The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 iSteve BlogTeasers
Maybe CIA / Washington Post Brainstorming About a Coup Needs a Rethink About Just Whom They Can Trust to Carry It Out?
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

Judging from the reaction to Trump’s arrival at today’s Army / Navy football game among military cadets, young military officers wouldn’t be on board.

 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
    []
  1. If hypothetically factions within the military and security agencies decided to launch a coup in the USA, how would it likely play through ? Would it be dud like the Turkey coup, would it work but most people shrug their shoulders and go on with their lives like in Thailand or would it end into an intractable civil war like in Syria ?

    Read More
    • Replies: @whorefinder
    The problem is that the federal policing agencies---the FBI, the ATFE, the CIA---have all been converged by the Left. They are loyal to the state only, not the people. Look at the CIA in the last few days covering for Hillary and making up Russian nonsense, or Comey covering for Clinton in July, or the ATFE running guns for Holder and keeping it quiet.

    Do not trust federal police agencies.

    In Animal Farm , Orwell made the distinction between the armies (the regular animals) and the secret police (the dogs). The regular animals overthrew the farmers, but Napoleon the Pig steals the puppies from their mother early, trains them in secret in the attic, and then, when the animals are starting to question the Pigs autocratic ways, he releases the now-fully grown and vicious dogs on the animals to police them and violently attack them if necessary.

    The animals fully roll over to the dogs' (and the pigs') control.

    It was a metaphor for Stalin's KGB being used on the Soviet people after their armies had overthrown the Czar. And also for how the German army fully rolled over and obeyed the Nazi SS (although, to the German army's credit, it strongly opposed Ernest Rohm's Brownshirt squads, probably leading to the old fairy's death).

    In short, the Left has been quite successful in taking over countries using the secret police. The armies are, to their detriment, largely made up of men used to obeying those in power. The few rabble rousers among them would be rooted out by the feds if the Left ever made a move.

    The Left, however, doesn't think it has enough in the feds to make it work; hence the recent efforts to federalize the local police forces across the country, under the guise of "reforming" them and "making them less racist."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    //www.unz.com/isteve/maybe-cia-washington-post-brainstorming-about-a-coup-needs-a-rethink-about-just-whom-they-can-trust-to-implement-it/#comment-1687227
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. I do wonder what Trump is going to do to the people at the CIA who have gone all in on attacking him.

    It’s not the usual thing for employees to go out of their way to trash the incoming CEO publicly. Can they be so smug that they don’t think there will be consequences?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lagertha
    The CIA and FBI and NSA have been fighting against each other for decades, duh, major, duh. This is a pivotal year for all factions to choose sides or: retire, or fall in line. SIMPLE. My grandfather had to deal with this in Finland in 1919. Choose....fracking choose: country or your petty self - should be easy.

    And, if you can't chose...well, according to my Grandpa's memoirs: you and your family will forfeit your farm, your property, you existence (border moved west)...pack up and march to the eastern (Russian) border. You are now, on your own. Good bye.
    , @Alden
    Maybe they are pretty sure there will be no bad consequences but many rewards. Many leaders have been ousted by coups over the centuries.

    I don't want to insult any vets, but it seems to me the military is just another affirmative action welfare government agency for blacks, Hispanics, gays, women etc. With the exception of the young White Goy men who do the actual fighting. But it seems every time I see military news its all about the latest black lesbian handicapped woman admiral or general. Or another announcement about the military's commitment to diversity and inclusion and social programs.

    Been on a military base in the last 30 years? Like government buildings, hardly a White to be seen.
  3. If there was a war it would depend on who’s side heavily armed rural whites were on. That side would win imo. By the way, the cadets in grey are army or navy?

    Read More
    • Replies: @EdwardM
    Heavily armed rural whites will always be outgunned by the government. I think that what it would come down to is whether the white soldiers and lower-level officers who come from these communities would obey orders to fire on their friends. It could go either way.

    I like to play out what would happen if/when the government decides to confiscate firearms door-to-door like in Australia. Despite the noble cries of "from my cold dead hands," I don't think that most responsible gun owners would really take it to that level when the SWAT team shows up. It will all come down to whether the ATF/FBI agents obey orders. I guess the Feds will marshal the agents from Boston and San Francisco field offices to go to Alabama and Wyoming to carry out the task to improve their odds. I wouldn't count on resistance to succeed, though it could get messy.

    No doubt the left is acutely aware of this risk, hence their efforts to eviscerate the cultures of the military and federal police forces, and to try to nationalize local police departments. A few more generations of their recruitment, social programming, human capital management, and purges, and they may succeed.
    , @dfordoom

    If there was a war it would depend on who’s side heavily armed rural whites were on. That side would win imo.
     
    Those heavily armed rural whites would last about ten minutes if it came to a fight against the military and the police.
  4. I think this is why he’s been behaving extra-Presidential ever since he won. In order to ensconce himself in the minds of many people as possible as the incumbent, in order to deter game-playing with possible recounts, the Electoral College actual vote, and potential coups. In other words, he’s behaving like he’s already President to dare them to try any of those shenanigans.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clyde

    I think this is why he’s been behaving extra-Presidential ever since he won. In order to ensconce himself in the minds of many people as possible as the incumbent, in order to deter game-playing with possible recounts, the Electoral College actual vote, and potential coups. In other words, he’s behaving like he’s already President to dare them to try any of those shenanigans.
     
    So true. And the Carrier deal/other American jobs saving deals/helps a lot. This highlights how Obama wouldn't lift a finger. O being a chickenshit who has zero ability to negotiate with captains of industry. Plus paranoid of them having his number (think empty suit) the minute he walks into the room.
    , @Kaz
    You call bitching about SNL on twitter as behaving extra-presidential? Well I guess he isn't calling someone ugly or fat..
    , @Laugh Track
    Been reading Scott Adams, I see...
  5. You guys need to get out of your bubble

    Go search for Angel Rye and Charles Blowa and observe how they DESTROY white conservatives

    I hope you know sites like this will be shut down in the near future. I was watching CNN today and people are angry about white nationalists and fake news.

    You guys are responsible for DYlan Roof and will be held accountable

    Read More
    • LOL: AndrewR
    • Troll: CK, IHTG, NickG
    • Replies: @Kyle a
    Is "Blowa" how the brothers pronounce Blow? That's kind of like how they put the letter a at the end of the N-word.
    , @International Jew

    Tiny, you goofed, that was something you were supposed to post after Hillary won.
     
    , @MBlanc46
    Come on and try to "hold me accountable".
    , @Brutusale
    Angela Rye, a new candidate for the title of whitest "black" woman ever.
  6. Most definitely would not be on board with any coup or other treason against our country.

    HAVING BEEN APPOINTED A MIDSHIPMAN IN THE UNITED STATES NAVY, I
    SOLEMNLY SWEAR THAT I WILL SUPPORT AND DEFEND THE
    CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES AGAINST ALL ENEMIES, FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC; THAT I WILL BEAR TRUE FAITH AND ALLEGIANCE TO THE SAME; THAT I TAKE THIS OBLIGATION FREELY, WITHOUT ANY MENTAL RESERVATION OR PURPOSE OF EVASION; AND THAT I WILL WELL AND FAITHFULLY DISCHARGE THE DUTIES OF THE OFFICE ON WHICH I AM ABOUT TO ENTER, SO HELP ME GOD.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Big Bill
    Wow. The Constitution.

    So tell me, what do Russians and Jews pledge their allegiance to?

    Israel doesn't have a Constitution and I just can't see the Russians pledging their lives and sacred honor to preserve a piece of paper.

    Do they pledge themselves to fight and defend their nation? Their people? Their land?

    I am a married man, but I would never plead undying loyalty to my marriage license.
    , @Chrisnonymous
    I've never understood how that works with separation of powers, etc. For example, if SCOTUS says the Constitution contains a protection of abortion, does that make pro-life activists domestic enemies? What if SCOTUS finds a loophole in the 2nd Amendment? You've taken an oath to consider gun advocates enemies then?

    I'm sure this has been addressed in military law circles, but what do you think as an oath-taker?
    , @scrivener3
    A politician who acts beyond the limits set out in the Constitution for his office is violating the Constitution and is a domestic enemy. That is why the pledge is to support Constitutional government and not particular individuals. If someone tries to assume the office of President without gaining the appropriate votes, or if a Congressman refuses to vacate his seat after loosing an election and his successor is sworn in, they are similarly violating the Constitution.

    The Constitution has nothing about judicial review in it. It was assumed all people would pretty much recognize when the plain words were being violated and know a constitutional violation when they saw it.
    , @in the middle
    DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES AGAINST ALL ENEMIES, FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC...

    Don't forget that when the going gets tough, and keep that promise, we might need it sooner than later. Remember, at the end of the day, the American people as a whole is the boss, and not the gov. The gov. has usurped that power vested in the people of this great nation. Those people, i.e. agencies burying us with refugees who later massacre people like the Somali muslim few days ago, read, and search who is bringing these people in boat loads, and lets shame them. I heard that the 'catholic something of Houston' brought them here. We blame the gov, but sometimes these agencies are the ones who should bear responsibility for their people they bring into the USA.
  7. @AlexT
    If there was a war it would depend on who's side heavily armed rural whites were on. That side would win imo. By the way, the cadets in grey are army or navy?

    Heavily armed rural whites will always be outgunned by the government. I think that what it would come down to is whether the white soldiers and lower-level officers who come from these communities would obey orders to fire on their friends. It could go either way.

    I like to play out what would happen if/when the government decides to confiscate firearms door-to-door like in Australia. Despite the noble cries of “from my cold dead hands,” I don’t think that most responsible gun owners would really take it to that level when the SWAT team shows up. It will all come down to whether the ATF/FBI agents obey orders. I guess the Feds will marshal the agents from Boston and San Francisco field offices to go to Alabama and Wyoming to carry out the task to improve their odds. I wouldn’t count on resistance to succeed, though it could get messy.

    No doubt the left is acutely aware of this risk, hence their efforts to eviscerate the cultures of the military and federal police forces, and to try to nationalize local police departments. A few more generations of their recruitment, social programming, human capital management, and purges, and they may succeed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thomas
    I've never understood why it's assumed in a "door-to-door" scenario, the preferred and most effective strategy of anyone seeking to resist would principally be a defensive "cold dead hands," wait for the jackboots to show up at the door approach. The Beltway snipers – a mere two people (a nutty black nationalist and a teenager) – were able by themselves to terrorize the national capital for three weeks.
    , @Jack Hanson
    Yeah, and Afghanis with Mausers can never stop the US.

    All it takes is one good ambush and cops would tell the bureaucrats "You do it".
    , @dfordoom

    Heavily armed rural whites will always be outgunned by the government.
     
    How many RPGs do those "heavily armed rural whites" have? How many man-portable air-defense systems will they have? How will they deal with drone strikes?

    A bunch of fat middle-aged men with rifles in pick-up trucks won't trouble trained regulars for very long.

    This is another example of the alt-right's detachment from reality.
    , @Vendetta
    Outgunned doesn't matter. What is it with people obsessed with thinking of this as a gunfight? Is it still that hard to understand after ten years of watching our troops get blown up with IEDs?

    How many miles of power lines in this country are unguarded and impossible to guard in full? How easy is it to go out and start a wildfire in California?
    , @RonaldB
    I think you're completely correct.

    A professional military will be able to wipe out any localized resistance. If the police can't do it, they will import special forces. You think a leftist administration would pay any attention to the Constitution if they're threatened?

    Any armed insurgency has got to have a country as a base of support. The Taliban have Pakistan. The Viet Cong had North Vietnam, to the extent the Viet Cong had any independent existence at all.

    It would be the sheerest of disasters to start shooting at US forces or police. That would simply polarize them, and the professional soldiers would be challenged, not deterred, by the prospect of ambushes.

    The only way, and it is extremely powerful, to resist the government is massive, unarmed street protests. The biggest danger for the government is in ordering its troops to fire on unarmed civilians of their own country. The reaction of the troops is the critical factor, and it would be stupid to put them in the position of being fired on by their own people. So, in my opinion, anyone who advocates US citizens shooting at US police or military forces, even to keep their guns, is either a dupe or an agent. It's an almost foolproof recipe for failure, and based totally on emotion rather than reason.

    If you want to have a revolution, there's nothing that says you can't infiltrate the police, military, and government agencies yourself. Turn the enemy's playbook against him. Have a counter-Revolutionary long march through the institutions. And that would have the added benefit of urging the military and police to support, rather than ignore, the Constitution.
    , @in the middle
    Heck! no. When I was in the service, we were told that the AMERICAN PEOPLE were our boss. I am talking in the AF. I don't know other services. So, no; hopefully our fighter aircraft serves our boss, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE! Heck Yes.
    , @DL
    I live in Australia.

    No one went door to door confiscating weapons.

    The didn't need to.

    The government banned certain weapons, and Australians complained for 5 minutes, then lined up like sheep to hand them in.

    My point being, they GAVE them back like pussies, they weren't forcefully TAKEN by armed agents.

    Gun owners in Australia have zero understanding of the importance of an armed citizenry to resist tyranny.

    Even owning arms for individual protection is unheard of and completely alien.

    I have heard American politicians mention their admiration for Australian style gun laws.

    It is my sense that these politicians and their supporting media have no earthly idea how different the mindset is between average Australian and American gun owners.

    Australians were annoyed like someone changed a freeway from 75 to 65 MPH. Shooting is like a hobby here, there is no culture that understands or embraces individual liberty, or the very tools that guarantee it.

    Ordinary Americans I know across the land would declare civil war if this were attempted.

    (Rightly fucking so.)

    Don't ever let them register your guns guys.
    , @G'man
    """Heavily armed rural whites will always be outgunned by the government""" UmmmCLUE for 500$ please ...
    There were over 600,000 hunters this season in the state of Wisconsin. That number pales in comparison to the 750,000 who hunted the woods of Pennsylvania and Michigan’s 700,000 hunters. With only 765,000 sworn personnel (defined as those with general arrest powers)...

    Rut roe....some popo gona need some some back up...Remember Dallas shoot out ....THAT WAS ONE GUY....hmmmm.....and a swat team ...and a whole police dept....

    Keep telling us DEFENSELESS we are ...if if ..

    “And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?... The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If...if...aleksandr solzhenitsyn
  8. @neutral
    If hypothetically factions within the military and security agencies decided to launch a coup in the USA, how would it likely play through ? Would it be dud like the Turkey coup, would it work but most people shrug their shoulders and go on with their lives like in Thailand or would it end into an intractable civil war like in Syria ?

    The problem is that the federal policing agencies—the FBI, the ATFE, the CIA—have all been converged by the Left. They are loyal to the state only, not the people. Look at the CIA in the last few days covering for Hillary and making up Russian nonsense, or Comey covering for Clinton in July, or the ATFE running guns for Holder and keeping it quiet.

    Do not trust federal police agencies.

    In Animal Farm , Orwell made the distinction between the armies (the regular animals) and the secret police (the dogs). The regular animals overthrew the farmers, but Napoleon the Pig steals the puppies from their mother early, trains them in secret in the attic, and then, when the animals are starting to question the Pigs autocratic ways, he releases the now-fully grown and vicious dogs on the animals to police them and violently attack them if necessary.

    The animals fully roll over to the dogs’ (and the pigs’) control.

    It was a metaphor for Stalin’s KGB being used on the Soviet people after their armies had overthrown the Czar. And also for how the German army fully rolled over and obeyed the Nazi SS (although, to the German army’s credit, it strongly opposed Ernest Rohm’s Brownshirt squads, probably leading to the old fairy’s death).

    In short, the Left has been quite successful in taking over countries using the secret police. The armies are, to their detriment, largely made up of men used to obeying those in power. The few rabble rousers among them would be rooted out by the feds if the Left ever made a move.

    The Left, however, doesn’t think it has enough in the feds to make it work; hence the recent efforts to federalize the local police forces across the country, under the guise of “reforming” them and “making them less racist.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @BenKenobi
    All great points.

