I have only received about three e-mails in the past year or so that mentioned what I wrote about rehearsals, but one of them was from a young man returning from service in Iraq as a Mechanic and he said that when he went along on ground convoys the security force sometimes made everyone do rehearsals for ambushes and road side bombs.
I'll bet they also briefed a plan and possibly did other rehearals such as for in-operable vehicle and cross loaded people and supplies and other likely event...may have even may everyone aware of where the emergency medical kits were located, explained how to operate the vehicles radios and the correct frequencies.
Rehearsals do more than insure everyone understand their roles and tasks, rehearsals can detect problems and therefore dictate changes in the plan.
There are many types of rehearsals, the easiest type is called a chart rehearsal usually using a map, chart or sketch while briefing the plan. This is commonly done as an orders brief or patrol order brief before the mission launches but can be done during the planning process to determine critical areas of the plan and contingencies that need to be planned.
Much like a chart rehearsals the table top rehearsal also uses a graphic, sketch or map and much like the movies "The Dirty Dozen", all team members explain their tasks and roles, this can be done with just key leaders as well, leaving these key leaders to get their respective elements up to snuff.
Sand Table rehearsal uses a model of the entire operational area, or just critical segments of the missions, maybe just the objective area. Using dirt or sand or boxes, cardboard and other things, a 3D representation of an rural or urban area can be made to present a mental picture of ground and the the operational tasks and flow.
The term Key Leaders rehearsals refers to any type of rehearsal, chart, tabe top or sand table, where just the element leaders are present. Sometimes this is done because of time restraints to allow other to prepare equipment and vehicles for the mission while key leaders rehearse, modify, refine and finalize the plan.
The military uses a term, Tactical Exercise Without Troops (TEWT) is usually where key leaders walk or visit the terrain or area where the mission is going to take place. Probably utilized in a defensive scenario, I imagine this used quite a bit where a community, be it a urban apartment building or a suburban block (a street with houses) organizes for early warning and defense and maybe one of the survivors with experience goes house to house or apartment to apartment and goes over the plan and individual area of responsibility with each group.
Another way a TEWT could be used in a Survival or Collapse defensive scenario would be for a group planning on a response from one locaton to another could walk the terrain from an assembly area to the objective area basically rehearsing element movement.
A Full Mission Profile Rehearsal is just like it sounds,....everyone,..everything,....and all phases of the mission rehearsed. This is obviously the best type of rehearsal but it takes time and organization.
Remember to consider PACE planning in your rehearsals. Primary, Alternate, Contingency and Emergency - have backups to all critical phases of your operation - test these during your rehearsals. Think for yourselves and prepare well.
Tuesday, September 4, 2012
Friday, August 31, 2012
More Comments on Threat Groups
Thanks to PSYOP Soldier for letting us know the original post was blacked out.
Falcon15 has left a new comment on your post "Debate on Survival Threat Groups": Survival threat group: THEM. If you are not one of US you are one of THEM. In a full blown collapse, SHTF, etc. 1 year after the event or events, if you are not one of our group, I either want you dead or part of my group. As far as the period building up to the 1 year mark, for anyone to have found US, they needed to either know where we are, been looking specifically for us, or gone way out of their way looking. So unless you are exceptionally well known and can be positively identified, you may be asked, nicely at first, to leave. Failure to do so, and crossing a certain threshold brings you under Texas (thank God I live in the Great State) Castle Law. Just saying. Great post, keep them coming!
UrbanMan replies: Thanks Falcon 15 for your comments. Roger your comments on the US and THEM. I just had this conversation with a couple regarding the fact that in a collapse your neighbors and even friends will turn against you if it means their survival. That is the danger of exposing your survival preparatory lifestyle to the “Ostrich Heads” who think nothing will happen, hence no need to plan or prep. They are the “Hey lets go to the Burger King then to the movies!” as opposed to ”let’s go find some bargains at the local thrift mart or flea market and work off some items off our prep list.”
