspective for most people, just present them with the correct outfitting of only FIVE people, and keeping a sustainable standard with equipment. Somebody is certain to criticize me on this, so fire away. But I can only "guess" that this would become a real issue if you and a buddy were cornered and he ran out of ammo and you tossed a full magazine but you were using a Soviet bloc weapon, and he was using a U.S. made weapon....OOPSIE.

But I'm not talking about maintaining and keeping standards. Most people buy what they can afford. Keeping standards is a luxury. Having to do it on a budget only means that the mass equipment issue will be cheap gear. Having a bigger budget means better equipment of course.

What I am getting at here is that I believe that soon the environment will be RIPE for a major civil disruption. I'm not in my old job any more. So I don't speak with any insider knowledge. I'm just like the next person, watching what's going on around me. But it's very possible that soon we will have an unprecedented unemployment rate AND hyperinflation. This will result in masses of angry, unemployed people...the combination of which is a very BAD thing indeed! Could it be that the Obama administration knows this and has therefore attempted to counter it with their plans for massive INVOLUNTARY national service? This suggestion seems reasonable.

Hyperinflation is the key issue here. Because after hyperinflation, the dynamics of buying and selling changes. Right now, there is a great deal of anger aimed at D.C. This anger is also crossing political boundaries and only the most brainwashed of the left is still seriously on board with "Change We Can Believe In". The continuing collapse of the financial industry is bringing reality to a personal level and many of these are coming to terms with the fact that they were deceived badly. If I were the authorities, I'd be carefully watching wealthy patriotic businessmen just about now. Because after hyperinflation kicks in, it will be difficult to accomplish the logistics of procuring large numbers of weapons, body armor, surgical kits, communications gear, and other necessities. This is because the logistics would probably be solved through foreign (and illegal) channels. But U.S. dollars wouldn't be worth anything at that point. Hence the key indicator being hyperinflation. It VASTLY impacts the logistics of orchestrating a civil conflict.

Before somebody accuses me of actually saying that somebody is going to START a civil war, I must remind everybody that I'm doing NO SUCH THING. I'm merely reminding people of what must be done in order to undertake such an endeavor. Those who believe that "We The People" are going to suddenly form up and take up arms simply have a strange and unrealistic expectation. Perhaps they'll let me know how that goes if those who CONTROL the flow of ammunition decided to STOP the flow of ammunition. I'm sure that while you get the point, others will be offended due to personal pride issues. This is to be expected.

But the entire issue is one of logistics, and somebody will have to be influential enough and wealthy enough and have enough political pull at least at a state level. I would especially pay attention if something goes seriously wrong with the power structure in D.C. Perhaps another successful terrorist attack involving NBC?

I don't know. I'm not advocating anything, nor suggesting, nor encouraging. I'm merely stating that once a favorable environment is established for mass armed conflict, there's still a huge logistics issue at hand.

I've been cogitating about your contribution for the past hour, and it has crystallized my thought about the coming crisis.

There is an old saying in the military. "Amateurs think tactics; professionals think logistics." Without actually quoting that statement, you have proved it admirably. In a conflict with the US Armed Forces loyal to the government, American citizens won't stand a chance. They will be mowed down with enthusiasm. The inability to handle the logistics of standardized weaponry will spell the end of any resistance, no matter how well organized.

As an ex-Army officer (Vietnam era), I know that American troops will follow the orders of their commander in chief to the letter. They will do their duty. Whether those orders are illegal or inhumane will mean nothing. They will be followed, or else.

The only way to sap the will of the Armed Forces would be to "go Iraq", ie. an insurgency. This would involve things such as the assassination of elected officials and roadside IED's. Insurgents would have to blend in with their surrounding communities and count on the loyalty -- or the fear -- of their neighbors to protect them.

While some of our armchair Rambos here find this idea exciting, I view it as a vision of hell. I have no desire to kill my neighbors because their politics differ from mine.