    Also, Animals is probably the best Pink Floyd album.
    , @Jack Hanson
    Being on the inside of the FedGov LE apparatus, I can safely say you're painting with a huge brush that has no basis in reality.
    , @Lagertha
    I call huge bullshit. Millennial man-boys, in particular, are on to the bull that Liberals have foisted upon them. The Armed Forces are full up of young people, today (most voted for Trump) that are not so easily convinced that they are farm animals a la' 1984. I think the ranks of people who want to be cops will be thinning...for nice cops. And, the growth, which we will all applaud will be the new crop of 'DieHard' cops who will just fracking waste bad guys! Everyone wants that; we all want bad guys wasted! Die Hard movies were the best. BTW, the Diehard franchise, how good was that that they knew the idea of really bad guys was forever good movies....especially in February - the "date movie" bonanza of making money thru bored-midwinter teenagers.
  9. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    It looks like they’re trying to lay the groundwork for a Tahrir Square or Ukraine Maidan style campaign during Trump’s presidency, with massive protests in the major cities, amplified by media coverage, to try to get Trump impeached or removed from office. The particular event or thing that would initially trigger the movement and protests are unforeseen at this point, but this is obviously a psyops/info campaign by the CIA to delegitimize Trump and lay the groundwork for a potential uprising and removal. The most charitable interpretation of the CIA’s actions here would be that the Russians have simply penetrated too far into Trump’s orbit. This would also explain why Trump is being surrounded by generals.

    These nonviolent coups are based on the work of Gene Sharp, and many of the tactics have been field tested. They don’t depend on military personnel, rather they try to use military attempts to quell the protests to further delegitimize the regime.

    If this situation turns into a hot conflict, it would quickly turn into a proxy war between Russia and NATO on the North American continent.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    When the army is comprised of local conscripts, there's a good chance they won't fire on their neighbors and relatives.

    When it's a professional army drawn from a continental country, it's not as safe a bet. But in the US, the Posse Comitatus Act limits the use of the military for domestic law enforcement (there have been rare exceptions, such as the use of active duty soldiers and Marines during the LA riots). But the federal government also has militarized police at the FBI, ATF, etc.

    Back in the '90s, there were some grass roots movements against militarized feds, proposals that warrants had to be executed with local sheriffs, that sort of thing, prompted in part by Ruby Ridge and Waco.

    But the Oklahoma City bombing and then 9/11 shifted the politics on that. Maybe it's time to shift back a bit.
    , @Kyle McKenna

    The particular event or thing that would initially trigger the movement and protests are unforeseen at this point..
     
    "Race Crime Hoax"
    , @RonaldB
    Your comments are thoughtful.

    The use of the military on mass protests against Trump would be very unwise. Indeed, the counter to mass protests against Trump would be mass protests in support of Trump. The left would use violent tactics or street gangs, and that is where the right of the individual to own arms comes in. The right to own arms protects against extra-government street gangs and random violence, not against the government's own forces.

    The left is obviously positioning itself for a major challenge to a Trump Presidency, but that doesn't mean the only response to them is through force. Why can't we adopt their tactics? The populists need to organize their own movements, especially after the Trump victory. The movement should be non-violent, open to ideas, and supportive of the actual Constitution. Parts of the movement may also be secret, since they may be in hostile territory (eg, in academic institutions).
    , @Frau Katze
    I do get that impression from NYT and their commenters. Some of them are incoherent with rage.

    (I live in Canada so I have no other way to gauge it).
  10. @countenance
    I think this is why he's been behaving extra-Presidential ever since he won. In order to ensconce himself in the minds of many people as possible as the incumbent, in order to deter game-playing with possible recounts, the Electoral College actual vote, and potential coups. In other words, he's behaving like he's already President to dare them to try any of those shenanigans.

    I think this is why he’s been behaving extra-Presidential ever since he won. In order to ensconce himself in the minds of many people as possible as the incumbent, in order to deter game-playing with possible recounts, the Electoral College actual vote, and potential coups. In other words, he’s behaving like he’s already President to dare them to try any of those shenanigans.

    So true. And the Carrier deal/other American jobs saving deals/helps a lot. This highlights how Obama wouldn’t lift a finger. O being a chickenshit who has zero ability to negotiate with captains of industry. Plus paranoid of them having his number (think empty suit) the minute he walks into the room.

    Read More
  11. A successful coup in the United States wouldn’t look like the Turkey coup at all.

    What they would do is assassinate the President, and possibly simultaneously assassinate the Vice President. The exact circumstances depend on a number of factors. They may want to feel out the VP for a year or two and see if he will play ball. If he will, then he is the replacement. If not, they will take him out too.

    Hypothesize that Air Force One is shot down or crashes while the President and Vice President are aboard. The Secret Service at the point would basically take the speaker of the house into custody. Whatever intelligence agents and generals were around the speaker at that moment would basically be in charge of the country. They could feed the speaker whatever “intelligence” they wanted to, and in that environment, the new president wouldn’t have the means to do any independent analysis at all.

    “Mr. President, it turns out the previous president and vice president were making a deal with Russia to do XYZ, and the deal fell through, so the Russians had them killed. The following members of the administration should be considered suspicous: the attorney general, the secretary of state, this general, that admiral, etc.”

    If they could make it look like an accident or a lone wolf job that might be even better. But if they can tie it to some perceived enemy, they can isolate the incoming president, and get him to execute an emergency purge of the government.

    I believe that this is how any coup would go down.

    The problem with such a coup is that there are something like 17 intelligence agencies currently operating in the United States. This type of thing would require broad consent across all 17 intelligence agencies that the current administration is so dangerous to the current paradigm that immediate action has to be taken, at high risk to everyone involved.

    If the Kennedy assassination was a coup (and I’m not saying it was) then it probably looked something like this.

    If we hypothesize that Kennedy was a coup, ask yourself: who won, the army, or the well armed ruralites? And the answer is: there was never an armed confrontation because the coup was achieved without anyone realizing it was a coup.

    To reiterate: I am not saying and I do not believe that the CIA killed Kennedy. I suppose it is certainly possible that that is what happened (its also possible that Obama was born in Kenya, Bush had inside knowledge of 9/11, and Russians hacked voting machines in Wisconsin) but I do not believe it is the most likely explanation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Glossy
    This seems plausible to me. The Middle Eastern and Latin American publics have seen overt coups before and view them as somewhat normal. The American public views them as foreign and third-worldish. Also, Americans are very used to dismissing conspiracy theories about assasinations and terrorist acts. Conspiracy theorists are thought of as crazy and downscale. This would help the organizers of a coup disguised as an assasination.
    , @Almost Missouri

    "The problem with such a coup is that there are something like 17 intelligence agencies currently operating in the United States."
     
    The other problem for a coup is that most of those agencies' track records does not inspire confidence in their competence.

    Though I suppose it would be fitting in a way that ne'er-do-wells who couldn't knock off a tin pot dictator 90 miles off shore and who couldn't ice a stone age religious fanatic in a lawless country would finally be in their element executing a massive demolition of the semi-constitutional order beneath their own feet.
    , @Detective Club
    On Nov. 2, 1963 President Kennedy was scheduled to attend the Army-Air Force football game at Soldier Field, Chicago.

    Before Nov. 2, 1963 the Secret Service was tipped off by a woman, who owned a boarding house, that three "dark" snipers had rented a room in her establishment and were "loaded for bear." The SS picked these 3 characters (Cubans?) up and found out that they were on the CIA payroll. These 3 ratted out a "mentally deranged" ex-military guy by the name of Thomas Arthur Vallee, who was supposed to take a pot-shot at Kennedy from his printing-shop window (where he was employed), up in a Chicago office building, along the presidential parade route from the airport to the final destination of the football field.

    From the elevated sniper's nest of the print shop, Vallee was put in place (by the CIA?, by the Pentagon?) to shoot Kennedy when he stepped out of his car to greet a group of school kids, waiting to meet him below, at street-level. If Vallee missed, street-level shooters (presumably the 3 "dark" snipers) would then have a "good try" at Kennedy.

    The SS insisted that the President cancel his Chicago trip, with only about 30 minutes to go before Air Force One would have departed for Chicago on Nov. 2, 1963. The SS later released the three "dark" snipers without charging them. Vallee was picked up on Nov. 2, 1963 (after Kennedy's Chicago trip had been canceled) by 2 Chicago PD detectives with deep FBI connections. Vallee was arrested by the 2 Chicago PD detectives on city firearms charges but lated released, after all charges against Vallee were suddenly dropped soon after Nov. 2, 1963.

    After Nov. 2, 1963, Kennedy announced, at his last press conference, that he was pulling 1,000 military men out of South Vietnam, reducing US forces there to a total of 15,000. Then came Nov. 22, 1963 in Dallas. Lee Harvey Oswald, who claimed he was "just a patsy," was silenced forever by Jack Ruby on Nov. 24, 1963.

    By Dec, 1, 1963, President Johnson had canceled Kennedy's November, 1963 S. Vietnam, US forces reduction order, choosing rather to gradually increase the number of US forces in South Vietnam during 1964.

    Thomas Arthur Vallee of Chicago, Illinois could have had class, he could have been a contender! Thomas Arthur Vallee of Chicago, Illinois : THE PATSY WHO NEVER WAS!
    , @Vendetta
    The President and Vice President do not fly together. Security protocol 101.
    , @Flip
    Coup in America

    https://www.fff.org/2013/07/09/no-military-coups-for-america-really/
    , @dearieme
    I can see that it was in LBJ's interest to assassinate JFK, but why would any arm of govt join in? JFK was just an ordinarily-incompetent prez of no great consequence, and little threat to anyone in govt.
    , @Richard S

    there are something like 17 intelligence agencies currently operating in the United States
     
    17 American agencies, that is.
  12. @EdwardM
    Heavily armed rural whites will always be outgunned by the government. I think that what it would come down to is whether the white soldiers and lower-level officers who come from these communities would obey orders to fire on their friends. It could go either way.

    I like to play out what would happen if/when the government decides to confiscate firearms door-to-door like in Australia. Despite the noble cries of "from my cold dead hands," I don't think that most responsible gun owners would really take it to that level when the SWAT team shows up. It will all come down to whether the ATF/FBI agents obey orders. I guess the Feds will marshal the agents from Boston and San Francisco field offices to go to Alabama and Wyoming to carry out the task to improve their odds. I wouldn't count on resistance to succeed, though it could get messy.

    No doubt the left is acutely aware of this risk, hence their efforts to eviscerate the cultures of the military and federal police forces, and to try to nationalize local police departments. A few more generations of their recruitment, social programming, human capital management, and purges, and they may succeed.

    I’ve never understood why it’s assumed in a “door-to-door” scenario, the preferred and most effective strategy of anyone seeking to resist would principally be a defensive “cold dead hands,” wait for the jackboots to show up at the door approach. The Beltway snipers – a mere two people (a nutty black nationalist and a teenager) – were able by themselves to terrorize the national capital for three weeks.

    Read More
  13. @Tiny Duck
    You guys need to get out of your bubble

    Go search for Angel Rye and Charles Blowa and observe how they DESTROY white conservatives

    I hope you know sites like this will be shut down in the near future. I was watching CNN today and people are angry about white nationalists and fake news.

    You guys are responsible for DYlan Roof and will be held accountable

    Is “Blowa” how the brothers pronounce Blow? That’s kind of like how they put the letter a at the end of the N-word.

    Read More
  14. Probably get the tiny duck to pull it off for bread crumbs. She’s a patriot after all.

    Read More
  15. @AlexT
    If there was a war it would depend on who's side heavily armed rural whites were on. That side would win imo. By the way, the cadets in grey are army or navy?

    If there was a war it would depend on who’s side heavily armed rural whites were on. That side would win imo.

    Those heavily armed rural whites would last about ten minutes if it came to a fight against the military and the police.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kyle McKenna

    Those heavily armed rural whites would last about ten minutes if it came to a fight against the military and the police.
     
    But the carnage would give pause to everyone. Oh, silly me, the MSM wouldn't report the carnage.
    , @Andy
    most of the military come from the rural whites...they wouldn't fight against their brethren
    , @bomag

    Those heavily armed rural whites would last about ten minutes if it came to a fight against the military and the police.
     
    I wouldn't bet too heavily. The Iraqi irregulars didn't do too badly. Guerrilla warfare has evolved faster than conventional.
    , @Honorary Thief
    Agree completely on the military. The police, eh, not so much.
    , @Jack Hanson
    Which is why Afghanistan is a settled protectorate.

    Lmbo
    , @Vendetta
    Heavily armed rural whites are the largest demographic the military recruits. Always overlooked by the armchair skeptics.
    , @RonaldB
    You're exactly right. In an open fight, the professional military would win against any insurgency not supported by an outside country. For those citing Afghanistan, they should keep in mind that the Taliban is supported by a major part of the Pakistani government. Also, those stating the rural whites are a major component of the armed forces should keep in mind that an army will tend to shoot back at somebody shooting at them.

    The only viable way to resist the government is through mass, unarmed demonstrations. If the police or military are directed to use force or fire on unarmed demonstrators, that will provide the biggest threat, by far, to the existing government. That is the situation where the armed forces are likely to turn their guns around, and any military general willing to countermand the orders will have a major part of the military ready to support him. So, governments generally think a long time before ordering the military to confront unarmed protesters. I understand during the Tienanmen protests, when the Chinese government finally decided to end the demonstration, they shipped in military from other parts of the country, since the local military was judged to be too cozy with the demonstrators.

    Once you begin shooting at your own military, though, you create a completely different dynamic. Those who advocate using guns against their own military are giving you a recipe for loss and disaster of the first magnitude.
    , @The Plutonium Kid
    Never heard of guerrilla warfare, huh? And an awful lot of military and law enforcement personnel are not going to be eager to hunt down their fellow citizens.
    , @Brutusale
    I suspect Colonel Banastre Tarleton said the same thing about facing off against Colonel Francis Marion and General Daniel Morgan.
    , @in the middle
    That is an uninformed conclusion. The Taliban has endured decades; first against the Russians, then against the whole or NATO. Those rural whites as you call them, are mostly vets, who know their stuff, and I believe better trained than the Taliban in Afghanistan. So, yes, they will last. Also it might depend on who the people are for. If the rurals have the people behind them, then they will win.
    , @Simple
    Those heavily armed rural whites ARE the military and the police.
    , @MarcB
    The suburban Whites are the ones with the highest concentration of firepower closest to major population centers, so they would be the most immediate target to neutralize. Rural Whites are sparse and isolated, and pose less of a threat to any New Order. I suspect teams in MRAP's would firebomb the houses of those who would not submit to gun confiscation rather than risking their bacon and resources performing raids. Most suburban homes are tinder boxes.
    , @Armst
    You statement demonstrates your lack of knowledge in many fields. Do you think rural whites will simple line up and march out on a field to be shot. Look at wars around the world. How many are being waged by rag tag groups against better armed and trained militaries. And how many times do the rag tags win....and if not....what about all the chaos and death that comes about anyway......
  16. It seems that the CIA is the only armed part of the government that’s anti-Trump. Unfortunately it’s also the only one that has an extensive experience with coups.

    How deep does the anti-Trump sentiment go within the CIA? It could be just the director, but the disturbing thing is that the current director is a career CIA man. What if he’s representative? I don’t know. Egg McMuffin is a career spy and look at him.

    Who are the CIA’s rank and file? The Hollywood stereotype is WASPs, but Hollywood lies a lot. I’ve heard there are a lot of Mormons there because they know foreign languages and can pass background tests due to their clean living.

    Normally, the world over, the people who choose careers in armed branches of the government are conservative and patriotic. If the CIA’s rank and file isn’t like that, why would that be?

    Read More
    • Replies: @sanjoaquinsam

    Normally, the world over, the people who choose careers in armed branches of the government are conservative and patriotic. If the CIA’s rank and file isn’t like that, why would that be?

     

    CIA recruits from the ranks most vulnerable to radicalization. During the cold war they focused on recruiting socialists because a cosmopolitan Red wouldn't believe Mr. Honkey Bumpkin was interested in sacrificing for the international revolution whereas a historically oppressed brown guy from Southern California might be in it for the long haul.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "Normally, the world over, the people who choose careers in armed branches of the government are conservative and patriotic. If the CIA’s rank and file isn’t like that, why would that be?"

    I'm certainly no expert, but I think that CIA employees are often much more liberal (and probably a lot more flaky) than military men. The CIA even has, or recently had, at least one high official who was an open muslim convert. I once knew a guy, who was a beatnik-type trust-fund kid, a perennial student and amateur drug-dealer, who aspired to join the CIA. I don't know that he ever made it in, but he was evidently the kind of person who was attracted to the job.