These people, the Ostrich Heads, who prefer to ignore the threat,…the impending economic – dollar – infrastructure collapse that so close upon us,….they will come to you if they know you are prepared. They will smooze you at first, then plea or beg, maybe want to be part of your group now that the necessity is upon them. They’ll maybe even threaten you and lastly will certainly have no qualms about going against you if it is a question of their survival or not.
Depending upon your location and nearest organized threat, you may not have much to fear, at least initially, from the really bad threat groups like street gangs and such, however it is phenomenal just how quickly a mob can be organized and feed off each other’s fears and hatred. In fact, this country has bred an entitlement mentality which makes them believe they should be given everything they need.
If you are located on or near a likely mass migration route you could potentially see large groups of people moving through your neighborhood looting and running amok. Barriers, fences, obstacles and even a show of an armed and organized force may not matter if these people are near starvation or their anger clouds their judgment. My survival group has discussed courses of action on what we do if we have to defend our site against any threat group, organized or not.
Many branches for planning here. What if you engage a group of armed thugs, kill several but some get away. Did you just teach them to go someplace else? Did you just create a group now solely focused on you? What do they now know of your defenses and response?
What do you do with the bodies? Our plan, if possible and as long as we have the capability, is that we’ll record on digital photos and from any documents taken off the dead for future identification, before we bury them. We will also attempt to write a record of what happened – like an official statement This is to support any legal efforts when and if society comes back on line.
We have talked about stragglers and even large groups of people moving through. To help all that appear in your area or on your “door step” obviously degrades you own supplies as well as poses an OPSEC risk. But how do you enforce your own security protocols on un-armed groups? These un-armed people still poses a threat to you. Everything from attracting others, to stealing or looting, and even just as a source of information about your location and preps if they move on.
Falcon15 has left a new comment on your post "Debate on Survival Threat Groups": Survival threat group: THEM. If you are not one of US you are one of THEM. In a full blown collapse, SHTF, etc. 1 year after the event or events, if you are not one of our group, I either want you dead or part of my group. As far as the period building up to the 1 year mark, for anyone to have found US, they needed to either know where we are, been looking specifically for us, or gone way out of their way looking. So unless you are exceptionally well known and can be positively identified, you may be asked, nicely at first, to leave. Failure to do so, and crossing a certain threshold brings you under Texas (thank God I live in the Great State) Castle Law. Just saying. Great post, keep them coming!
UrbanMan replies: Thanks Falcon 15 for your comments. Roger your comments on the US and THEM. I just had this conversation with a couple regarding the fact that in a collapse your neighbors and even friends will turn against you if it means their survival. That is the danger of exposing your survival preparatory lifestyle to the “Ostrich Heads” who think nothing will happen, hence no need to plan or prep. They are the “Hey lets go to the Burger King then to the movies!” as opposed to ”let’s go find some bargains at the local thrift mart or flea market and work off some items off our prep list.”
These people, the Ostrich Heads, who prefer to ignore the threat,…the impending economic – dollar – infrastructure collapse that so close upon us,….they will come to you if they know you are prepared. They will smooze you at first, then plea or beg, maybe want to be part of your group now that the necessity is upon them. They’ll maybe even threaten you and lastly will certainly have no qualms about going against you if it is a question of their survival or not.
Depending upon your location and nearest organized threat, you may not have much to fear, at least initially, from the really bad threat groups like street gangs and such, however it is phenomenal just how quickly a mob can be organized and feed off each other’s fears and hatred. In fact, this country has bred an entitlement mentality which makes them believe they should be given everything they need.
If you are located on or near a likely mass migration route you could potentially see large groups of people moving through your neighborhood looting and running amok. Barriers, fences, obstacles and even a show of an armed and organized force may not matter if these people are near starvation or their anger clouds their judgment. My survival group has discussed courses of action on what we do if we have to defend our site against any threat group, organized or not.
