• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Are we already at war?

Freedom1Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
4,462
Location
Greater Eastside Washington
3 months to 15 years.

Given the 15 year window to aim for. I believe that a domestic shoot'em up COULD turn out for the better within 15 years.

Given a 15 year time frame we have the option for non-violent repairs also. Though implementing these I BELIEVE (not hope nor wish for) will lead to a domestic shoot'em up. If "we" are diligent about obtaining the non-violent governmental correction I believe we could have a correction within 3 years, and be back "on our feet" again within 4 after that.

We would have to start by arresting and jailing the bankers, declaring a debt jubilee, dumping cargo ships full of FRNs on China, and going back to a constitutional money even if we have to start with privately minted coins to get this kicked off. The Federal Reserve Banks should be disbanded and banned from our country. We would get rid of the Social Security program, tax imports again, shut down the standing armies, and end corporate person hood. That would go a long way to fixing our country. None of it has to require violence. However I believe that those in power will only listen to violence.
 

Gil223

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
1,392
Location
Weber County Utah
We would have to start by arresting and jailing the bankers, declaring a debt jubilee, dumping cargo ships full of FRNs on China, and going back to a constitutional money even if we have to start with privately minted coins to get this kicked off. The Federal Reserve Banks should be disbanded and banned from our country. We would get rid of the Social Security program, tax imports again, shut down the standing armies, and end corporate person hood. That would go a long way to fixing our country. None of it has to require violence. However I believe that those in power will only listen to violence.

Completely shutting down the standing army would most likely prove to be a disastrous mistake. Reducing the size of the standing army by 25-35% would be less dangerous, and more cost effective. We have already had terrorist probes such as 9-11-01, the Fort Hood massacre, and the underwear and shoe bombers. North Korea is doing some saber-rattling now, and Iran continues to develop it's nuclear WMD. It is the professional soldier who, by maintaining a high degree of personal readiness, will neutralize such things - perhaps not directly, but through the training and indoctrination of inductees and volunteers, should we have a SHTF scenario. Our success in WWII was credited primarily to our ability to train civilians as soldiers in a very short time. That training was accomplished by a cadre of experienced, combat-ready professional soldiers. Nobody who has not BTDT is capable of conducting such training with credibility, and without credibility there is no effectiveness. Participation in an armed conflict is not a theoretical experience! "God, country, mom and apple pie" are rare considerations when one hundred people (±) you don't even know are trying to put an end to your life - it is a survival experience. You don't learn that from some college professor. You can only learn effective military tactics and strategy from somebody who has the practical experience of successfully applying T&S.

Assume for a minute that the SHTF, and we use one military base in every state for military training purposes. In order for that base to operate a base with minimal efficiency, let's say that a minimum of (just for a number) 1,500 experienced military personnel are required. In that number we have trainers and support personnel (administrative, medical, transportation, cooks, laundry, security, logistics, etc). That's 75,000 people throughout the CONUS - many of whom need to be experienced specialists - people you cannot find just walking down the street. EOD, SERE, snipers, marksmanship instructors, field medics, load masters, tank crews, artillery crews, intel, small watercraft operators, helo pilots and crews, etc. Then there's the logistics of training involved - how many troops are needed and how fast do we need them? The general answer in time of crisis would be "All we can get, and yesterday wouldn't be soon enough". The equipment has been in "mothballs" in various places around the country for God knows how long (we didn't need it active since we don't have a standing army). Therefore, it must all be inspected, serviced and made ready for use - which takes significant time if it is done right. The list of potential stumbling blocks to launching an effective military response (still without a significant standing army) in the event of an attack is mind boggling.

It is true that some of the "support functions" could be filled by civilians and retired or ex-military personnel. Those of us with combat skills would probably be volunteering for instructor duty, and the ex- and retired military without direct combat skills could fill some of the support positions. Base transportation, laundry and security are two that come immediately to mind.

My "bottom line" is that if/when an army is needed, tomorrow may be too late. Do we need a million men in arms at all times? Probably not, but we must maintain a high degree of readiness even in "peacetime"... because peace can end at a moment's notice, as it did at Pearl Horbor.