    There is of course one filter that defines CIA agents: they are the sort of people who like the idea of being spies.
  17. @Anonymous
    It looks like they're trying to lay the groundwork for a Tahrir Square or Ukraine Maidan style campaign during Trump's presidency, with massive protests in the major cities, amplified by media coverage, to try to get Trump impeached or removed from office. The particular event or thing that would initially trigger the movement and protests are unforeseen at this point, but this is obviously a psyops/info campaign by the CIA to delegitimize Trump and lay the groundwork for a potential uprising and removal. The most charitable interpretation of the CIA's actions here would be that the Russians have simply penetrated too far into Trump's orbit. This would also explain why Trump is being surrounded by generals.

    These nonviolent coups are based on the work of Gene Sharp, and many of the tactics have been field tested. They don't depend on military personnel, rather they try to use military attempts to quell the protests to further delegitimize the regime.

    If this situation turns into a hot conflict, it would quickly turn into a proxy war between Russia and NATO on the North American continent.

    When the army is comprised of local conscripts, there’s a good chance they won’t fire on their neighbors and relatives.

    When it’s a professional army drawn from a continental country, it’s not as safe a bet. But in the US, the Posse Comitatus Act limits the use of the military for domestic law enforcement (there have been rare exceptions, such as the use of active duty soldiers and Marines during the LA riots). But the federal government also has militarized police at the FBI, ATF, etc.

    Back in the ’90s, there were some grass roots movements against militarized feds, proposals that warrants had to be executed with local sheriffs, that sort of thing, prompted in part by Ruby Ridge and Waco.

    But the Oklahoma City bombing and then 9/11 shifted the politics on that. Maybe it’s time to shift back a bit.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    Our military transfers every 2 years. The soldiers in the bases are not locals. They are from all over the country. And a huge proportion of them are blacks and browns who hate Whites.
  18. @taco
    A successful coup in the United States wouldn't look like the Turkey coup at all.

    What they would do is assassinate the President, and possibly simultaneously assassinate the Vice President. The exact circumstances depend on a number of factors. They may want to feel out the VP for a year or two and see if he will play ball. If he will, then he is the replacement. If not, they will take him out too.

    Hypothesize that Air Force One is shot down or crashes while the President and Vice President are aboard. The Secret Service at the point would basically take the speaker of the house into custody. Whatever intelligence agents and generals were around the speaker at that moment would basically be in charge of the country. They could feed the speaker whatever "intelligence" they wanted to, and in that environment, the new president wouldn't have the means to do any independent analysis at all.

    "Mr. President, it turns out the previous president and vice president were making a deal with Russia to do XYZ, and the deal fell through, so the Russians had them killed. The following members of the administration should be considered suspicous: the attorney general, the secretary of state, this general, that admiral, etc."

    If they could make it look like an accident or a lone wolf job that might be even better. But if they can tie it to some perceived enemy, they can isolate the incoming president, and get him to execute an emergency purge of the government.

    I believe that this is how any coup would go down.

    The problem with such a coup is that there are something like 17 intelligence agencies currently operating in the United States. This type of thing would require broad consent across all 17 intelligence agencies that the current administration is so dangerous to the current paradigm that immediate action has to be taken, at high risk to everyone involved.

    If the Kennedy assassination was a coup (and I'm not saying it was) then it probably looked something like this.

    If we hypothesize that Kennedy was a coup, ask yourself: who won, the army, or the well armed ruralites? And the answer is: there was never an armed confrontation because the coup was achieved without anyone realizing it was a coup.

    To reiterate: I am not saying and I do not believe that the CIA killed Kennedy. I suppose it is certainly possible that that is what happened (its also possible that Obama was born in Kenya, Bush had inside knowledge of 9/11, and Russians hacked voting machines in Wisconsin) but I do not believe it is the most likely explanation.

    This seems plausible to me. The Middle Eastern and Latin American publics have seen overt coups before and view them as somewhat normal. The American public views them as foreign and third-worldish. Also, Americans are very used to dismissing conspiracy theories about assasinations and terrorist acts. Conspiracy theorists are thought of as crazy and downscale. This would help the organizers of a coup disguised as an assasination.

    Read More
  19. The CIA is in the crosshairs, and the agency knows it. That’s why last night’s election “news” release via WaPo, that the Russians did something or other, is such a desperation heave.

    The JSOC community (the ones mainly responsible for our “success” in IRQ and AFG), have done very well aligning with Trump (think Flynn, Pompeo (the rep from Koch) at CIA (and also an army officer). Devos is Erik Prince’s sister! Mattis just got done w/ 3 years at General Dyanmics. Curtis Yarvin might argue the “red empire” won this election over the “blue empire” candidate when Trump ended the Clinton dynasty, with a little help from likely several sources, including the NSA and perhaps from Russia. I am not unhappy about this, I have no direct evidence, but both of those sources had means, motive and opportunity.

    Understanding that, and understanding those same JSOC guys pushed Petraeus at CIA in order to “mold” the CIA into a JSOC subsidiary, well, the CIA sees part two of that attack coming. (Note: The CIA ended David Petraeus w/ the help of his private protection team, who blew him w/r/t to his affair w/ PB. The CIA REALLY didn’t want to change.) The CIA and the blue empire have bungled Egypt, Syria and the rest of the middle east, so it’s not like they don’t have it coming. But team red is not exactly covered in glory from the IRQ and AFG occupations, either.

    At stake is control over intel and who controls the tip of the spear response to it. Money, mission and prestige are at stake.

    So, long story short, I think the CIA is running scared, tossing a hail mary in attempt to head off the hammer heading it’s way.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Olorin
    Part of your comment meshes with my initial reaction to this "news." Dying mammoths thrash a lot.

    WaPo, etc., have long been bound up with CIA in propaganda campaigns, and vice versa.

    http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/11/30/the-cia-and-the-press-when-the-washington-post-ran-the-cias-propaganda-network/

    Compare:

    http://wallstreetonparade.com/2016/12/whos-behind-propornots-blacklist-of-news-websites/

    Now, looking at this representation of CIA's org chart:

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dc/CIA_ORG_Structure.svg/800px-CIA_ORG_Structure.svg.png

    ...I observe that there hasn't been (and can't be) much talk about who's going to corner the new MAGA market on global cyberint...and make those Big Lig "digital innovation" Deals.

    Maybe at some level they're pinging The Donald's team for a piece of the action.

    "Look how good we are! We can create shadow organizations to get nonsense in the WaPo, and the people in or aspiring to the Access Class who've always eaten it up are eating it up!"
  20. @Anonymous
    It looks like they're trying to lay the groundwork for a Tahrir Square or Ukraine Maidan style campaign during Trump's presidency, with massive protests in the major cities, amplified by media coverage, to try to get Trump impeached or removed from office. The particular event or thing that would initially trigger the movement and protests are unforeseen at this point, but this is obviously a psyops/info campaign by the CIA to delegitimize Trump and lay the groundwork for a potential uprising and removal. The most charitable interpretation of the CIA's actions here would be that the Russians have simply penetrated too far into Trump's orbit. This would also explain why Trump is being surrounded by generals.

    These nonviolent coups are based on the work of Gene Sharp, and many of the tactics have been field tested. They don't depend on military personnel, rather they try to use military attempts to quell the protests to further delegitimize the regime.

    If this situation turns into a hot conflict, it would quickly turn into a proxy war between Russia and NATO on the North American continent.

    The particular event or thing that would initially trigger the movement and protests are unforeseen at this point..

    “Race Crime Hoax”

    Read More
  21. @dfordoom

    If there was a war it would depend on who’s side heavily armed rural whites were on. That side would win imo.
     
    Those heavily armed rural whites would last about ten minutes if it came to a fight against the military and the police.

    Those heavily armed rural whites would last about ten minutes if it came to a fight against the military and the police.

    But the carnage would give pause to everyone. Oh, silly me, the MSM wouldn’t report the carnage.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dfordoom

    But the carnage would give pause to everyone. Oh, silly me, the MSM wouldn’t report the carnage.
     
    Or if they did report it the story would be that a handful of dangerous racist neo-Nazi extremists tried to overthrow the government but they have now been rounded up.

    A successful coup depends on who has the megaphone. I think we know the answer to that one.
  22. @dfordoom

    If there was a war it would depend on who’s side heavily armed rural whites were on. That side would win imo.
     
    Those heavily armed rural whites would last about ten minutes if it came to a fight against the military and the police.

    most of the military come from the rural whites…they wouldn’t fight against their brethren

    Read More
    • Replies: @dfordoom

    most of the military come from the rural whites…they wouldn’t fight against their brethren
     
    Some serious wishful thinking there. The military will obey whoever pays them.
  23. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Exhibit 1. The video from the Army/Navy game.

    Exhibit 2. Financial markets have voted vigorously in favor of the election outcome.

    Exhibit 3. The US dollar. The dollar spot index is up 3 to 4% since the election. https://www.bloomberg.com/quote/DXY:CUR

    Say what you want about elites or the deep state — they aren’t big on risk. Trump isn’t all that risky. He promised to spend more money on the military. And if he quits sending them into losing battles in the Middle East, whats not to like?

    Army just snapped a 14 year losing streak in their annual matchup. The Cubs won the series. Is the system ‘rigged’? Isn’t Trump proof that it isn’t rigged?

    The real danger to Trump is the Republican establishment. If they have any sense they will look back and see how poorly it worked out for them to trade LBJ for Kennedy. Consider swapping Trump for Pence/Ryan. If they actually got their entitlement reform and privatize Medicare and Social Security, that would prove less popular than the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Democrats lost the South forever. Old people vote.

    The US needs some strong economic growth and taking the shackles off ‘tight oil’ and actually encouraging the banks to lend money is a plausible path. Note that the Democrats and Elizabeth Warren are still trying to refight 2008. The best performing sector since the election has been financials. https://www.bloomberg.com/quote/BKX:IND

    or https://finance.yahoo.com/chart/%5EBKX#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%3D

    Most of it has to do with expectations of higher interest rates which will increase net interest margins. But when they tried to fix everything that lead to 2008, they also screwed the ‘near prime’ — which, surprise — was the same demographic that maps to the deplorable.

    And, FWIW, the bad guys in banking are all in the ‘shadow’ banking system — which aren’t the guys with the branch in the corner shopping center.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Could it be the Establishment backed Hillary cuz it thought she would win and would come after them if they backed Trump?

    Did the Estab really prefer Trump over Hillary?

    Could it be that the Democrats held the elites out of fear than enthusiasm?

    Fear is a big factor in behavior. Often, what seems like enthusiasm is just fear talking.

    But now that Hillary Witch is gone, it seems much of the Estab that backed Hillary is sighing with relief and loving it.

    They went from the swamp thing to beach partiers.
  24. @dfordoom

    If there was a war it would depend on who’s side heavily armed rural whites were on. That side would win imo.
     
    Those heavily armed rural whites would last about ten minutes if it came to a fight against the military and the police.

    Those heavily armed rural whites would last about ten minutes if it came to a fight against the military and the police.

    I wouldn’t bet too heavily. The Iraqi irregulars didn’t do too badly. Guerrilla warfare has evolved faster than conventional.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    Iraq is mostly desert with a few roads connecting distant population centers. Iraqi irregulars can immobilize the army by blocking individual roads, bridges and capturing key settlements.

    -
    Contrarian
    , @Almost Missouri
    Agree. I always point this out to people who mock the defense against tyranny aspect of the 2nd Amendment as being naïve versus a modern military: how did the world's best military do against third world guerillas over the last fifty years?

    Also, the terrain in Mesopotamia is flat and open: most favorable for a modern military, yet the guerillas still managed to hang on. Most of the US is not like that terrain.

    The true counter arguments are that third world guerrillas are less casualty-averse, younger, and their civil society is much less organized and so is much more dependent on order and will tolerate much to maintain it.

    , @in the middle
    The Talibans are beating mighty NATO. So the rural armed whites have a chance.
  25. In light of this:

    http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/military-enlistment-rates-by-state-and-region/

    It sounds like the modern US Army is more like the Army of Nothern Virginia than the Army of the Potomac. I doubt the leftist idiots at the WaPo will find any takers.

    Apparently the Obama Administration has taken notice:

    http://www.defense.gov/News/Article/Article/925081/force-of-the-future-aims-to-increase-militarys-geographic-diversity

    Read More
    • Replies: @International Jew

    In light of this:
    http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/military-enlistment-rates-by-state-and-region/
    It sounds like the modern US Army is more like the Army of Nothern Virginia
     
    Meh, so the range, across states, runs about from 3% to 7%. I expected much more. In a new War between the States, the old Confederacy would be even worse outnumbered than the first time around.

    In Israel, the rate of enlistment ranges from a low of about 70% in Tel Aviv to about 90% in some other places.

    , @Ryan C
    Yes, they prevented the chance of a successful coup by taking away conscription and through non-regional units.
    , @RonaldB
    Once you get to the point of actual hostilities, the dynamics change completely and it's very easy to lose. The biggest enemy of the Confederacy was Jefferson Davis, who carried out a military attack against a superior power and expected hostilities to just fade away.

    An inferior military power, to maintain an independent existence, has to learn to be diplomatic and to not threaten the nearby major military power, even if it means conceding marginal diplomatic or economic issues. The Ukraine is a major case in point. The Ukrainians supported a major (CIA-supported) coup which aligned the Ukraine against Russia, economically and militarily. Russia reacted to the threat in its close sphere of interest by sponsoring an independence movement in the Russian part of the Ukraine. This was perfectly predictable and perfectly preventable.

    So, if any movement to preserve the Constitution and the character of the US assumes all it has to do is take the gun off the wall and start blazing away, it's going to lose big time. The proper way to carry out a Revolution is to act to your strengths and avoid your weaknesses.
  26. @dfordoom

    If there was a war it would depend on who’s side heavily armed rural whites were on. That side would win imo.
     
    Those heavily armed rural whites would last about ten minutes if it came to a fight against the military and the police.

    Agree completely on the military. The police, eh, not so much.

    Read More
  27. @Glossy
    It seems that the CIA is the only armed part of the government that's anti-Trump. Unfortunately it's also the only one that has an extensive experience with coups.

    How deep does the anti-Trump sentiment go within the CIA? It could be just the director, but the disturbing thing is that the current director is a career CIA man. What if he's representative? I don't know. Egg McMuffin is a career spy and look at him.

    Who are the CIA's rank and file? The Hollywood stereotype is WASPs, but Hollywood lies a lot. I've heard there are a lot of Mormons there because they know foreign languages and can pass background tests due to their clean living.

    Normally, the world over, the people who choose careers in armed branches of the government are conservative and patriotic. If the CIA's rank and file isn't like that, why would that be?

    Normally, the world over, the people who choose careers in armed branches of the government are conservative and patriotic. If the CIA’s rank and file isn’t like that, why would that be?

    CIA recruits from the ranks most vulnerable to radicalization. During the cold war they focused on recruiting socialists because a cosmopolitan Red wouldn’t believe Mr. Honkey Bumpkin was interested in sacrificing for the international revolution whereas a historically oppressed brown guy from Southern California might be in it for the long haul.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri

    "CIA recruits from the ranks most vulnerable to radicalization."
     
    If you mean the non-Agency agents recruited by the Agency staff to do their bidding, then yes, but if you mean the decision-making Agency staff themselves, then I think, not so much.
  28. Any coup would not be mounted by the CIA or military. Rather, the Courts.

    Hillary is running out two strings. First, “the Russians hacked to back Trump” leading to some judge ruling her the “victor” in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and Florida and hence the next President. Bezos is all on board, he’s bet the farm on Hillary and Trump will hammer him silly for anti-trust and FTC violations.

    The second is as a poster here noted, “the Electoral College is racist. Or something.” So again a federal judge rules Hillary the victor.

    How would the Supremes rule? My guess a 5-3 split, with Roberts the Craven bowing down to his masters they way he did with ObamaCare.

    In America, the power has traditionally lain not with the military, where there was never any real danger of a coup, but the courts and media. Both arms are profoundly threatened by Trump, who seems likely to limit the courts and pack them with his friends, while pushing anti Trust against media monopolies and duopolies.