Many branches for planning here. What if you engage a group of armed thugs, kill several but some get away. Did you just teach them to go someplace else? Did you just create a group now solely focused on you? What do they now know of your defenses and response?
What do you do with the bodies? Our plan, if possible and as long as we have the capability, is that we’ll record on digital photos and from any documents taken off the dead for future identification, before we bury them. We will also attempt to write a record of what happened – like an official statement This is to support any legal efforts when and if society comes back on line.
We have talked about stragglers and even large groups of people moving through. To help all that appear in your area or on your “door step” obviously degrades you own supplies as well as poses an OPSEC risk. But how do you enforce your own security protocols on un-armed groups? These un-armed people still poses a threat to you. Everything from attracting others, to stealing or looting, and even just as a source of information about your location and preps if they move on.
SO, we get the “US” and “THEM” concept. I think groups who do not war game what to plan for when faced with situations from massed refugees to well armed threat groups are just unprepared.
Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Urban Farming for Surviving the Collapse
With unpredecented rises in food prices many people, including urban dwellers, are trying to reduce costs by growing their own food and bartering services or goods for food, and vice versa.
The United States used to practically feed the world. Then we went from a agricultural society to a manufacturing society and now to an entitlement society and really to a "pre-collapse society", so the bits and pieces we can see of people learning to take care of themselves, especially through these urban farming co-operatives, are not only good news but gives examples for urban survivalists.
The below is from an article titled Farmscape Brings Urban Agriculture to Los Angeles http://www.good.is/post/farmscape-brings-urban-agriculture-to-los-angeles/
In a dry and sunny city like Los Angeles, planting grass is one of the more useless ways to use your property. It takes a lot of water to grow and it's expensive—but beyond that, what's the point when the climate supports much more interesting flora, like succulents, and delicious ones, like fruits and vegetables?
A company called Farmscape is proving that there's enough of an appetite for farming on residential land to turn the proposition into a high-growth business. The less-than-four-year-old company has 12 full-time employees—including seven farmers who receive a living wage plus healthcare—and is looking to keep growing. "One of the things that people don’t talk about when they talk about the food system is who is working," says Rachel Bailin, Farmscape's marketing manager. It's often poorly paid and vulnerable migrant workers.
But the company is changing that by bringing farm labor out into the open, into the yards of city-dwellers and businesses. So far they've installed more than 300 urban farms throughout the L.A. area and maintain 150 of them weekly. Projects range from a rooftop garden on a downtown Los Angeles highrise to small plots for families. An exciting project in the works is a three-quarter acre-sized farm for a restaurant in the West San Fernando Valley. And the diversity of the projects is echoed by the diversity of their clients. "When we first started, we expected that our clients would be of a higher income level and would be two-parent working families," says Bailin.
Instead, Farmscape has been delighted to build gardens for preschool teachers, single mothers, and institutions and businesses that want employee gardens as perks. Bailin says the challenges of farming in Los Angeles are manifold. "You have to account for spaces that haven't had life or biodiversity for decades and then you kind of have to bring it back." The company uses raised beds to avoid contaminated soil and drip irrigation systems to provide water. And their newest challenge? Running for office.
The company has thrown its hat into the ring for the office of mayor of Los Angeles in the 2013 election, running on the platform of bringing back farms into the city. Bailin says it's an ironic way of questioning the bounds of "corporate personhood," extended to a corporation's right to free speech by the Supreme Court's ruling on Citizens United in 2010. "We’re testing the limit of what it is. If corporations are already deciding our politics by giving a bunch of money and lobbying, why not see if we can take out the middleman that would be the politician and make corporations the politician?" It's a joke, of course, and the company will presumably never make it onto the ballot, but it's a clever way to get the word out about the company while making a statement. And perhaps this corporate candidate wouldn't be so bad anyway.