There is no red ribbon award for 2[SUP]nd[/SUP] Place in a war, because there is no "winner" in a war - one side just loses less of everything than the other. JMT. Pax...
 

nonameisgood

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
1,008
Location
Big D
I think there are lots of options, rather than a full time military of 1.5 million personnel and another 1.5 million reservists. In fact, we could cut costs quite dramatically by shifting those same people to 1/2 million active and 2.5 million reserve. Mobilization would be fast, and no one has yet argued that our reservists are substandard. I don't know that this is the right ratio, but you get the idea.
I bet we would even have a chance for a draft into the reserves, so the real number of nominally ready personnel could be huge.
 

Freedom1Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
4,462
Location
Greater Eastside Washington
Completely shutting down the standing army would most likely prove to be a disastrous mistake. Reducing the size of the standing army by 25-35% would be less dangerous, and more cost effective. We have already had terrorist probes such as 9-11-01, the Fort Hood massacre, and the underwear and shoe bombers.
SNIPPED (to reduce the quote not to demean or change the meaning there of)

It is true that some of the "support functions" could be filled by civilians and retired or ex-military personnel. Those of us with combat skills would probably be volunteering for instructor duty, and the ex- and retired military without direct combat skills could fill some of the support positions. Base transportation, laundry and security are two that come immediately to mind.

My "bottom line" is that if/when an army is needed, tomorrow may be too late. Do we need a million men in arms at all times? Probably not, but we must maintain a high degree of readiness even in "peacetime"... because peace can end at a moment's notice, as it did at Pearl Horbor.

There is no red ribbon award for 2[SUP]nd[/SUP] Place in a war, because there is no "winner" in a war - one side just loses less of everything than the other. JMT. Pax...

First off Iran is working on nuclear power not WMD.

Pull all of our troops out of all foreign lands. Put all remaining troops on border patrol until they ETS. Congress is supposed to help with the militias.

Have a maintenance level military to less than 25% of current. Have active militia training for the general militias.
Issue monthly ammo rations to all militia members who assemble for muster that they are to store at home and to use X amount for Y level of training.

For those who wish to operate armor class have a selective system and issue X tanks per Y area. Setup a maintenance scheduled for all armor. If/when you move you take all 'small arms' with you to your new home and find a position within your new militia group.

Have annual area competitions to compete for 'new' or specialized equipment prizes that you can keep. Make all military 'hardware' available to the general public for sale.

Pass an Amendment for the allowance of maintaining an Air force.

Rebuild our navy.

We have no reason to be harassing Iran/Persia. North Korea is PO'd at us because we are still helping it's enemies.
 

Gil223

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
1,392
Location
Weber County Utah
First off Iran is working on nuclear power not WMD.
Yeah... right. :rolleyes: (And on March 31st there will be a large white bunny, hopping through your yard, on his way to bring you a basket of treats.)

The rest of your ideas aren't half bad though! ;) Pax...
 
Last edited:

Freedom1Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
4,462
Location
Greater Eastside Washington
Yeah... right. :rolleyes: (And on March 31st there will be a large white bunny, hopping through your yard, on his way to bring you a basket of treats.)

The rest of your ideas aren't half bad though! ;) Pax...

Iran has not violated the Nuclear weapons treaty.

Israel has not even signed it. Under out laws it would be legal to give support to Iran but not Israel.

Considering that Israel is one of the biggest sources of terrorism they have going over there.
 

Gil223

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
1,392
Location
Weber County Utah
Iran has not violated the Nuclear weapons treaty.

Israel has not even signed it. Under out laws it would be legal to give support to Iran but not Israel.

Considering that Israel is one of the biggest sources of terrorism they have going over there.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I tend to agree with the IAEA, and most of the world. The LA Times reported in November of 2012 -
Iran insists its nuclear program is only for peaceful uses. But many nations believe that it aims to acquire a bomb-making capability, and the five members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany have tried to persuade Iran to accept curbs on the effort.
The IAEA, based in Vienna, said Iran has expanded its stockpile of medium-enriched uranium by 43 kilograms since August, to a total of 233 kilograms, nearly enough to create fuel for a bomb. At the same time, Iran has diverted 96 kilograms of the total for use as civilian reactor fuel, which makes it harder to use the material for a bomb.
That leaves about 137 kilograms enriched to 20%. Experts say 200 to 250 kilograms are needed for a single bomb.
Ehud Barak, Israel's defense minister, said in October that Iran's diversion of fuel for the reactor indicated that Iran was moving more slowly toward bomb-making capability, and had pushed back the "moment of truth" for its bomb program by 10 months or so.
The IAEA report, however, suggests Iran is not slowing its program, but is poised to accelerate its output.
There was no requirement for anybody to have signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The vast majority of the world's governments signed onto the agreement. However, China, India, Israel, Pakistan and S. Sudan chose not to sign the NNPT, and the DPRK (which reminds one of "The Mouse That Roared") withdrew from it.