    The real issue is if Trump simply ignores the court ruling and Hillary tries to rally the military to arrest him or what have you. We can’t have forever an elite that loathes and despises its native people; sooner or later things will break.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lagertha
    Native people (today's native people for all you PC's) in this country, always win. Tons of Republicans just won. Elites that try to manipulate armed forces just lost big time...or are forever thought of as a parasitic and duplicitous entity that can not be trusted, ever - what ever they speak is wrong and harmful. Hillary is a sociopath, in my opinion. siiiiiiighhh, relief, siiiiiiighhhhhhhh. And, as some of you know, I have thought this for over 2 decades.
    , @RonaldB
    I think you have a point. However, the left got overconfident, and didn't begin to organize co-option by the courts early enough. They don't have enough time before the inauguration, and it would be obvious suicide to try to co-opt the Presidency once Trump is actually President. We may have dodged a major bullet; Obama has worked diligently to turn the military into establishment lap-dogs and to federalize the police, but figured Hillary would have at least 4 more years to complete the job. If he had dreamed that Trump would win, he might have pushed faster, and we'd be in far greater danger of an actual coup, initiated by the courts and supported by the security forces.
    , @Alden
    You are so right about the courts. The federal courts have ruled this country since 1804 (Marbury vs Madison) President Andrew Jackson made some noise about disregarding the court but he caved in as have all Presidents.

    Any coup will come from the federal courts. The federal courts are the supreme enemy of Whites. School desegregation, school busing, support for black on White crime and the destruction of our great cities and most of all, most of all affirmative action for retarded blacks browns and anything but White.

    Whatever the constitution says and whatever anyone thinks the founders intended, the federal courts rule the country.

    And for about 70 years, the federal courts have consistently ruled against Whites.
    , @whorefinder

    How would the Supremes rule? My guess a 5-3 split, with Roberts the Craven bowing down to his masters they way he did with ObamaCare
     
    One of Trump's duties down the road---after the first 100 days hullaballoo has past, and the wall is built, and illegals are frog marched to Gitmo---is to get someone to figure out the leverage Obama had on Roberts, get it, and then get Roberts to resign. It would be a huge media event (Roberts is young, he was expected to be the anti-leftist leader of the court for a half-century), but Roberts can blame it on a trumped-up medical condition. Trump tells Obama to keep his mouth shut or he'll reveal how Obama cheated and got Roberts to rule on Obamacare. Heck, Roberts could even say he feels that he "lost" the respect for the Supreme Court and feels guilty about it. Sweep that traitor out by any means, and replace him.

    And Kennedy. "Penumbras Live!" Kennedy. He needs to go next. He's enjoyed the power to declare dogs to be cats long enough. Out the door, traitor.

    In my dream world, he replaces them with Ann Coulter and Ann's personal favorite two picks (Ann gets Scalia's current empty seat). Ann gets appointed first female Chief Justice and the Left's heads explode. Roe v. Wade overturned, gay "marriage" overturned, concealed carry and open carry without a license now a constitutional right, Brown v. Board tossed, Civil Rights Act nullified for all except blacks.

    And then, in Trump's second term...

    Let a man dream, won't you?
  29. David Frum and the crowd at the Army/Navy game differ on Trump’s Americanness:

    Read More
    • Replies: @oh its just me too
    that would be hilarious if those cadets were reprimanded or penalized for being 'political' when, a few months ago, black female cadets posed in uniform with the black power salute and I think a black lives matter sign? which is a big enough offense to be expelled and sent to the brig, but got off without any penalty whatsoever.
    , @SFG
    Frum's not even American, he's Canadian.
    , @J.Ross
    Frum is, in keeing with tradition, using the idea of "American" and "an intelligence community worthy of the name" to very specifically mean "happily carrying water for a certain illegitimate statelet."
    , @Almost Missouri
    The casual way the pundit class calumnies the election and calls for the violent overthrow of the elected government is a little alarming. Last night pseudo-authority David Brooks was on PBS saying the Trump presidency may turn into an "authoritarian" state before the midterms. Like it's gonna be the Third Reich or something.

    You'd think that he--or at least his listeners--would be a little chastened by his unblemished record of 100% wrong predictions over the last 18 months. Not a bit of it.
    , @Ed
    I unfollowed Frum because he's just becoming stupid with his unhinged non-stop Trump criticism. Looks like it's doing wonders for him in terms of Twitter popularity though.
  30. @whorefinder
    The problem is that the federal policing agencies---the FBI, the ATFE, the CIA---have all been converged by the Left. They are loyal to the state only, not the people. Look at the CIA in the last few days covering for Hillary and making up Russian nonsense, or Comey covering for Clinton in July, or the ATFE running guns for Holder and keeping it quiet.

    Do not trust federal police agencies.

    In Animal Farm , Orwell made the distinction between the armies (the regular animals) and the secret police (the dogs). The regular animals overthrew the farmers, but Napoleon the Pig steals the puppies from their mother early, trains them in secret in the attic, and then, when the animals are starting to question the Pigs autocratic ways, he releases the now-fully grown and vicious dogs on the animals to police them and violently attack them if necessary.

    The animals fully roll over to the dogs' (and the pigs') control.

    It was a metaphor for Stalin's KGB being used on the Soviet people after their armies had overthrown the Czar. And also for how the German army fully rolled over and obeyed the Nazi SS (although, to the German army's credit, it strongly opposed Ernest Rohm's Brownshirt squads, probably leading to the old fairy's death).

    In short, the Left has been quite successful in taking over countries using the secret police. The armies are, to their detriment, largely made up of men used to obeying those in power. The few rabble rousers among them would be rooted out by the feds if the Left ever made a move.

    The Left, however, doesn't think it has enough in the feds to make it work; hence the recent efforts to federalize the local police forces across the country, under the guise of "reforming" them and "making them less racist."

    All great points.

    Also, Animals is probably the best Pink Floyd album.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ATX Hipster
    Agreed. One of my favorite running jokes in early South Park episodes was Cartman triumphantly saying "Haha, charade you are!" when he believed he had turned the tables on an opponent.
  31. Judging from the reaction to Trump’s arrival at today’s Army / Navy football game among military cadets, young military officers wouldn’t be on board.

    which is why the US government has been going crazy trying to replace white male cadets with minorities/women of color.

    I have tried to tell people outside the steve-o-sphere that whenever the elite replaces the office corps of the nation there is only one reason- to turn the military against nation.

    “oh no it’s for diversity’ the coo….

    Read More
  32. @EdwardM
    Heavily armed rural whites will always be outgunned by the government. I think that what it would come down to is whether the white soldiers and lower-level officers who come from these communities would obey orders to fire on their friends. It could go either way.

    I like to play out what would happen if/when the government decides to confiscate firearms door-to-door like in Australia. Despite the noble cries of "from my cold dead hands," I don't think that most responsible gun owners would really take it to that level when the SWAT team shows up. It will all come down to whether the ATF/FBI agents obey orders. I guess the Feds will marshal the agents from Boston and San Francisco field offices to go to Alabama and Wyoming to carry out the task to improve their odds. I wouldn't count on resistance to succeed, though it could get messy.

    No doubt the left is acutely aware of this risk, hence their efforts to eviscerate the cultures of the military and federal police forces, and to try to nationalize local police departments. A few more generations of their recruitment, social programming, human capital management, and purges, and they may succeed.

    Yeah, and Afghanis with Mausers can never stop the US.

    All it takes is one good ambush and cops would tell the bureaucrats “You do it”.

    Read More
  33. @whorefinder
    The problem is that the federal policing agencies---the FBI, the ATFE, the CIA---have all been converged by the Left. They are loyal to the state only, not the people. Look at the CIA in the last few days covering for Hillary and making up Russian nonsense, or Comey covering for Clinton in July, or the ATFE running guns for Holder and keeping it quiet.

    Do not trust federal police agencies.

    In Animal Farm , Orwell made the distinction between the armies (the regular animals) and the secret police (the dogs). The regular animals overthrew the farmers, but Napoleon the Pig steals the puppies from their mother early, trains them in secret in the attic, and then, when the animals are starting to question the Pigs autocratic ways, he releases the now-fully grown and vicious dogs on the animals to police them and violently attack them if necessary.

    The animals fully roll over to the dogs' (and the pigs') control.

    It was a metaphor for Stalin's KGB being used on the Soviet people after their armies had overthrown the Czar. And also for how the German army fully rolled over and obeyed the Nazi SS (although, to the German army's credit, it strongly opposed Ernest Rohm's Brownshirt squads, probably leading to the old fairy's death).

    In short, the Left has been quite successful in taking over countries using the secret police. The armies are, to their detriment, largely made up of men used to obeying those in power. The few rabble rousers among them would be rooted out by the feds if the Left ever made a move.

    The Left, however, doesn't think it has enough in the feds to make it work; hence the recent efforts to federalize the local police forces across the country, under the guise of "reforming" them and "making them less racist."

    Being on the inside of the FedGov LE apparatus, I can safely say you’re painting with a huge brush that has no basis in reality.

    Read More
    • Replies: @whorefinder

    Being on the inside of the FedGov LE apparatus, I can safely say you’re painting with a huge brush that has no basis in reality.
     
    Oh yeah, you secret police are the good guys.

    Let me know when your boss Comey's done shredding the last of Hillary's files to prevent prosecution, ok?
    , @Desiderius
    What's your sense, Jack H.?
  34. @Cagey Beast
    David Frum and the crowd at the Army/Navy game differ on Trump's Americanness:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KS8iNaFKxt4

    https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/807455330066202624

    https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/807463790736347136

    https://twitter.com/EmilyEab1998/status/807759145327792132

    that would be hilarious if those cadets were reprimanded or penalized for being ‘political’ when, a few months ago, black female cadets posed in uniform with the black power salute and I think a black lives matter sign? which is a big enough offense to be expelled and sent to the brig, but got off without any penalty whatsoever.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius

    that would be hilarious if those cadets were reprimanded or penalized for being ‘political’ when
     
    There's too many of them.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8h_v_our_Q
  35. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @anon
    Exhibit 1. The video from the Army/Navy game.

    Exhibit 2. Financial markets have voted vigorously in favor of the election outcome.

    Exhibit 3. The US dollar. The dollar spot index is up 3 to 4% since the election. https://www.bloomberg.com/quote/DXY:CUR

    Say what you want about elites or the deep state -- they aren't big on risk. Trump isn't all that risky. He promised to spend more money on the military. And if he quits sending them into losing battles in the Middle East, whats not to like?

    Army just snapped a 14 year losing streak in their annual matchup. The Cubs won the series. Is the system 'rigged'? Isn't Trump proof that it isn't rigged?

    The real danger to Trump is the Republican establishment. If they have any sense they will look back and see how poorly it worked out for them to trade LBJ for Kennedy. Consider swapping Trump for Pence/Ryan. If they actually got their entitlement reform and privatize Medicare and Social Security, that would prove less popular than the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Democrats lost the South forever. Old people vote.

    The US needs some strong economic growth and taking the shackles off 'tight oil' and actually encouraging the banks to lend money is a plausible path. Note that the Democrats and Elizabeth Warren are still trying to refight 2008. The best performing sector since the election has been financials. https://www.bloomberg.com/quote/BKX:IND

    or https://finance.yahoo.com/chart/%5EBKX#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%3D

    Most of it has to do with expectations of higher interest rates which will increase net interest margins. But when they tried to fix everything that lead to 2008, they also screwed the 'near prime' -- which, surprise -- was the same demographic that maps to the deplorable.

    And, FWIW, the bad guys in banking are all in the 'shadow' banking system -- which aren't the guys with the branch in the corner shopping center.

    Could it be the Establishment backed Hillary cuz it thought she would win and would come after them if they backed Trump?

    Did the Estab really prefer Trump over Hillary?

    Could it be that the Democrats held the elites out of fear than enthusiasm?

    Fear is a big factor in behavior. Often, what seems like enthusiasm is just fear talking.

    But now that Hillary Witch is gone, it seems much of the Estab that backed Hillary is sighing with relief and loving it.

    They went from the swamp thing to beach partiers.

    Read More
  36. NO COMMENTS = FAKE NEWS
    This is how we take over the “fake news” forced-meme and turn it true.
    Remember when every mainstream news site had a comments section? Remember disrespectful peanut gallery denizens pointing out that the story they were commenting on was a lie? And then proving it with a hyperlink.
    And then no mainstream news site had a comments section.
    NO COMMENTS = FAKE NEWS
    Next time an office-mate tries to tell you about a “trending” story, ask if the site he or she got it from allows comments, then explain why that matters.
    NO COMMENTS = FAKE NEWS

    Read More
    • Agree: Almost Missouri, TWS
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    But of course the Left has used and still uses Potemkin comments section where dissent is quickly deleted, but the appearance of a legitimate comments section remains. Fake Comments for Fake News, one might say.
    , @Chief Seattle
    Agree completely. No Comments = Fake News.

    If the management isn't confident enough to get feedback from readers then it's just propaganda. Exhibit A is how the NYT only allows comments for a few "pile on the evil republican" stories, and even then they sometimes get burned by the independence of their readers.

    Say what you will about WaPo, but at least they allow comments. And if you read those comments during the election, you could see clearly the strength of the support for Trump, even among the somewhat limited demographic of readers of a legacy prestige publication.
  37. @Cagey Beast
    David Frum and the crowd at the Army/Navy game differ on Trump's Americanness:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KS8iNaFKxt4

    https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/807455330066202624

    https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/807463790736347136

    https://twitter.com/EmilyEab1998/status/807759145327792132

    Frum’s not even American, he’s Canadian.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    Yes exactly. I always find it funny how he shamelessly drums other people out of their own countries and institutions. I can remember him even ruling Edmund Burke beyond the acceptable bounds of conservatism due to his anti-Semitism! What's Canadian for "chutzpah"?
    , @Opinionator
    The chutzpah is just astonishing.
    , @David In TN
    "Frum's not even American, he's Canadian."

    And he would call people descended from the 17th and 18th Century pioneers "unpatriotic" for opposing what turned out to be a disastrous war.

  38. @Cagey Beast
    David Frum and the crowd at the Army/Navy game differ on Trump's Americanness:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KS8iNaFKxt4

    https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/807455330066202624

    https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/807463790736347136

    https://twitter.com/EmilyEab1998/status/807759145327792132

    Frum is, in keeing with tradition, using the idea of “American” and “an intelligence community worthy of the name” to very specifically mean “happily carrying water for a certain illegitimate statelet.”

    Read More
  39. Washington Post Brainstorming About a Coup

    What a pretty pass we’ve come to as a nation when this can not only be said, but be said accurately.

    The MSM, and their owners, are the only enemies of this once-great nation worth worrying about.

    Read More
  40. It was around 1995, a navy lieutenant recently separated from the service and going on to other things said to a small group of friends, “Military people are not politically monolithic. You’ll find every sort of opinion on things like abortion or gun control. There’s really only one thing they all agree on: We all hate Clinton.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @cthulhu
    And they hate Hillary in particular, likely because of the clear hate she has for them. I know somebody who was in a position to observe HRC's treatment of military and Secret Service personnel in the '90s; this person corroborated the rumors you've heard and reports you've read - and then some. My understanding is that the typical feelings about WJC were more ambivalent.
  41. @SFG
    Frum's not even American, he's Canadian.

    Yes exactly. I always find it funny how he shamelessly drums other people out of their own countries and institutions. I can remember him even ruling Edmund Burke beyond the acceptable bounds of conservatism due to his anti-Semitism! What’s Canadian for “chutzpah”?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Richard S

    What’s Canadian for “chutzpah”?
     
    "Moxie, eh?" ;)
  42. anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @bomag

    Those heavily armed rural whites would last about ten minutes if it came to a fight against the military and the police.
     
    I wouldn't bet too heavily. The Iraqi irregulars didn't do too badly. Guerrilla warfare has evolved faster than conventional.

    Iraq is mostly desert with a few roads connecting distant population centers. Iraqi irregulars can immobilize the army by blocking individual roads, bridges and capturing key settlements.

    -
    Contrarian

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Plutonium Kid
    America has plenty of terrain where guerrilla warfare would work, and even in urban areas hit-and-run tactics can work. Look at the Symbionese Liberation Army. The managed to last more than two years, with some members running around loose as late as 2002, and they didn't even have much popular support.
  43. @Whoever
    Most definitely would not be on board with any coup or other treason against our country.