Urban Farming Sources
Another article:
http://www.good.is/post/five-innovative-urban-gardening-programs-in-los-angeles/
Five Innovative Urban Gardening Programs in Los Angeles
This is bad news. Here is some good news: “Let’s Hear It for Urban Agriculture,” “Mayor’s Agriculture
Plan Soon to Bear Fruit,” and “Planners Recommend New Zoning, Lower Tax for Urban Farms.” These
are just a few of the headlines that pop up from a Google search for current news on urban agriculture.
The idea is not new, but it’s being resurrected in cities throughout the country (and, for that matter, the
world), in part because it’s one way of fighting childhood obesity, which, along with diabetes, is a
serious health concern for children of all ages. The number of urban gardens in the United States has
grown dramatically in such cities as Los Angeles, Detroit, Milwaukee, and San Francisco, where local
governments and residents agree that these gardens are an important way to give children and
residents access to healthy food like locally grown fresh produce. Below is a list of innovative
programs and initiatives emerging in the Los Angeles area.
Urban Farming Food Chain Project
http://www.urbanfarming.org/
A partnership between Green Living Technologies and Emslie Osler Architects, this organization
constructs “edible” food-producing wall panels and mounts them on buildings. The people who tend
these vertical gardens use them for their own purposes (meaning produce is not sold commercially),
but they currently have four locations in and around downtown Los Angeles.
Silver Lake Farms
http://www.silverlakefarms.com/
Launched in 2004, Silver Lake Farms just began a Community Supported Agriculture program offering
subscribers a weekly box of fresh produce, grown locally in Silver Lake. They also hold workshops on
how to start your own vegetable garden, and sponsor a volunteer program that connects urban
residents with local farms, community gardens, and homesteads to help out with some of the work.
Market Makeovers
http://www.marketmakeovers.org/
Responding to poor access to fresh fruits and vegetables in their communities, South Los Angeles’s
Healthy Eating, Active Communities initiative and Public Matters have teamed up to engage young
people and convert corner stores into sources of healthy foods via an online toolkit.
Urban Homestead, Pasadena
http://urbanhomestead.org/journal/
An advocacy group for self-sufficient city living via farming and homesteading, this family-owned
operation was started in the mid-1980s on a one tenth of an acre backyard plot. Most of the produce is
sold to local restaurants and caterers.
Urban Farming Advocates
http://urbanfarmingadvocates.org/
Formed in June 2009, Urban Farming Advocates is a group of individuals, small business owners, and
organizations seeking to legalize urban farming in the City of Los Angeles. Their goal is to revise
outdated ordinances that restrict people's freedom to use residential land for urban agriculture.
The United States used to practically feed the world. Then we went from a agricultural society to a manufacturing society and now to an entitlement society and really to a "pre-collapse society", so the bits and pieces we can see of people learning to take care of themselves, especially through these urban farming co-operatives, are not only good news but gives examples for urban survivalists.
The below is from an article titled Farmscape Brings Urban Agriculture to Los Angeles http://www.good.is/post/farmscape-brings-urban-agriculture-to-los-angeles/
In a dry and sunny city like Los Angeles, planting grass is one of the more useless ways to use your property. It takes a lot of water to grow and it's expensive—but beyond that, what's the point when the climate supports much more interesting flora, like succulents, and delicious ones, like fruits and vegetables?
A company called Farmscape is proving that there's enough of an appetite for farming on residential land to turn the proposition into a high-growth business. The less-than-four-year-old company has 12 full-time employees—including seven farmers who receive a living wage plus healthcare—and is looking to keep growing. "One of the things that people don’t talk about when they talk about the food system is who is working," says Rachel Bailin, Farmscape's marketing manager. It's often poorly paid and vulnerable migrant workers.
But the company is changing that by bringing farm labor out into the open, into the yards of city-dwellers and businesses. So far they've installed more than 300 urban farms throughout the L.A. area and maintain 150 of them weekly. Projects range from a rooftop garden on a downtown Los Angeles highrise to small plots for families. An exciting project in the works is a three-quarter acre-sized farm for a restaurant in the West San Fernando Valley. And the diversity of the projects is echoed by the diversity of their clients. "When we first started, we expected that our clients would be of a higher income level and would be two-parent working families," says Bailin.