As for your claim that "Israel is one of the biggest sources of terrorism"... it appears to be conjecture on your part, but I am certain that there are probably tens of thousands of anti-Semites who would agree with you. Israel has been under almost constant attack since it's establishment in 1947, it is smaller than any one of it's Muslim neighbors, and - as a nation - Israel has earned the respect (or fear, if you prefer) of those neighbors in June of 1967. (Please don't begin singing the "without the backing of the U.S." song to me. Unlike the Vietnamese we backed, the Israeli's don't run away when things look bad.) Israel is a nation of survivors. Pax...
 

Raffie

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
75
Location
Lynnwood
Considering all the events and nothing is getting better I think its a matter of time till we see the American Underground start going to work to get our country back and repel the invaders.

@gil223
I agree with you about Israel.
They are taunted just about 24/7 and are truly battle hardened.
Their fighter pilot's could tear ours apart if put in the same planes.
The 6 day war as a true stroke of brilliance. Very impressive. They slapped multiple big countries in the face and still today all them countries got hurt feelings about it.
 
Last edited:

PFC HALE

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
481
Location
earth
are we at war...

look at it from this point of view.

our government is outgrowing their bounds and doing things or getting close to lines that they shouldnt be doing. also amassing billions of anti personnel ammo plus full auto weapons for some reason.

the people are arming themselves in case the government preemptively does something to cause (civil) war.

take for example north and south korea..

south korea is peaceful etc etc but they are preparing for war from north korea that is acting very aggressive and hostile, threatening war yadda yadda...

south korea, relate the country to the people of our country

north korea relate that country to our government.

to amass weapons munitions, tools of war is the only response when war is being threatened or brought on by an aggressor. its that simple.

we the people are preparing to go against the government when our government steps over a line that causes civil war. im not afraid to admit and see the facts.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Actually, the above is a good assessment of the situation. We are NOT at war. However, it is looking more and more unavoidable that the government will wage war on the People and the States. We must be ready.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
Actually, the above is a good assessment of the situation. We are NOT at war. However, it is looking more and more unavoidable that the government will wage war on the People and the States. We must be ready.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

We must be ready.


And what do you suggest we do to be ready?
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
If I didn't think that conversation with you would be an utter waste of time, I'd be happy to answer you.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Yeah, I know what this means ... unable to offer anything ... you said get ready, right?

I think you are a frenchman ...
 

PFC HALE

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
481
Location
earth
Actually, the above is a good assessment of the situation. We are NOT at war. However, it is looking more and more unavoidable that the government will wage war on the People and the States. We must be ready.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

i honestly want to thank you for seeing what i see sir, at least you and i see the writing on the wall.

my motto
hope for the best (i hope im wrong about it all)
expect the worse (although im sure im right)
prepare for war (in light of how things are going all the primers are falling into place and action will be warranted eventually)
 

Raffie

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
75
Location
Lynnwood
The sad part is that anything you do, you will be labeled as a terrorist and killed. Even though they are doing far worse.

Whatever you do, make sure there is no witnesses and never mention what you do.
Just friendly advise.
 

nobama

New member
Joined
Mar 19, 2009
Messages
756
Location
, ,
Jack - please re-read the post. I did say "10+ years" which would include Bush. I also include Clinton, the 1st Bush, and on back to the "pee-nut farmer" and "Stumblebutt" Ford.
Each of them have done things that have diminished people's freedoms but it is a matter of degrees. The left, in general, has taken more steps and larger steps that damage the people than the right ever has, with the possible exception of the Patriot Act.
That being said, the left pushed for it, they have expanded it as they have expanded DHS, to our detriment.