    HAVING BEEN APPOINTED A MIDSHIPMAN IN THE UNITED STATES NAVY, I
    SOLEMNLY SWEAR THAT I WILL SUPPORT AND DEFEND THE
    CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES AGAINST ALL ENEMIES, FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC; THAT I WILL BEAR TRUE FAITH AND ALLEGIANCE TO THE SAME; THAT I TAKE THIS OBLIGATION FREELY, WITHOUT ANY MENTAL RESERVATION OR PURPOSE OF EVASION; AND THAT I WILL WELL AND FAITHFULLY DISCHARGE THE DUTIES OF THE OFFICE ON WHICH I AM ABOUT TO ENTER, SO HELP ME GOD.

    Wow. The Constitution.

    So tell me, what do Russians and Jews pledge their allegiance to?

    Israel doesn’t have a Constitution and I just can’t see the Russians pledging their lives and sacred honor to preserve a piece of paper.

    Do they pledge themselves to fight and defend their nation? Their people? Their land?

    I am a married man, but I would never plead undying loyalty to my marriage license.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Karl
    > Israel doesn’t have a Constitution


    not a suingle peice of paper, no. There are Basic LAws.

    IDF & gendarmarie ("Border Police") recruits swear to defend the State of Israel with their body.
    , @Whoever

    Wow. The Constitution.
     
    Yes, indeed: Wow!! The Constitution!!! (ノ^ヮ^)ノ*:・゚✧

    So tell me, what do Russians and Jews pledge their allegiance to?
     
    Being neither a Russian nor a Jew, I wouldn't know. ◉ _ ◉

    I am a married man, but I would never plead [sic] undying loyalty to my marriage license.
     
    Is the constitution America's marriage license -- or its marriage vows? (◔ૂ◔)
    , @International Jew
    This page has a pretty good translation of the words Israel's soldiers recite at their swearing-in ceremony.

    https://m.facebook.com/notes/avi-mayer/the-idf-oath-of-allegiance/10150799554558717/
  44. @dfordoom

    If there was a war it would depend on who’s side heavily armed rural whites were on. That side would win imo.
     
    Those heavily armed rural whites would last about ten minutes if it came to a fight against the military and the police.

    Which is why Afghanistan is a settled protectorate.

    Lmbo

    Read More
  45. @taco
    A successful coup in the United States wouldn't look like the Turkey coup at all.

    What they would do is assassinate the President, and possibly simultaneously assassinate the Vice President. The exact circumstances depend on a number of factors. They may want to feel out the VP for a year or two and see if he will play ball. If he will, then he is the replacement. If not, they will take him out too.

    Hypothesize that Air Force One is shot down or crashes while the President and Vice President are aboard. The Secret Service at the point would basically take the speaker of the house into custody. Whatever intelligence agents and generals were around the speaker at that moment would basically be in charge of the country. They could feed the speaker whatever "intelligence" they wanted to, and in that environment, the new president wouldn't have the means to do any independent analysis at all.

    "Mr. President, it turns out the previous president and vice president were making a deal with Russia to do XYZ, and the deal fell through, so the Russians had them killed. The following members of the administration should be considered suspicous: the attorney general, the secretary of state, this general, that admiral, etc."

    If they could make it look like an accident or a lone wolf job that might be even better. But if they can tie it to some perceived enemy, they can isolate the incoming president, and get him to execute an emergency purge of the government.

    I believe that this is how any coup would go down.

    The problem with such a coup is that there are something like 17 intelligence agencies currently operating in the United States. This type of thing would require broad consent across all 17 intelligence agencies that the current administration is so dangerous to the current paradigm that immediate action has to be taken, at high risk to everyone involved.

    If the Kennedy assassination was a coup (and I'm not saying it was) then it probably looked something like this.

    If we hypothesize that Kennedy was a coup, ask yourself: who won, the army, or the well armed ruralites? And the answer is: there was never an armed confrontation because the coup was achieved without anyone realizing it was a coup.

    To reiterate: I am not saying and I do not believe that the CIA killed Kennedy. I suppose it is certainly possible that that is what happened (its also possible that Obama was born in Kenya, Bush had inside knowledge of 9/11, and Russians hacked voting machines in Wisconsin) but I do not believe it is the most likely explanation.

    “The problem with such a coup is that there are something like 17 intelligence agencies currently operating in the United States.”

    The other problem for a coup is that most of those agencies’ track records does not inspire confidence in their competence.

    Though I suppose it would be fitting in a way that ne’er-do-wells who couldn’t knock off a tin pot dictator 90 miles off shore and who couldn’t ice a stone age religious fanatic in a lawless country would finally be in their element executing a massive demolition of the semi-constitutional order beneath their own feet.

    Read More
    • Replies: @taco

    The other problem for a coup is that most of those agencies’ track records does not inspire confidence in their competence.
    Though I suppose it would be fitting in a way that ne’er-do-wells who couldn’t knock off a tin pot dictator 90 miles off shore and who couldn’t ice a stone age religious fanatic in a lawless country
     
    Did it really never occur to you that endless war was their goal, in both of those situations? A quick and relatively bloodless foreign policy success does not go a long way toward increasing the budget of intelligence agencies.

    I'm sure that if those intelligence agencies were truly motivated to accomplish something they could probably do it.
  46. I’m old enough to remember when the Democratic Party mocked anyone who said that Russia was a geopolitical foe “Hey Mitt Romney, the 1980s called, it wants its foreign policy back”. That was the official position of the Democratic Party 4 years ago.

    I’m also old enough to remember a time when anyone who suggested that an election might be rigged or interfered with was a crank and a crockpot who was threatening the very fabric of our Democracy and undermining the most sacred peaceful transfer of power. That was almost 2 months ago, so not everyone remembers it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lagertha
    I'm old enough to remember, too.

    Just say to those people: I fart in your general direction.
  47. @Almost Missouri

    "The problem with such a coup is that there are something like 17 intelligence agencies currently operating in the United States."
     
    The other problem for a coup is that most of those agencies' track records does not inspire confidence in their competence.

    Though I suppose it would be fitting in a way that ne'er-do-wells who couldn't knock off a tin pot dictator 90 miles off shore and who couldn't ice a stone age religious fanatic in a lawless country would finally be in their element executing a massive demolition of the semi-constitutional order beneath their own feet.

    The other problem for a coup is that most of those agencies’ track records does not inspire confidence in their competence.
    Though I suppose it would be fitting in a way that ne’er-do-wells who couldn’t knock off a tin pot dictator 90 miles off shore and who couldn’t ice a stone age religious fanatic in a lawless country

    Did it really never occur to you that endless war was their goal, in both of those situations? A quick and relatively bloodless foreign policy success does not go a long way toward increasing the budget of intelligence agencies.

    I’m sure that if those intelligence agencies were truly motivated to accomplish something they could probably do it.

    Read More
  48. @bomag

    Those heavily armed rural whites would last about ten minutes if it came to a fight against the military and the police.
     
    I wouldn't bet too heavily. The Iraqi irregulars didn't do too badly. Guerrilla warfare has evolved faster than conventional.

    Agree. I always point this out to people who mock the defense against tyranny aspect of the 2nd Amendment as being naïve versus a modern military: how did the world’s best military do against third world guerillas over the last fifty years?

    Also, the terrain in Mesopotamia is flat and open: most favorable for a modern military, yet the guerillas still managed to hang on. Most of the US is not like that terrain.

    The true counter arguments are that third world guerrillas are less casualty-averse, younger, and their civil society is much less organized and so is much more dependent on order and will tolerate much to maintain it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @International Jew

    how did the world’s best military do against third world guerillas over the last fifty years?
     
    I hate to tell you, but those guerrillas have been willing to make stunning sacrifices. No, I'm not at all sympathetic to their causes but a suicide bomber is anything but "cowardly" (as our boilerplate goes).

    Americans have surrendered their great cities, or at least major swaths of them— Detroit, St Louis, Baltimore — to disorganized and lightly armed "teenagers". Stand up to cops or the army? Gimme a break.
    , @anon

    Agree. I always point this out to people who mock the defense against tyranny aspect of the 2nd Amendment as being naïve versus a modern military: how did the world’s best military do against third world guerillas over the last fifty years?
     
    The world's best military would make short work of "third world guerrillas" in a war situation. Unfortunately, they don't do as well in "police actions" which is what our military has been misapplied towards for the last 50 years.

    Germany, for example, had few problems with French guerilla's for the majority of time that they occupied France during WWII. If a guerrilla shot a German soldier, the Germans would walk into local shops on the street of the shooting, take out 10 random French into the middle of the street, execute them, and promise to do it again the next time some Frenchman got spunky. That stopped guerrilla activity very quickly. The German's weren't special. That's the way guerrilla's have been handled since forever. That's why there's not a lot of war stories featuring them. They don't work well with an invading army during an actual war.

    In "police actions," however, we can't/won't do that, so under those very constrained circumstances they as happy and active as jungle monkeys. But in an existential war, guerilla's aren't a problem for any significant occupying military, as long as the guerilla's have family and friends they care about. And they always do.
    , @Almost Missouri
    That last sentence should read:

    "The true counter arguments are that third world guerrillas are less casualty-averse, younger, and their civil society is much less organized than the first world's, which is much more dependent on order and will tolerate much to maintain it."

    Getting sloppy. And I wasn't even drinking last night.

    , @gcochran
    Just think of all the examples where local patriots threw out the Germans or Japanese in WWII.

    Shouldn't take long.
  49. Tucker Carlson interviewed the neoconservative queen Jennifer Rubin on his new Fox show last night. I have never seen a host surprise and then humiliate a guest as thoroughly as he did. He quoted from her opinion column in the Washington Post about Trump’s racist and anti-immigrant white male voters. The look on her face at as the piece ended was precious. If someone could post the video it would be highly entertaining.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    "Tucker Carlson interviewed the neoconservative queen Jennifer Rubin on his new Fox show last night. I have never seen a host surprise and then humiliate a guest as thoroughly as he did. He quoted from her opinion column in the Washington Post about Trump’s racist and anti-immigrant white male voters. The look on her face at as the piece ended was precious. If someone could post the video it would be highly entertaining."

    That one was okay:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3rwuhKQTWs

    But this one's better:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08axobwoiz4

    , @Anon
    I was never a follower or particular fan of Tucker Carlson, but his show is pretty entertaining with these people who, for some reason, choose to appear. It's like shooting fish in a barrel, but Tucker enjoys shooting fish in a barrel:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dH-ug5XgA1M

    That said, I think YouTube is probably what cost Hillary FAR more than "fake news." Watching negroes acting up while they themselves gleefully film it, over and over again, watching hardcore libs contradict themselves with no self-consciousness repeatedly, while demanding we dismiss our lying eyes, as well as tons of Cspan hearings in which dems are left sputtering under acute examination is FAR more instructive and motivating for an internet coherent voter.

    If Libs want an advantage, they should move to eliminate Cspan uploads to Youtube. It allows people who wouldn't ordinarily have the time to sit through congressional hearings to watch the most important moments for themselves. This was bad for Hillary. VERY bad.

    A casual Youtube viewer can just put "Trey Gowdy" in the search box, and be amazed for hours, without any pundit trying to spin it one way or another. That's what's killing the democrats, more than anything else. Censoring "fake news' won't help them. Only censoring Youtube, LiveLeak, and Worldstar HipHop can help them now, and I don't think that will be happening.

    Here's a taste of Trey Gowdy on Cspan. There's tons of video featuring Trey Gowdy reeming not just dems, but anyone who might be an asshole. The guy is like George Baily with a headache:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxmuNS6azaA

  50. @Cagey Beast
    David Frum and the crowd at the Army/Navy game differ on Trump's Americanness:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KS8iNaFKxt4

    https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/807455330066202624

    https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/807463790736347136

    https://twitter.com/EmilyEab1998/status/807759145327792132

    The casual way the pundit class calumnies the election and calls for the violent overthrow of the elected government is a little alarming. Last night pseudo-authority David Brooks was on PBS saying the Trump presidency may turn into an “authoritarian” state before the midterms. Like it’s gonna be the Third Reich or something.

    You’d think that he–or at least his listeners–would be a little chastened by his unblemished record of 100% wrong predictions over the last 18 months. Not a bit of it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res

    You’d think that he–or at least his listeners–would be a little chastened by his unblemished record of 100% wrong predictions over the last 18 months. Not a bit of it.
     
    Pretty much any response to predictions by people like that should begin with: "So why should I expect your prediction of X to be any more accurate than your prediction of the election outcome?"
  51. @sanjoaquinsam

    Normally, the world over, the people who choose careers in armed branches of the government are conservative and patriotic. If the CIA’s rank and file isn’t like that, why would that be?

     

    CIA recruits from the ranks most vulnerable to radicalization. During the cold war they focused on recruiting socialists because a cosmopolitan Red wouldn't believe Mr. Honkey Bumpkin was interested in sacrificing for the international revolution whereas a historically oppressed brown guy from Southern California might be in it for the long haul.

    “CIA recruits from the ranks most vulnerable to radicalization.”

    If you mean the non-Agency agents recruited by the Agency staff to do their bidding, then yes, but if you mean the decision-making Agency staff themselves, then I think, not so much.

    Read More
  52. anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    “The problem with such a coup is that there are something like 17 intelligence agencies currently operating in the United States.”

    In a silicon valley lunch conversation with some smart guys from all over the world, the issue of why coups were relatively rare in the English-speaking (British descended) world came up. A Serbian guy was particularly concerned; if the central government fell apart, would the country be lost to chaos?

    One of my guesses as to why a classic coup is so unlikely in the traditional anglo-sphere (aside from immense accumulated cultural and social trust capital) is the prominent roles that relatively independent counties and sheriffs play. The sheriff’s office goes back a long way, over a thousand years.

    Isn’t the sheriff ultimately responsible for maintaining the peace and function of the county? If you wanted to raise a militia, or the military wanted to impose marital law, wouldn’t the sheriff have something to say about that? The sheriff isn’t in the Federal government’s direct chain of command:

    Sheriffs in the United States:

    “…is responsible for keeping the peace and enforcing the law…

    Elected sheriffs are accountable directly to the constitution of their state, the United States Constitution, statutes, and the citizens of their county.

    There are lots of large, armed sheriffs departments out there. The military might have the bombs, but the sheriff has the women and children. And the power to deputize posses:

    “…Arizona is unique in that many sheriff’s offices have formed semi-permanent posse units which can be operated as a reserve to the main deputized force under a variety of circumstances…”

    Posse comitatus:

    “The common-law… authority of a county sheriff… to conscript any able-bodied man to assist him in keeping the peace or to pursue and arrest a felon, similar to the concept of the “hue and cry.” Originally found in English common law, it is generally obsolete; however, it survives in the United States, where it is the law enforcement equivalent of summoning the militia for military purposes.”

    It’s not happening here. (Unless the Black Death Zombie horde kills 90% of the population.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Another Canadian
    During the War of 1812 Ontario sheriffs frequently executed warrants issued by a local judge for the arrest of those suspected of treason against the Crown. Sheriffs can work for or against The Establishment but your point is sound, sheriffs operate outside of the federal chain of command. In a US military coup a sheriff might define treason as actions against the Constitution or actions against some General Handgrenade, depending on his political viewpoint and that of his local constituency. That's how civil wars turn ugly fast, just ask the United Empire Loyalists about the collapse in the southern colonies. It's no coincidence they drink sweet tea in Toronto.
    , @Anon
    You get stability in a society when you have achieved X. X is the percentage of white alpha males in a population with a minimum IQ of 100 who understand why you need to maintain public order in a society for that public's own good. When a threat to society emerges, they group together, act in concert, close in, and wipe out the threat. (Trump vs. Hillary, e.g.)

    The biological success of white males over the last 2000 years (or further, if you want to take it back to the Indo-Europeans) is not an accident. There appear to be genes in the white population that are specific for building sophisticated societies and other complex social constructs. They aren't just good at nation-building. They're good at business-building. They're good at culture-building. They're good at transmitting their knowledge. Without these genes, browns-skinned people struggle with the success of Sisyphus to make their own countries work, and black-skinned people see their white-built societies fall apart like sandcastles (e.g. Detroit.)

    Without a minimum IQ level and willingness to put aside differences and cooperate with each other for the society's own good, the nation-state doesn't work. Other peoples just operate like big tribes who are in it for themselves, and whose commerce is at the local-market-booth level.
  53. @SFG
    Frum's not even American, he's Canadian.

    “Frum’s not even American, he’s Canadian.”

    And he would call people descended from the 17th and 18th Century pioneers “unpatriotic” for opposing what turned out to be a disastrous war.