Instead, Farmscape has been delighted to build gardens for preschool teachers, single mothers, and institutions and businesses that want employee gardens as perks. Bailin says the challenges of farming in Los Angeles are manifold. "You have to account for spaces that haven't had life or biodiversity for decades and then you kind of have to bring it back." The company uses raised beds to avoid contaminated soil and drip irrigation systems to provide water. And their newest challenge? Running for office.
The company has thrown its hat into the ring for the office of mayor of Los Angeles in the 2013 election, running on the platform of bringing back farms into the city. Bailin says it's an ironic way of questioning the bounds of "corporate personhood," extended to a corporation's right to free speech by the Supreme Court's ruling on Citizens United in 2010. "We’re testing the limit of what it is. If corporations are already deciding our politics by giving a bunch of money and lobbying, why not see if we can take out the middleman that would be the politician and make corporations the politician?" It's a joke, of course, and the company will presumably never make it onto the ballot, but it's a clever way to get the word out about the company while making a statement. And perhaps this corporate candidate wouldn't be so bad anyway.
Urban Farming Sources
Another article:
http://www.good.is/post/five-innovative-urban-gardening-programs-in-los-angeles/
Five Innovative Urban Gardening Programs in Los Angeles
This is bad news. Here is some good news: “Let’s Hear It for Urban Agriculture,” “Mayor’s Agriculture
Plan Soon to Bear Fruit,” and “Planners Recommend New Zoning, Lower Tax for Urban Farms.” These
are just a few of the headlines that pop up from a Google search for current news on urban agriculture.
The idea is not new, but it’s being resurrected in cities throughout the country (and, for that matter, the
world), in part because it’s one way of fighting childhood obesity, which, along with diabetes, is a
serious health concern for children of all ages. The number of urban gardens in the United States has
grown dramatically in such cities as Los Angeles, Detroit, Milwaukee, and San Francisco, where local
governments and residents agree that these gardens are an important way to give children and
residents access to healthy food like locally grown fresh produce. Below is a list of innovative
programs and initiatives emerging in the Los Angeles area.
Urban Farming Food Chain Project
http://www.urbanfarming.org/
A partnership between Green Living Technologies and Emslie Osler Architects, this organization
constructs “edible” food-producing wall panels and mounts them on buildings. The people who tend
these vertical gardens use them for their own purposes (meaning produce is not sold commercially),
but they currently have four locations in and around downtown Los Angeles.
Silver Lake Farms
http://www.silverlakefarms.com/
Launched in 2004, Silver Lake Farms just began a Community Supported Agriculture program offering
subscribers a weekly box of fresh produce, grown locally in Silver Lake. They also hold workshops on
how to start your own vegetable garden, and sponsor a volunteer program that connects urban
residents with local farms, community gardens, and homesteads to help out with some of the work.
Market Makeovers
http://www.marketmakeovers.org/
Responding to poor access to fresh fruits and vegetables in their communities, South Los Angeles’s
Healthy Eating, Active Communities initiative and Public Matters have teamed up to engage young
people and convert corner stores into sources of healthy foods via an online toolkit.
Urban Homestead, Pasadena
http://urbanhomestead.org/journal/
An advocacy group for self-sufficient city living via farming and homesteading, this family-owned
operation was started in the mid-1980s on a one tenth of an acre backyard plot. Most of the produce is
sold to local restaurants and caterers.
Urban Farming Advocates
http://urbanfarmingadvocates.org/
Formed in June 2009, Urban Farming Advocates is a group of individuals, small business owners, and
organizations seeking to legalize urban farming in the City of Los Angeles. Their goal is to revise
outdated ordinances that restrict people's freedom to use residential land for urban agriculture.
Friday, August 24, 2012
Is The Army Preparing for an Internal Conspiracy?