The Bush admin did do the patriot act and the left gave him hell for it, then when the evil got their power they increased it 10 fold. Just to shine a little light on the subject.
 

Gil223

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
1,392
Location
Weber County Utah
Here's what I see as the problem with readiness...

We must be ready.


And what do you suggest we do to be ready?

Readiness is much more than any one specific thing, as the "preppers" know. There are several levels of "readiness". To be "ready" is a complicated and expensive operation for most modern folks, because we have learned to depend upon retail stores to supply our every need, rather than depending upon ourselves to grow, raise, or make those commodities we need. There are obvious things that we should prepare for in case of any emergency situation - food, medical supplies, tools (both construction and defensive tools), clothing, transportation, etc. As I see it, there are two things that are truly needed, but less obvious - the survival mindset, and organization. The mindset is such that it requires one to commit to the possibility that it will be necessary to engage in acts which they normally would not even consider. That is what constitutes the individual's mindset if he/she wishes to survive. There is a natural tendency to want to protect our "stuff". "Stuff" in which we have large financial and/or emotional connections. Your mansion won't do you any good if it becomes your coffin.

There's an old saying, which remains valid even today - "There is safety in numbers." In part, because of our dependency upon retail stores, very few individuals are capable of stockpiling sufficient, practical quantities of everything they'll need for an extended emergency - natural or man-made - in just a couple of easily transported go-bags. Striking a balance between quantities, and weight, is very important. This is where both individual and group organization comes into play. The dedicated "survivalist" is prepared do this, as could individuals trained in SERE. A group of ten or more people provides for better security for the individuals within group than does a single individual for him/herself (sooner or later, everybody has to sleep). The larger the group the greater the security, and the more successful they will be at repelling those other groups who may desire to relieve them of supplies, or to do them physical harm. However, one of the problems with a large group is that of group logistics -transportation of it's members (assuming the group would find it desirable or necessary to be mobile), determining group leadership, who controls what, etc. Popularity alone is not a viable reason for appointment to a leadership position (as we have learned from the last two presidential elections). And, within a group there may be several specialized leadership roles. The decisions of a trained medical professional would be more trusted in a medical emergency, than would those of an automobile detailer. If an attack is imminent, an ex-military man with combat tactical experience should be more efficient at leading the response (assuming that the military man learned from and internalized that experience) than a dentist. A politician or lawyer would serve no useful purpose whatsoever - let them form their own group :rolleyes:. The downside to a large group would quite likely be internal bickering, and some level of distrust between individuals or smaller groups of individuals within the primary group.

Inasmuch as the government has declared independent citizen militias to be "potential terrorists" (and, in fact, some are inclined toward that), and the only "militia" condoned by the government are the National Guard, We the People are - for the most part - without a support group upon which we can depend in time of crisis. We are forced into an "every man for himself" condition until we either form such a group ourselves, or connect with an established group after the fact. If one has a predetermined group of significant size there's the need for a recall roster, and the designation of an assembly point, task assignments, etc. All these and more are organizational activities. Who already has this kind of organization? The military and National Guard, of course. Who has a lesser, but still more effective than no level of organization? Law enforcement, old-school organized crime, and street gangs - they all have numbers and weapons.

On the whole, I believe that We the People do not have such established organization, and that will be our problem with "readiness" should we be faced with SHTF. Just my thoughts. :shocker: Pax...
 
Last edited:

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
It depends on how you define your war.

I say we are already at war.

The American Revolution of British citizens against their government in England was not the physical battles. The war had started long before that, a war of wills, a war of the minds, a war to think freely as free men and free agents to actually win the war, the colonist had to give up the ingrained thought that King George was not their superior and they owed him no allegiance, he was their equals. Some of the first to publicly announce this had to temper their words for fear of their life (Samuel Adams, endured calls of treason for suggesting this).

Likewise we will not win any war and especially not one the becomes physical, without winning a free mind, and realizing we owe our government and officials and those who serve them no special allegiance. We are free people, we are free minds. By evidence in this very forum some are already there, others will call names and report posts for deletion for dare suggesting we don't have to put soldiers on a pedestal, that the governments street warriors in the various LEA's are not "special", or how dare anybody suggest nullification, or secession............."treason".......yes history repeats itself.

I hope it doesn't come to physical war the variables of that could give us something tremendously worse.
 
Top