    Read More
  54. @Tiny Duck
    You guys need to get out of your bubble

    Go search for Angel Rye and Charles Blowa and observe how they DESTROY white conservatives

    I hope you know sites like this will be shut down in the near future. I was watching CNN today and people are angry about white nationalists and fake news.

    You guys are responsible for DYlan Roof and will be held accountable

    Tiny, you goofed, that was something you were supposed to post after Hillary won.

    Read More
  55. @NorthOfTheOneOhOne
    In light of this:

    http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/military-enlistment-rates-by-state-and-region/

    It sounds like the modern US Army is more like the Army of Nothern Virginia than the Army of the Potomac. I doubt the leftist idiots at the WaPo will find any takers.

    Apparently the Obama Administration has taken notice:

    http://www.defense.gov/News/Article/Article/925081/force-of-the-future-aims-to-increase-militarys-geographic-diversity

    In light of this:

    http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/military-enlistment-rates-by-state-and-region/

    It sounds like the modern US Army is more like the Army of Nothern Virginia

    Meh, so the range, across states, runs about from 3% to 7%. I expected much more. In a new War between the States, the old Confederacy would be even worse outnumbered than the first time around.

    In Israel, the rate of enlistment ranges from a low of about 70% in Tel Aviv to about 90% in some other places.

    Read More
  56. @Almost Missouri
    Agree. I always point this out to people who mock the defense against tyranny aspect of the 2nd Amendment as being naïve versus a modern military: how did the world's best military do against third world guerillas over the last fifty years?

    Also, the terrain in Mesopotamia is flat and open: most favorable for a modern military, yet the guerillas still managed to hang on. Most of the US is not like that terrain.

    The true counter arguments are that third world guerrillas are less casualty-averse, younger, and their civil society is much less organized and so is much more dependent on order and will tolerate much to maintain it.

    how did the world’s best military do against third world guerillas over the last fifty years?

    I hate to tell you, but those guerrillas have been willing to make stunning sacrifices. No, I’m not at all sympathetic to their causes but a suicide bomber is anything but “cowardly” (as our boilerplate goes).

    Americans have surrendered their great cities, or at least major swaths of them— Detroit, St Louis, Baltimore — to disorganized and lightly armed “teenagers”. Stand up to cops or the army? Gimme a break.

    Read More
    • Replies: @bomag

    Americans have surrendered their great cities...
     
    We are an age and people that prizes avoidance of conflict. This could change pretty rapidly.
    , @dfordoom

    I hate to tell you, but those guerrillas have been willing to make stunning sacrifices. No, I’m not at all sympathetic to their causes but a suicide bomber is anything but “cowardly” (as our boilerplate goes).
     
    Yep. Americans are not going to be either desperate enough or fanatical enough to make those sacrifices. They're also going to know that if they pick the losing side they can look forward to spending the rest of their lives in Guantanamo Bay. And knowing their families will be left destitute. No way are they going to be motivated enough to make those kinds of sacrifices.

    Americans have surrendered their great cities, or at least major swaths of them— Detroit, St Louis, Baltimore — to disorganized and lightly armed “teenagers”. Stand up to cops or the army? Gimme a break.
     
    Exactly. I'm not knocking Americans here - no European in a First World country would have that kind of motivation.
  57. @taco
    A successful coup in the United States wouldn't look like the Turkey coup at all.

    What they would do is assassinate the President, and possibly simultaneously assassinate the Vice President. The exact circumstances depend on a number of factors. They may want to feel out the VP for a year or two and see if he will play ball. If he will, then he is the replacement. If not, they will take him out too.

    Hypothesize that Air Force One is shot down or crashes while the President and Vice President are aboard. The Secret Service at the point would basically take the speaker of the house into custody. Whatever intelligence agents and generals were around the speaker at that moment would basically be in charge of the country. They could feed the speaker whatever "intelligence" they wanted to, and in that environment, the new president wouldn't have the means to do any independent analysis at all.

    "Mr. President, it turns out the previous president and vice president were making a deal with Russia to do XYZ, and the deal fell through, so the Russians had them killed. The following members of the administration should be considered suspicous: the attorney general, the secretary of state, this general, that admiral, etc."

    If they could make it look like an accident or a lone wolf job that might be even better. But if they can tie it to some perceived enemy, they can isolate the incoming president, and get him to execute an emergency purge of the government.

    I believe that this is how any coup would go down.

    The problem with such a coup is that there are something like 17 intelligence agencies currently operating in the United States. This type of thing would require broad consent across all 17 intelligence agencies that the current administration is so dangerous to the current paradigm that immediate action has to be taken, at high risk to everyone involved.

    If the Kennedy assassination was a coup (and I'm not saying it was) then it probably looked something like this.

    If we hypothesize that Kennedy was a coup, ask yourself: who won, the army, or the well armed ruralites? And the answer is: there was never an armed confrontation because the coup was achieved without anyone realizing it was a coup.

    To reiterate: I am not saying and I do not believe that the CIA killed Kennedy. I suppose it is certainly possible that that is what happened (its also possible that Obama was born in Kenya, Bush had inside knowledge of 9/11, and Russians hacked voting machines in Wisconsin) but I do not believe it is the most likely explanation.

    On Nov. 2, 1963 President Kennedy was scheduled to attend the Army-Air Force football game at Soldier Field, Chicago.

    Before Nov. 2, 1963 the Secret Service was tipped off by a woman, who owned a boarding house, that three “dark” snipers had rented a room in her establishment and were “loaded for bear.” The SS picked these 3 characters (Cubans?) up and found out that they were on the CIA payroll. These 3 ratted out a “mentally deranged” ex-military guy by the name of Thomas Arthur Vallee, who was supposed to take a pot-shot at Kennedy from his printing-shop window (where he was employed), up in a Chicago office building, along the presidential parade route from the airport to the final destination of the football field.

    From the elevated sniper’s nest of the print shop, Vallee was put in place (by the CIA?, by the Pentagon?) to shoot Kennedy when he stepped out of his car to greet a group of school kids, waiting to meet him below, at street-level. If Vallee missed, street-level shooters (presumably the 3 “dark” snipers) would then have a “good try” at Kennedy.

    The SS insisted that the President cancel his Chicago trip, with only about 30 minutes to go before Air Force One would have departed for Chicago on Nov. 2, 1963. The SS later released the three “dark” snipers without charging them. Vallee was picked up on Nov. 2, 1963 (after Kennedy’s Chicago trip had been canceled) by 2 Chicago PD detectives with deep FBI connections. Vallee was arrested by the 2 Chicago PD detectives on city firearms charges but lated released, after all charges against Vallee were suddenly dropped soon after Nov. 2, 1963.

    After Nov. 2, 1963, Kennedy announced, at his last press conference, that he was pulling 1,000 military men out of South Vietnam, reducing US forces there to a total of 15,000. Then came Nov. 22, 1963 in Dallas. Lee Harvey Oswald, who claimed he was “just a patsy,” was silenced forever by Jack Ruby on Nov. 24, 1963.

    By Dec, 1, 1963, President Johnson had canceled Kennedy’s November, 1963 S. Vietnam, US forces reduction order, choosing rather to gradually increase the number of US forces in South Vietnam during 1964.

    Thomas Arthur Vallee of Chicago, Illinois could have had class, he could have been a contender! Thomas Arthur Vallee of Chicago, Illinois : THE PATSY WHO NEVER WAS!

    Read More
  58. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @O'Hara in Philly
    Tucker Carlson interviewed the neoconservative queen Jennifer Rubin on his new Fox show last night. I have never seen a host surprise and then humiliate a guest as thoroughly as he did. He quoted from her opinion column in the Washington Post about Trump's racist and anti-immigrant white male voters. The look on her face at as the piece ended was precious. If someone could post the video it would be highly entertaining.

    “Tucker Carlson interviewed the neoconservative queen Jennifer Rubin on his new Fox show last night. I have never seen a host surprise and then humiliate a guest as thoroughly as he did. He quoted from her opinion column in the Washington Post about Trump’s racist and anti-immigrant white male voters. The look on her face at as the piece ended was precious. If someone could post the video it would be highly entertaining.”

    That one was okay:

    But this one’s better:

    Read More
  59. If hypothetically factions within the military and security agencies decided to launch a coup in the USA, how would it likely play through ? Would it be dud like the Turkey coup, would it work but most people shrug their shoulders and go on with their lives like in Thailand or would it end into an intractable civil war like in Syria ?

    It would have to involve the successful assassination or disappearance of PotUS (assuming we’re talking about a federal coup), and considerable fog of war.

    If you’re going to run a coup in DC, you’d better install a gov’t that looks at least as legit as the one that preceded it. Otherwise you’d see counter-coups.

    If there was going to be a successful coup, it would involve faithless electors.

    Heavily armed rural whites will always be outgunned by the government.

    The gov’t’s had such a great run against enemies it had outgunned, since WWII, so I can see why you’d be so confident in their chances.

    The truth is, it would come down to who wanted it more. Generally speaking, both sides of the insurgency (I see conflation of insurgency and coup in this thread, but they’re quite different) conversation in this country get it very, very wrong. The people who would like to see regime change and a house cleaning get it wrong because they don’t see how very far the populace is from supporting a serious insurgency. The statists and crypto-statists (people who hate the state, but believe in its omnipotence), think the gov’t is far more powerful than it is.

    The populace holds the cards. Even if you just limit it to the White rural population. They can bring any state to its knees. The gov’t would race to the negotiating table, fold like a cheap tent.

    I like to play out what would happen if/when the government decides to confiscate firearms door-to-door like in Australia.

    This isn’t Australia. I bet even in Australia, there are a bunch of weapon caches packed in cosmoline and buried all over the place. As it stands now, people aren’t angry enough in the States, so there wouldn’t be insurgency levels of resistance. But there would be insurgency-level of arms caching. And gun smuggling would become the new badwhite pastime.

    A successful coup in the United States wouldn’t look like the Turkey coup at all.

    What they would do is assassinate the President, and possibly simultaneously assassinate the Vice President.

    Subsequent “fog of war” stuff is correct, too. An American coup at this point would have to be all about deception, surgically removing the parts they want replaced.

    Thomas: how many months did it take the State to find that nut hiding out in the woods in Pennsylvania? Now imagine hundreds of them, all being resupplied by a supportive population. Like I said, coup-talkers overestimate both the power of the State, and the dissatisfaction of the people.

    Which is why Afghanistan is a settled protectorate.

    Yeah, I don’t get the confidence, at all. The power of the (western) State is not in its military, but its legitimacy. And the USG still has a lot of legitimacy to burn (people like to be rrrreally aggrieved, before they stop working and start shooting). But, assuming that legitimacy is gone, and there was actually a serious insurgency, supported by a large percentage of the populace, I wouldn’t bet on the gov’t winning. Americans are not illiterate goatherds. Can you imagine what their IEDs would look like? Not to mention how restrictive the military’s ROE would be.

    The true counter arguments are that third world guerrillas are less casualty-averse

    Right. You need people willing to die to clean out the stables. People who are so pissed, they start shooting. USA is very far from that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Maj. Kong

    Not to mention how restrictive the military’s ROE would be.
     
    Against an eeevil right wing insurgency, the tactics of Genghis Khan would be revived by a globalist government.
    , @anonguy

    Right. You need people willing to die to clean out the stables. People who are so pissed, they start shooting. USA is very far from that.
     
    Why is it always about shooting, insurgencies, etc. You guys watch way too many movies or something.

    Don't you guys remember how the East Bloc governments all failed without a shot being fired except for Romania in 1989 then followed by the Soviet Union in 1991 more or less bloodlessly.

    Domestic armed insurgencies weren't even part of the equation.

    The governed simply withdrew their consent.

    BTW,the vast majority of gun owners I've encountered over the decades are generally hot air couch potatoes engaging in male escapist fantasies to compensate for the lack of machismo in their real life commuting to an office somewhere. There is a substantial segment that this does not apply to, but it is a tiny minority, I'd guess much less than 10% based on my admittedly anecdotal observations.

    The average American male under 40 or so has never even been in a fistfight in his life, but now they are all of a sudden going to put down the remote and the Doritos and turn into Viet Cong or Mujaheedin or something?

    That is fake news if I ever heard it, I'm thinking.

  60. It’s tough to keep control of a country when your highways and bridges and power lines keep blowing up.

    Read More
  61. @NorthOfTheOneOhOne
    In light of this:

    http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/military-enlistment-rates-by-state-and-region/

    It sounds like the modern US Army is more like the Army of Nothern Virginia than the Army of the Potomac. I doubt the leftist idiots at the WaPo will find any takers.

    Apparently the Obama Administration has taken notice:

    http://www.defense.gov/News/Article/Article/925081/force-of-the-future-aims-to-increase-militarys-geographic-diversity

    Yes, they prevented the chance of a successful coup by taking away conscription and through non-regional units.

    Read More
  62. If you want to see what a Big State can do to stop a determined insurgency in a western population, just look at what the Irish did to the English. Totally a matter of will.

    The Irish simply wanted it enough to get it, and they did.

    Re Posse Comitatus, the Act does not mention The Navy or the Marine Corps, and does not apply to the Army National Guard, or the Air National Guard. A bit of bureaucratic shuffling, and those four groups would mean American military power applied to any serious insurgency, if that’s what the feds wanted. Or Congress could just pass an overriding law.

    NO COMMENTS = FAKE NEWS

    Good point.

    Read More
  63. What worries me is Obama’s ego. Trump’s victory was basically a “screw you” to Obama and his legacy. You have to figure that Obama will try to hurt Trump’s presidency before it begins out of spite.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lagertha
    No. Obama is finished. Anything he does now to hurt Trump will hurt everyone way beyond his constituency. Obama should have backed Bernie and, well, pundits need to act on that if they still have a d*c. . Bernie was closer to the philosophy of "Dreams from my Father" than Hillary...or any other person. The "what went wrong " gang of mourners need to just electrocute themselves at this point ( my wish) or suck it up and admit they had a sucky candidate!
    , @Lagertha
    well, I think that would backfire. Trump appearing at the game yesterday was such a cagey move - was kinda' shocked by it. It was a very good game, and, of course, Verne was the highlight - I doubt Verne wants to go to Sweden, however.

    It was a yuge check-mate move to keep anyone, especially the MSM, from trying pull anything. Dissing military, even if these are just students, will deep-six your career...or deplete your reputation in this current climate. All past year, the flag burning and anthem dissing was epic fail; epic fail for the MSM to justify it.
  64. @whorefinder
    The problem is that the federal policing agencies---the FBI, the ATFE, the CIA---have all been converged by the Left. They are loyal to the state only, not the people. Look at the CIA in the last few days covering for Hillary and making up Russian nonsense, or Comey covering for Clinton in July, or the ATFE running guns for Holder and keeping it quiet.

    Do not trust federal police agencies.

    In Animal Farm , Orwell made the distinction between the armies (the regular animals) and the secret police (the dogs). The regular animals overthrew the farmers, but Napoleon the Pig steals the puppies from their mother early, trains them in secret in the attic, and then, when the animals are starting to question the Pigs autocratic ways, he releases the now-fully grown and vicious dogs on the animals to police them and violently attack them if necessary.

    The animals fully roll over to the dogs' (and the pigs') control.

    It was a metaphor for Stalin's KGB being used on the Soviet people after their armies had overthrown the Czar. And also for how the German army fully rolled over and obeyed the Nazi SS (although, to the German army's credit, it strongly opposed Ernest Rohm's Brownshirt squads, probably leading to the old fairy's death).

    In short, the Left has been quite successful in taking over countries using the secret police. The armies are, to their detriment, largely made up of men used to obeying those in power. The few rabble rousers among them would be rooted out by the feds if the Left ever made a move.

    The Left, however, doesn't think it has enough in the feds to make it work; hence the recent efforts to federalize the local police forces across the country, under the guise of "reforming" them and "making them less racist."

    I call huge bullshit. Millennial man-boys, in particular, are on to the bull that Liberals have foisted upon them. The Armed Forces are full up of young people, today (most voted for Trump) that are not so easily convinced that they are farm animals a la’ 1984. I think the ranks of people who want to be cops will be thinning…for nice cops. And, the growth, which we will all applaud will be the new crop of ‘DieHard’ cops who will just fracking waste bad guys! Everyone wants that; we all want bad guys wasted! Die Hard movies were the best. BTW, the Diehard franchise, how good was that that they knew the idea of really bad guys was forever good movies….especially in February – the “date movie” bonanza of making money thru bored-midwinter teenagers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @whorefinder

    . The Armed Forces are full up of young people, today (most voted for Trump) that are not so easily convinced that they are farm animals a la’ 1984
     
    If you can find me historical examples where the army---on its own---thwarted or removed a coup, I'd love to hear it. But the historical truth is that armies don't do so.
    , @random observer
    Your lips to God's ears, I most fervently hope.