I think I am at least on the fringe of Govenment Conspriacy thinking - meaning I am not pre-disposed to see conspiracies in every shadow. While many of my friends read "Malicious Government intent" into about any news report, I tend to think that most of the information needed to make a proper analysis is missing in most cases,...in other words, we are only seeing one side of the story. Having said that, the story below, sent to me by a friend, worries me.
Army colonel ignites firestorm with article on crushing a 'tea party insurgency'
Source: http://www.examiner.com/article/army-colonel-ignites-firestorm-with-article-on-crushing-a-tea-party-insurgency
A retired U.S. Army colonel who now teaches modern warfare to soldiers at the University of Foreign Military and Cultural Studies at Fort Leavenworth, Kan. has co-written an article with a Civil War expert that has ignited a firestorm today among those increasingly concerned about what some say is a distinct anti-civilian tone that has infected much of the military and Homeland Security since 2009.
Retired Col. Kevin Benson and Jennifer Weber, Associate Professor of History at the University of Kansas, co-wrote an article for Small Wars Journal on a 2010 Army report titled, "U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, The Army Operating Concept 2016 - 2028." The report describes how the Army will respond to threats "at home and abroad" in the coming two decades and in doing so has made clear that a monumental cultural shift has occurred in the thinking of those at the top levels of military command.
This shift has some government watchdogs worried, particularly given that Benson is using the platform provided at Fort Leavenworth to educate military personnel in his vision of the nature of modern warfare in America.
According to the vision articulated by Benson, future warfare will be conducted on our own soil. The military will use its full force against our own citizens. The enemy will be average citizens whose values resonate with those articulated by the tea party.
The fictitious scenario used in the Army report as a teaching tool is a future insurrection of "tea party activists" in South Carolina.
As the scenario goes, the tea party group stages a takeover of the town of Darlington, S.C. The mayor is placed under house arrest and prevented from exercising his duties. The police chief, the county sheriff, and other law enforcement officials are removed from office and told not to interfere. The city council is dissolved.
The governor of the state, who had previously expressed solidarity with tea party goals, does little to address the situation. A news conference is called by the new town leaders, all tea party activists, who tell the media that due to the failure of central government to address the concerns of the citizens, the Declaration of Independence has been re-imposed and the local government has been declared null and void.
From the report: When the leaders of the group hold a press conference to announce their goals, they invoke the Declaration of Independence and argue that the current form of the federal government is not deriving its “just powers from the consent of the governed” but is actually “destructive to these ends.”
Therefore, they say, the people can alter or abolish the existing government and replace it with another that, in the words of the Declaration, “shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.” While mainstream politicians and citizens react with alarm, the “tea party” insurrectionists in South Carolina enjoy a groundswell of support from other tea party groups, militias, racist organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan, anti-immigrant associations such as the Minutemen, and other right-wing groups.
Several items of interest are to be noted in the scenario the Army uses to describe the tea party activists -- "right wing," "extremists," "insurrectionists," all of whom are lumped together with militias and organizations that are considered "racist" and "anti-immigration."
By contrast, those who oppose the tea party are referred to as "mainstream." The obvious question that arises is why would this sort of scenario, with its obviously biased and skewed portrayals, be presented as a teaching tool to military personnel? Why would the U.S. military consider the tea party to be "extremist" or "insurrectionist?" And why would the tea party be classified together with groups that are "racist, "anti-immigration," and "extremist right wing?"
In the numerous tea party rallies that have occurred across the nation no racism was noted by any observer. Speakers included persons of all races and ethnic backgrounds. No sentiment was expressed against legal immigration but outrage was directed toward those break the law and enter the country by illegal means.
And the charge that the tea party is extremist right wing is difficult to justify given that the main thrust of the movement is the protest against runaway government spending that has placed the nation on the brink of economic ruin due to its enormous and unsustainable debt.
Yet repeatedly since the election of Barack Obama in 2009, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has referred to the tea party as "potential homegrown terrorists." Why? Not a shred of evidence remotely suggests that the tea party has any connection whatsoever with terrorists.
Yet some of President Obama's closet longtime friends have not only been associated with terrorism but actively participated in it, such as Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, who as members of the Weathermen from the 1960s and 70s bombed federal buildings that resulted in the deaths of police officers. But if one listens to the rhetoric emanating from the White House, DHS, and now the U.S. military, one gets the impression that none of the president's friends ever posed a threat to the country but hundreds of thousands of tea party activists are ticking time bombs lying in wait to unleash a nuke on an American city at the drop of a hat.
The brainwashing against conservatives by this administration has had a definite impact on the military. One analyst who works for retired U.S. Maj. Gen. Paul E. Vallely told this reporter that now over half of Pentagon personnel are solidly in Obama's corner and share his values and world view. And with the publication of the Benson and Weber article, it is now clear that the U.S. Army considers it a valid proposition to assume that a future civil war will be sparked not by extremist Islamists with dirty bombs or left wing insurrectionists inspired by Alinsky or Ayers but by the tea party and the conservatives who participate in it.
UrbanMan's comments: I'm sorry if the political bent in the last part of the article offends any readers. I did reach out of a few people I know within DoD and DHS and ask them their opinions. Some of the opinions I am not going to post due to their velmency, however there was a general consensus that while none of them had direct knowledge of the Army preparing for internal insurgencies, several expressed opinions that this train of thought (and preparation) was plausible within today's Army leadership.
One opinion, in particulary, said that this scenario would most likely pit the National Guard against the regular Army as the National Guard is geographical oriented and therefore loyal to a population center and would have very little patience for martial law effecting their families. And that for this reason the regular Army would be the action arm for any operations within the U.S. with the National Guard deployed far from their local areas. But he also said that the National Guard is pretty worn out from continued combat deployments. He continued that indicators of Army intentions would be a reduction of the National Guard's combat capabilities (read funding) and changes in the chains of command.
I sincerely hope this Examiner article is just a case of an Army Officer thinking way outside the box, but then again why does anyone think there is a chance of an American insurgency? What would spark this? Why would anyone even think the Army could be used against other Americans?
Army colonel ignites firestorm with article on crushing a 'tea party insurgency'
Source: http://www.examiner.com/article/army-colonel-ignites-firestorm-with-article-on-crushing-a-tea-party-insurgency
A retired U.S. Army colonel who now teaches modern warfare to soldiers at the University of Foreign Military and Cultural Studies at Fort Leavenworth, Kan. has co-written an article with a Civil War expert that has ignited a firestorm today among those increasingly concerned about what some say is a distinct anti-civilian tone that has infected much of the military and Homeland Security since 2009.
Retired Col. Kevin Benson and Jennifer Weber, Associate Professor of History at the University of Kansas, co-wrote an article for Small Wars Journal on a 2010 Army report titled, "U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, The Army Operating Concept 2016 - 2028." The report describes how the Army will respond to threats "at home and abroad" in the coming two decades and in doing so has made clear that a monumental cultural shift has occurred in the thinking of those at the top levels of military command.
This shift has some government watchdogs worried, particularly given that Benson is using the platform provided at Fort Leavenworth to educate military personnel in his vision of the nature of modern warfare in America.
According to the vision articulated by Benson, future warfare will be conducted on our own soil. The military will use its full force against our own citizens. The enemy will be average citizens whose values resonate with those articulated by the tea party.
The fictitious scenario used in the Army report as a teaching tool is a future insurrection of "tea party activists" in South Carolina.
As the scenario goes, the tea party group stages a takeover of the town of Darlington, S.C. The mayor is placed under house arrest and prevented from exercising his duties. The police chief, the county sheriff, and other law enforcement officials are removed from office and told not to interfere. The city council is dissolved.
The governor of the state, who had previously expressed solidarity with tea party goals, does little to address the situation. A news conference is called by the new town leaders, all tea party activists, who tell the media that due to the failure of central government to address the concerns of the citizens, the Declaration of Independence has been re-imposed and the local government has been declared null and void.