    Personally, for some reason I have been skirting a breakdown in recent weeks based on the thought that, Trump notwithstanding, the progs have already won. totally. I used to think WN was low rent and nuts, not to say unnecessary. I'm more along Zman's way of thinking on such questions, or Steve's.

    But I suspect it won't matter. In 200 years or so there will be neither our present nations, nor white people, to worry about it.
  65. @John Mansfield
    It was around 1995, a navy lieutenant recently separated from the service and going on to other things said to a small group of friends, "Military people are not politically monolithic. You'll find every sort of opinion on things like abortion or gun control. There's really only one thing they all agree on: We all hate Clinton."

    And they hate Hillary in particular, likely because of the clear hate she has for them. I know somebody who was in a position to observe HRC’s treatment of military and Secret Service personnel in the ’90s; this person corroborated the rumors you’ve heard and reports you’ve read – and then some. My understanding is that the typical feelings about WJC were more ambivalent.

    Read More
  66. @taco
    I'm old enough to remember when the Democratic Party mocked anyone who said that Russia was a geopolitical foe "Hey Mitt Romney, the 1980s called, it wants its foreign policy back". That was the official position of the Democratic Party 4 years ago.

    I'm also old enough to remember a time when anyone who suggested that an election might be rigged or interfered with was a crank and a crockpot who was threatening the very fabric of our Democracy and undermining the most sacred peaceful transfer of power. That was almost 2 months ago, so not everyone remembers it.

    I’m old enough to remember, too.

    Just say to those people: I fart in your general direction.

    Read More
  67. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    I don’t think the government forces would try to physically occupy every low population density rural area with rebel holdouts. They can fly over them, so they wouldn’t impede passage or anything and the government forces would just wait out the rebels.

    Read More
  68. @candid_observer
    I do wonder what Trump is going to do to the people at the CIA who have gone all in on attacking him.

    It's not the usual thing for employees to go out of their way to trash the incoming CEO publicly. Can they be so smug that they don't think there will be consequences?

    The CIA and FBI and NSA have been fighting against each other for decades, duh, major, duh. This is a pivotal year for all factions to choose sides or: retire, or fall in line. SIMPLE. My grandfather had to deal with this in Finland in 1919. Choose.…fracking choose: country or your petty self – should be easy.

    And, if you can’t chose…well, according to my Grandpa’s memoirs: you and your family will forfeit your farm, your property, you existence (border moved west)…pack up and march to the eastern (Russian) border. You are now, on your own. Good bye.

    Read More
    • Replies: @A Wandering Finn
    Excuse me, but what are you talking about? What happened to your grandfather in 1919 in Finland? Are you referring to the Civil War of 1918 or Winter War (1939 - 1940)? During the Civil War border moved nowhere. During the Winter War practically nobody chose a side - nearly all men, including most communists, were in arms against the invader. If you are referring to the Civil War, I have never heard that anybody forfeited their landed property, not even those on the losing ("Red") side. Then again, most of the Reds never actually owned land. They were mostly tenant farmers and agricultural laborers. Naturally there were criminal punishments for the rebellion and even executions (many of them of very dubious legal character).
  69. @JohnnyD
    What worries me is Obama's ego. Trump's victory was basically a "screw you" to Obama and his legacy. You have to figure that Obama will try to hurt Trump's presidency before it begins out of spite.

    No. Obama is finished. Anything he does now to hurt Trump will hurt everyone way beyond his constituency. Obama should have backed Bernie and, well, pundits need to act on that if they still have a d*c. . Bernie was closer to the philosophy of “Dreams from my Father” than Hillary…or any other person. The “what went wrong ” gang of mourners need to just electrocute themselves at this point ( my wish) or suck it up and admit they had a sucky candidate!

    Read More
  70. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @O'Hara in Philly
    Tucker Carlson interviewed the neoconservative queen Jennifer Rubin on his new Fox show last night. I have never seen a host surprise and then humiliate a guest as thoroughly as he did. He quoted from her opinion column in the Washington Post about Trump's racist and anti-immigrant white male voters. The look on her face at as the piece ended was precious. If someone could post the video it would be highly entertaining.

    I was never a follower or particular fan of Tucker Carlson, but his show is pretty entertaining with these people who, for some reason, choose to appear. It’s like shooting fish in a barrel, but Tucker enjoys shooting fish in a barrel:

    That said, I think YouTube is probably what cost Hillary FAR more than “fake news.” Watching negroes acting up while they themselves gleefully film it, over and over again, watching hardcore libs contradict themselves with no self-consciousness repeatedly, while demanding we dismiss our lying eyes, as well as tons of Cspan hearings in which dems are left sputtering under acute examination is FAR more instructive and motivating for an internet coherent voter.

    If Libs want an advantage, they should move to eliminate Cspan uploads to Youtube. It allows people who wouldn’t ordinarily have the time to sit through congressional hearings to watch the most important moments for themselves. This was bad for Hillary. VERY bad.

    A casual Youtube viewer can just put “Trey Gowdy” in the search box, and be amazed for hours, without any pundit trying to spin it one way or another. That’s what’s killing the democrats, more than anything else. Censoring “fake news’ won’t help them. Only censoring Youtube, LiveLeak, and Worldstar HipHop can help them now, and I don’t think that will be happening.

    Here’s a taste of Trey Gowdy on Cspan. There’s tons of video featuring Trey Gowdy reeming not just dems, but anyone who might be an asshole. The guy is like George Baily with a headache:

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lagertha
    I agree. I listened to so many Youtube pieces...was riveting. Gowdy is so good at self-editing. His tongue is like a Bowie knife; straight for the kill.
  71. @Whiskey
    Any coup would not be mounted by the CIA or military. Rather, the Courts.

    Hillary is running out two strings. First, "the Russians hacked to back Trump" leading to some judge ruling her the "victor" in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and Florida and hence the next President. Bezos is all on board, he's bet the farm on Hillary and Trump will hammer him silly for anti-trust and FTC violations.

    The second is as a poster here noted, "the Electoral College is racist. Or something." So again a federal judge rules Hillary the victor.

    How would the Supremes rule? My guess a 5-3 split, with Roberts the Craven bowing down to his masters they way he did with ObamaCare.

    In America, the power has traditionally lain not with the military, where there was never any real danger of a coup, but the courts and media. Both arms are profoundly threatened by Trump, who seems likely to limit the courts and pack them with his friends, while pushing anti Trust against media monopolies and duopolies.

    The real issue is if Trump simply ignores the court ruling and Hillary tries to rally the military to arrest him or what have you. We can't have forever an elite that loathes and despises its native people; sooner or later things will break.

    Native people (today’s native people for all you PC’s) in this country, always win. Tons of Republicans just won. Elites that try to manipulate armed forces just lost big time…or are forever thought of as a parasitic and duplicitous entity that can not be trusted, ever – what ever they speak is wrong and harmful. Hillary is a sociopath, in my opinion. siiiiiiighhh, relief, siiiiiiighhhhhhhh. And, as some of you know, I have thought this for over 2 decades.

    Read More
  72. @Whoever
    Most definitely would not be on board with any coup or other treason against our country.

    HAVING BEEN APPOINTED A MIDSHIPMAN IN THE UNITED STATES NAVY, I
    SOLEMNLY SWEAR THAT I WILL SUPPORT AND DEFEND THE
    CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES AGAINST ALL ENEMIES, FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC; THAT I WILL BEAR TRUE FAITH AND ALLEGIANCE TO THE SAME; THAT I TAKE THIS OBLIGATION FREELY, WITHOUT ANY MENTAL RESERVATION OR PURPOSE OF EVASION; AND THAT I WILL WELL AND FAITHFULLY DISCHARGE THE DUTIES OF THE OFFICE ON WHICH I AM ABOUT TO ENTER, SO HELP ME GOD.

    I’ve never understood how that works with separation of powers, etc. For example, if SCOTUS says the Constitution contains a protection of abortion, does that make pro-life activists domestic enemies? What if SCOTUS finds a loophole in the 2nd Amendment? You’ve taken an oath to consider gun advocates enemies then?

    I’m sure this has been addressed in military law circles, but what do you think as an oath-taker?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Whoever

    For example, if SCOTUS says the Constitution contains a protection of abortion, does that make pro-life activists domestic enemies?
     
    Constitution's got that covered:
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
  73. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Almost Missouri
    Agree. I always point this out to people who mock the defense against tyranny aspect of the 2nd Amendment as being naïve versus a modern military: how did the world's best military do against third world guerillas over the last fifty years?

    Also, the terrain in Mesopotamia is flat and open: most favorable for a modern military, yet the guerillas still managed to hang on. Most of the US is not like that terrain.

    The true counter arguments are that third world guerrillas are less casualty-averse, younger, and their civil society is much less organized and so is much more dependent on order and will tolerate much to maintain it.

    Agree. I always point this out to people who mock the defense against tyranny aspect of the 2nd Amendment as being naïve versus a modern military: how did the world’s best military do against third world guerillas over the last fifty years?

    The world’s best military would make short work of “third world guerrillas” in a war situation. Unfortunately, they don’t do as well in “police actions” which is what our military has been misapplied towards for the last 50 years.

    Germany, for example, had few problems with French guerilla’s for the majority of time that they occupied France during WWII. If a guerrilla shot a German soldier, the Germans would walk into local shops on the street of the shooting, take out 10 random French into the middle of the street, execute them, and promise to do it again the next time some Frenchman got spunky. That stopped guerrilla activity very quickly. The German’s weren’t special. That’s the way guerrilla’s have been handled since forever. That’s why there’s not a lot of war stories featuring them. They don’t work well with an invading army during an actual war.

    In “police actions,” however, we can’t/won’t do that, so under those very constrained circumstances they as happy and active as jungle monkeys. But in an existential war, guerilla’s aren’t a problem for any significant occupying military, as long as the guerilla’s have family and friends they care about. And they always do.

    Read More
    • Replies: @bomag
    The French are not a particularly good example here: they were lukewarm about opposing the Germans after the initial combat.

    Partisan activity was significant in WWII, with the Yugoslavs pretty much defeating the Germans outright.
    , @donut
    " as long as the guerilla’s have family and friends they care about. And they always do."

    The military and the police may treat us as if they were an occupying power but they're not and they to " have family and friends they care about" in the communities they are "occupying" , especially the police . Their families would be hostages as well and not immune to reprisals .
    , @Vendetta
    Police action by definition because when it's taking place in your own country. Good luck getting the military which is recruited primarily from the very demographics you're ordering it to fire upon to take the gloves off without seeing mass desertions and defections.
    , @Almost Missouri

    "That’s the way guerrilla’s have been handled since forever."
     
    In much of the world, yes, but when has it ever been US military policy to murder 10 random civilians in response to a guerilla shooting? And what we're talking about here isn't even foreign civilians. As many other commenters have pointed out, a coup government would be asking the military to pull the trigger on the class and communities that they come from. Good luck with that.

    Some might even welcome an event like this. It would finally clarify who exactly is on which side.

    https://www.getyarn.io/yarn-clip/f74e53d8-168d-41e5-8495-1df9c1ca740e

    , @The Plutonium Kid
    Seems to me the Viet Cong were very successful guerrillas. It was only when they came out in the open and tried to go toe to toe with US forces that they got clobbered. In the wake of the Civil War, the south successfully used guerrilla and terrorist tactics to thwart Reconstruction. Then there's the Irish War of Independence, as well as Spanish and Portuguese resistance to Napoleon's invasion of the Spanish peninsula. Napoleon had a third of a million men in Spain and Portugal, but almost all of them were continually tied up in dealing with insurgencies. You are much too quick to dismiss irregular warfare as a means of resisting domestic tyranny.
  74. @Kyle McKenna

    Those heavily armed rural whites would last about ten minutes if it came to a fight against the military and the police.
     
    But the carnage would give pause to everyone. Oh, silly me, the MSM wouldn't report the carnage.

    But the carnage would give pause to everyone. Oh, silly me, the MSM wouldn’t report the carnage.

    Or if they did report it the story would be that a handful of dangerous racist neo-Nazi extremists tried to overthrow the government but they have now been rounded up.

    A successful coup depends on who has the megaphone. I think we know the answer to that one.

    Read More
  75. @Andy
    most of the military come from the rural whites...they wouldn't fight against their brethren

    most of the military come from the rural whites…they wouldn’t fight against their brethren

    Some serious wishful thinking there. The military will obey whoever pays them.

    Read More
    • Agree: schmenz
    • Replies: @oh its just me too

    most of the military come from the rural whites…they wouldn’t fight against their brethren

    Some serious wishful thinking there. The military will obey whoever pays them.
     
    There is a reason our elite are flooding the office corps with minorities - just like the NKVD was almost entirely ethnically jewish - because they ARE willing to turn their guns on us.

    I try to tell this to liberals who insist that it's for 'diversity' - show me anytime in history the office corp has been radically ethnically transformed for 'diversity' - the current 'goal' I believe is to make white males the minority in the officer corp one professor blew the whistle at the naval academy - they are so desperate to replace whites that even orientals were being let in with SATs in the 300s
  76. @International Jew

    how did the world’s best military do against third world guerillas over the last fifty years?
     
    I hate to tell you, but those guerrillas have been willing to make stunning sacrifices. No, I'm not at all sympathetic to their causes but a suicide bomber is anything but "cowardly" (as our boilerplate goes).

    Americans have surrendered their great cities, or at least major swaths of them— Detroit, St Louis, Baltimore — to disorganized and lightly armed "teenagers". Stand up to cops or the army? Gimme a break.

    Americans have surrendered their great cities…

    We are an age and people that prizes avoidance of conflict. This could change pretty rapidly.

    Read More
  77. I saw Trump’s entrance and the reaction from the West Point cadets live as I watched the game. I am surprised that the CBS broadcast team – Vern Lundquist (doing his last game) and Gary Danielson – specifically commented on it. But that might be the most conservative crew in televised sports. SEC football is their usual gig. ESPN most probably not have made any mention of Trump’s appearance.

    Read More
  78. @DCThrowback
    The CIA is in the crosshairs, and the agency knows it. That's why last night's election "news" release via WaPo, that the Russians did something or other, is such a desperation heave.

    The JSOC community (the ones mainly responsible for our "success" in IRQ and AFG), have done very well aligning with Trump (think Flynn, Pompeo (the rep from Koch) at CIA (and also an army officer). Devos is Erik Prince's sister! Mattis just got done w/ 3 years at General Dyanmics. Curtis Yarvin might argue the "red empire" won this election over the "blue empire" candidate when Trump ended the Clinton dynasty, with a little help from likely several sources, including the NSA and perhaps from Russia. I am not unhappy about this, I have no direct evidence, but both of those sources had means, motive and opportunity.

    Understanding that, and understanding those same JSOC guys pushed Petraeus at CIA in order to "mold" the CIA into a JSOC subsidiary, well, the CIA sees part two of that attack coming. (Note: The CIA ended David Petraeus w/ the help of his private protection team, who blew him w/r/t to his affair w/ PB. The CIA REALLY didn't want to change.) The CIA and the blue empire have bungled Egypt, Syria and the rest of the middle east, so it's not like they don't have it coming. But team red is not exactly covered in glory from the IRQ and AFG occupations, either.

    At stake is control over intel and who controls the tip of the spear response to it. Money, mission and prestige are at stake.

    So, long story short, I think the CIA is running scared, tossing a hail mary in attempt to head off the hammer heading it's way.

    Part of your comment meshes with my initial reaction to this “news.” Dying mammoths thrash a lot.

    WaPo, etc., have long been bound up with CIA in propaganda campaigns, and vice versa.

    http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/11/30/the-cia-and-the-press-when-the-washington-post-ran-the-cias-propaganda-network/

    Compare:

    http://wallstreetonparade.com/2016/12/whos-behind-propornots-blacklist-of-news-websites/

    Now, looking at this representation of CIA’s org chart:

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dc/CIA_ORG_Structure.svg/800px-CIA_ORG_Structure.svg.png

    …I observe that there hasn’t been (and can’t be) much talk about who’s going to corner the new MAGA market on global cyberint…and make those Big Lig “digital innovation” Deals.