From the report: When the leaders of the group hold a press conference to announce their goals, they invoke the Declaration of Independence and argue that the current form of the federal government is not deriving its “just powers from the consent of the governed” but is actually “destructive to these ends.”
Therefore, they say, the people can alter or abolish the existing government and replace it with another that, in the words of the Declaration, “shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.” While mainstream politicians and citizens react with alarm, the “tea party” insurrectionists in South Carolina enjoy a groundswell of support from other tea party groups, militias, racist organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan, anti-immigrant associations such as the Minutemen, and other right-wing groups.
Several items of interest are to be noted in the scenario the Army uses to describe the tea party activists -- "right wing," "extremists," "insurrectionists," all of whom are lumped together with militias and organizations that are considered "racist" and "anti-immigration."
By contrast, those who oppose the tea party are referred to as "mainstream." The obvious question that arises is why would this sort of scenario, with its obviously biased and skewed portrayals, be presented as a teaching tool to military personnel? Why would the U.S. military consider the tea party to be "extremist" or "insurrectionist?" And why would the tea party be classified together with groups that are "racist, "anti-immigration," and "extremist right wing?"
In the numerous tea party rallies that have occurred across the nation no racism was noted by any observer. Speakers included persons of all races and ethnic backgrounds. No sentiment was expressed against legal immigration but outrage was directed toward those break the law and enter the country by illegal means.
And the charge that the tea party is extremist right wing is difficult to justify given that the main thrust of the movement is the protest against runaway government spending that has placed the nation on the brink of economic ruin due to its enormous and unsustainable debt.
Yet repeatedly since the election of Barack Obama in 2009, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has referred to the tea party as "potential homegrown terrorists." Why? Not a shred of evidence remotely suggests that the tea party has any connection whatsoever with terrorists.
Yet some of President Obama's closet longtime friends have not only been associated with terrorism but actively participated in it, such as Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, who as members of the Weathermen from the 1960s and 70s bombed federal buildings that resulted in the deaths of police officers. But if one listens to the rhetoric emanating from the White House, DHS, and now the U.S. military, one gets the impression that none of the president's friends ever posed a threat to the country but hundreds of thousands of tea party activists are ticking time bombs lying in wait to unleash a nuke on an American city at the drop of a hat.
The brainwashing against conservatives by this administration has had a definite impact on the military. One analyst who works for retired U.S. Maj. Gen. Paul E. Vallely told this reporter that now over half of Pentagon personnel are solidly in Obama's corner and share his values and world view. And with the publication of the Benson and Weber article, it is now clear that the U.S. Army considers it a valid proposition to assume that a future civil war will be sparked not by extremist Islamists with dirty bombs or left wing insurrectionists inspired by Alinsky or Ayers but by the tea party and the conservatives who participate in it.
UrbanMan's comments: I'm sorry if the political bent in the last part of the article offends any readers. I did reach out of a few people I know within DoD and DHS and ask them their opinions. Some of the opinions I am not going to post due to their velmency, however there was a general consensus that while none of them had direct knowledge of the Army preparing for internal insurgencies, several expressed opinions that this train of thought (and preparation) was plausible within today's Army leadership.
One opinion, in particulary, said that this scenario would most likely pit the National Guard against the regular Army as the National Guard is geographical oriented and therefore loyal to a population center and would have very little patience for martial law effecting their families. And that for this reason the regular Army would be the action arm for any operations within the U.S. with the National Guard deployed far from their local areas. But he also said that the National Guard is pretty worn out from continued combat deployments. He continued that indicators of Army intentions would be a reduction of the National Guard's combat capabilities (read funding) and changes in the chains of command.
I sincerely hope this Examiner article is just a case of an Army Officer thinking way outside the box, but then again why does anyone think there is a chance of an American insurgency? What would spark this? Why would anyone even think the Army could be used against other Americans?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