    Maybe at some level they’re pinging The Donald’s team for a piece of the action.

    “Look how good we are! We can create shadow organizations to get nonsense in the WaPo, and the people in or aspiring to the Access Class who’ve always eaten it up are eating it up!”

    Read More
    • Replies: @DCThrowback
    Look where the Special Activities Division (SAD) is buried. It's the CIA's operations arm and the one most like the SF door kickers.
  79. @anon

    Agree. I always point this out to people who mock the defense against tyranny aspect of the 2nd Amendment as being naïve versus a modern military: how did the world’s best military do against third world guerillas over the last fifty years?
     
    The world's best military would make short work of "third world guerrillas" in a war situation. Unfortunately, they don't do as well in "police actions" which is what our military has been misapplied towards for the last 50 years.

    Germany, for example, had few problems with French guerilla's for the majority of time that they occupied France during WWII. If a guerrilla shot a German soldier, the Germans would walk into local shops on the street of the shooting, take out 10 random French into the middle of the street, execute them, and promise to do it again the next time some Frenchman got spunky. That stopped guerrilla activity very quickly. The German's weren't special. That's the way guerrilla's have been handled since forever. That's why there's not a lot of war stories featuring them. They don't work well with an invading army during an actual war.

    In "police actions," however, we can't/won't do that, so under those very constrained circumstances they as happy and active as jungle monkeys. But in an existential war, guerilla's aren't a problem for any significant occupying military, as long as the guerilla's have family and friends they care about. And they always do.

    The French are not a particularly good example here: they were lukewarm about opposing the Germans after the initial combat.

    Partisan activity was significant in WWII, with the Yugoslavs pretty much defeating the Germans outright.

    Read More
  80. @countenance
    I think this is why he's been behaving extra-Presidential ever since he won. In order to ensconce himself in the minds of many people as possible as the incumbent, in order to deter game-playing with possible recounts, the Electoral College actual vote, and potential coups. In other words, he's behaving like he's already President to dare them to try any of those shenanigans.

    You call bitching about SNL on twitter as behaving extra-presidential? Well I guess he isn’t calling someone ugly or fat..

    Read More
    • Replies: @whorefinder
    lol. I'm sorry your usual snarkiness is being called out and smacked around by President Trump, little lefty.

    Sorry not sorry.
  81. @International Jew

    how did the world’s best military do against third world guerillas over the last fifty years?
     
    I hate to tell you, but those guerrillas have been willing to make stunning sacrifices. No, I'm not at all sympathetic to their causes but a suicide bomber is anything but "cowardly" (as our boilerplate goes).

    Americans have surrendered their great cities, or at least major swaths of them— Detroit, St Louis, Baltimore — to disorganized and lightly armed "teenagers". Stand up to cops or the army? Gimme a break.

    I hate to tell you, but those guerrillas have been willing to make stunning sacrifices. No, I’m not at all sympathetic to their causes but a suicide bomber is anything but “cowardly” (as our boilerplate goes).

    Yep. Americans are not going to be either desperate enough or fanatical enough to make those sacrifices. They’re also going to know that if they pick the losing side they can look forward to spending the rest of their lives in Guantanamo Bay. And knowing their families will be left destitute. No way are they going to be motivated enough to make those kinds of sacrifices.

    Americans have surrendered their great cities, or at least major swaths of them— Detroit, St Louis, Baltimore — to disorganized and lightly armed “teenagers”. Stand up to cops or the army? Gimme a break.

    Exactly. I’m not knocking Americans here – no European in a First World country would have that kind of motivation.

    Read More
  82. @EdwardM
    Heavily armed rural whites will always be outgunned by the government. I think that what it would come down to is whether the white soldiers and lower-level officers who come from these communities would obey orders to fire on their friends. It could go either way.

    I like to play out what would happen if/when the government decides to confiscate firearms door-to-door like in Australia. Despite the noble cries of "from my cold dead hands," I don't think that most responsible gun owners would really take it to that level when the SWAT team shows up. It will all come down to whether the ATF/FBI agents obey orders. I guess the Feds will marshal the agents from Boston and San Francisco field offices to go to Alabama and Wyoming to carry out the task to improve their odds. I wouldn't count on resistance to succeed, though it could get messy.

    No doubt the left is acutely aware of this risk, hence their efforts to eviscerate the cultures of the military and federal police forces, and to try to nationalize local police departments. A few more generations of their recruitment, social programming, human capital management, and purges, and they may succeed.

    Heavily armed rural whites will always be outgunned by the government.

    How many RPGs do those “heavily armed rural whites” have? How many man-portable air-defense systems will they have? How will they deal with drone strikes?

    A bunch of fat middle-aged men with rifles in pick-up trucks won’t trouble trained regulars for very long.

    This is another example of the alt-right’s detachment from reality.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Johnny Smoggins
    Why do you assume that all men with guns are Homer Simpson in a pick up truck? I would bet that a lot of them are former military men who are still in fighting condition.

    This is another example of the left's detachment from reality.
    , @whorefinder
    I guess you missed most of the 20th and 21st Century when guerrilla warfare by hardened, dedicated guerillas defeated professional militaries.

    But it's ok, cling to your delusions. How's the Hillary recount going?
  83. @Big Bill
    Wow. The Constitution.

    So tell me, what do Russians and Jews pledge their allegiance to?

    Israel doesn't have a Constitution and I just can't see the Russians pledging their lives and sacred honor to preserve a piece of paper.

    Do they pledge themselves to fight and defend their nation? Their people? Their land?

    I am a married man, but I would never plead undying loyalty to my marriage license.

    > Israel doesn’t have a Constitution

    not a suingle peice of paper, no. There are Basic LAws.

    IDF & gendarmarie (“Border Police”) recruits swear to defend the State of Israel with their body.

    Read More
  84. The easiest way to remove Trump from office, and it has the advantage of actually being constitutional, is for 24 Republican House members to switch parties and become Democrats. At this point the Dems become the majority party and get to impeach President Trump by a simple majority.

    Step 2 involves at least 5 GOP Senators switching parties to the Dems to give them the majority in the Senate. On top of that 16 more GOP Senators would have to vote for impeachment along with all the Democrats getting to the 67 vote requirement.

    It’s really that simple. They can make up any reason they like; there is no judicial review of Presidential impeachment.

    Read More
    • Replies: @International Jew
    Perhaps so, but it seems to me that the never-Trumpers have changed their tune. Have a look at National Review.
  85. @anon

    Agree. I always point this out to people who mock the defense against tyranny aspect of the 2nd Amendment as being naïve versus a modern military: how did the world’s best military do against third world guerillas over the last fifty years?
     
    The world's best military would make short work of "third world guerrillas" in a war situation. Unfortunately, they don't do as well in "police actions" which is what our military has been misapplied towards for the last 50 years.

    Germany, for example, had few problems with French guerilla's for the majority of time that they occupied France during WWII. If a guerrilla shot a German soldier, the Germans would walk into local shops on the street of the shooting, take out 10 random French into the middle of the street, execute them, and promise to do it again the next time some Frenchman got spunky. That stopped guerrilla activity very quickly. The German's weren't special. That's the way guerrilla's have been handled since forever. That's why there's not a lot of war stories featuring them. They don't work well with an invading army during an actual war.

    In "police actions," however, we can't/won't do that, so under those very constrained circumstances they as happy and active as jungle monkeys. But in an existential war, guerilla's aren't a problem for any significant occupying military, as long as the guerilla's have family and friends they care about. And they always do.

    ” as long as the guerilla’s have family and friends they care about. And they always do.”

    The military and the police may treat us as if they were an occupying power but they’re not and they to ” have family and friends they care about” in the communities they are “occupying” , especially the police . Their families would be hostages as well and not immune to reprisals .

    Read More
  86. @Cagey Beast
    David Frum and the crowd at the Army/Navy game differ on Trump's Americanness:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KS8iNaFKxt4

    https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/807455330066202624

    https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/807463790736347136

    https://twitter.com/EmilyEab1998/status/807759145327792132

    I unfollowed Frum because he’s just becoming stupid with his unhinged non-stop Trump criticism. Looks like it’s doing wonders for him in terms of Twitter popularity though.

    Read More
  87. @Olorin
    Part of your comment meshes with my initial reaction to this "news." Dying mammoths thrash a lot.

    WaPo, etc., have long been bound up with CIA in propaganda campaigns, and vice versa.

    http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/11/30/the-cia-and-the-press-when-the-washington-post-ran-the-cias-propaganda-network/

    Compare:

    http://wallstreetonparade.com/2016/12/whos-behind-propornots-blacklist-of-news-websites/

    Now, looking at this representation of CIA's org chart:

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dc/CIA_ORG_Structure.svg/800px-CIA_ORG_Structure.svg.png

    ...I observe that there hasn't been (and can't be) much talk about who's going to corner the new MAGA market on global cyberint...and make those Big Lig "digital innovation" Deals.

    Maybe at some level they're pinging The Donald's team for a piece of the action.

    "Look how good we are! We can create shadow organizations to get nonsense in the WaPo, and the people in or aspiring to the Access Class who've always eaten it up are eating it up!"

    Look where the Special Activities Division (SAD) is buried. It’s the CIA’s operations arm and the one most like the SF door kickers.

    Read More
  88. @taco
    A successful coup in the United States wouldn't look like the Turkey coup at all.

    What they would do is assassinate the President, and possibly simultaneously assassinate the Vice President. The exact circumstances depend on a number of factors. They may want to feel out the VP for a year or two and see if he will play ball. If he will, then he is the replacement. If not, they will take him out too.

    Hypothesize that Air Force One is shot down or crashes while the President and Vice President are aboard. The Secret Service at the point would basically take the speaker of the house into custody. Whatever intelligence agents and generals were around the speaker at that moment would basically be in charge of the country. They could feed the speaker whatever "intelligence" they wanted to, and in that environment, the new president wouldn't have the means to do any independent analysis at all.

    "Mr. President, it turns out the previous president and vice president were making a deal with Russia to do XYZ, and the deal fell through, so the Russians had them killed. The following members of the administration should be considered suspicous: the attorney general, the secretary of state, this general, that admiral, etc."

    If they could make it look like an accident or a lone wolf job that might be even better. But if they can tie it to some perceived enemy, they can isolate the incoming president, and get him to execute an emergency purge of the government.

    I believe that this is how any coup would go down.

    The problem with such a coup is that there are something like 17 intelligence agencies currently operating in the United States. This type of thing would require broad consent across all 17 intelligence agencies that the current administration is so dangerous to the current paradigm that immediate action has to be taken, at high risk to everyone involved.

    If the Kennedy assassination was a coup (and I'm not saying it was) then it probably looked something like this.

    If we hypothesize that Kennedy was a coup, ask yourself: who won, the army, or the well armed ruralites? And the answer is: there was never an armed confrontation because the coup was achieved without anyone realizing it was a coup.

    To reiterate: I am not saying and I do not believe that the CIA killed Kennedy. I suppose it is certainly possible that that is what happened (its also possible that Obama was born in Kenya, Bush had inside knowledge of 9/11, and Russians hacked voting machines in Wisconsin) but I do not believe it is the most likely explanation.

    The President and Vice President do not fly together. Security protocol 101.

    Read More
  89. @dfordoom

    If there was a war it would depend on who’s side heavily armed rural whites were on. That side would win imo.
     
    Those heavily armed rural whites would last about ten minutes if it came to a fight against the military and the police.

    Heavily armed rural whites are the largest demographic the military recruits. Always overlooked by the armchair skeptics.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    If they are in the military their weapons are in the armories. The military is heavily black and brown, not White. Some of the big navy ships are only about 15 percent White. The carrier my nephew works on has only 3 Whites on the whole ship, him and the other 2 nuclear engineers that run the ship.
  90. @anon

    Agree. I always point this out to people who mock the defense against tyranny aspect of the 2nd Amendment as being naïve versus a modern military: how did the world’s best military do against third world guerillas over the last fifty years?
     
    The world's best military would make short work of "third world guerrillas" in a war situation. Unfortunately, they don't do as well in "police actions" which is what our military has been misapplied towards for the last 50 years.

    Germany, for example, had few problems with French guerilla's for the majority of time that they occupied France during WWII. If a guerrilla shot a German soldier, the Germans would walk into local shops on the street of the shooting, take out 10 random French into the middle of the street, execute them, and promise to do it again the next time some Frenchman got spunky. That stopped guerrilla activity very quickly. The German's weren't special. That's the way guerrilla's have been handled since forever. That's why there's not a lot of war stories featuring them. They don't work well with an invading army during an actual war.

    In "police actions," however, we can't/won't do that, so under those very constrained circumstances they as happy and active as jungle monkeys. But in an existential war, guerilla's aren't a problem for any significant occupying military, as long as the guerilla's have family and friends they care about. And they always do.

    Police action by definition because when it’s taking place in your own country. Good luck getting the military which is recruited primarily from the very demographics you’re ordering it to fire upon to take the gloves off without seeing mass desertions and defections.

    Read More
  91. @EdwardM
    Heavily armed rural whites will always be outgunned by the government. I think that what it would come down to is whether the white soldiers and lower-level officers who come from these communities would obey orders to fire on their friends. It could go either way.

    I like to play out what would happen if/when the government decides to confiscate firearms door-to-door like in Australia. Despite the noble cries of "from my cold dead hands," I don't think that most responsible gun owners would really take it to that level when the SWAT team shows up. It will all come down to whether the ATF/FBI agents obey orders. I guess the Feds will marshal the agents from Boston and San Francisco field offices to go to Alabama and Wyoming to carry out the task to improve their odds. I wouldn't count on resistance to succeed, though it could get messy.

    No doubt the left is acutely aware of this risk, hence their efforts to eviscerate the cultures of the military and federal police forces, and to try to nationalize local police departments. A few more generations of their recruitment, social programming, human capital management, and purges, and they may succeed.

    Outgunned doesn’t matter. What is it with people obsessed with thinking of this as a gunfight? Is it still that hard to understand after ten years of watching our troops get blown up with IEDs?

    How many miles of power lines in this country are unguarded and impossible to guard in full? How easy is it to go out and start a wildfire in California?

    Read More
  92. @taco
    A successful coup in the United States wouldn't look like the Turkey coup at all.

    What they would do is assassinate the President, and possibly simultaneously assassinate the Vice President. The exact circumstances depend on a number of factors. They may want to feel out the VP for a year or two and see if he will play ball. If he will, then he is the replacement. If not, they will take him out too.

    Hypothesize that Air Force One is shot down or crashes while the President and Vice President are aboard. The Secret Service at the point would basically take the speaker of the house into custody. Whatever intelligence agents and generals were around the speaker at that moment would basically be in charge of the country. They could feed the speaker whatever "intelligence" they wanted to, and in that environment, the new president wouldn't have the means to do any independent analysis at all.

    "Mr. President, it turns out the previous president and vice president were making a deal with Russia to do XYZ, and the deal fell through, so the Russians had them killed. The following members of the administration should be considered suspicous: the attorney general, the secretary of state, this general, that admiral, etc."

    If they could make it look like an accident or a lone wolf job that might be even better. But if they can tie it to some perceived enemy, they can isolate the incoming president, and get him to execute an emergency purge of the government.

    I believe that this is how any coup would go down.

    The problem with such a coup is that there are something like 17 intelligence agencies currently operating in the United States. This type of thing would require broad consent across all 17 intelligence agencies that the current administration is so dangerous to the current paradigm that immediate action has to be taken, at high risk to everyone involved.

    If the Kennedy assassination was a coup (and I'm not saying it was) then it probably looked something like this.

    If we hypothesize that Kennedy was a coup, ask yourself: who won, the army, or the well armed ruralites? And the answer is: there was never an armed confrontation because the coup was achieved without anyone realizing it was a coup.

    To reiterate: I am not saying and I do not believe that the CIA killed Kennedy. I suppose it is certainly possible that that is what happened (its also possible that Obama was born in Kenya, Bush had inside knowledge of 9/11, and Russians hacked voting machines in Wisconsin) but I do not believe it is the most likely explanation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @taco
    I've never understood the Oliver Stone angle of "The CIA killed Kennedy because Kennedy wanted to withdraw from Vietnam"

    Kennedy sent the troops into Vietnam. Is there any evidence that Kennedy actually wanted to do this? Is there a single scintilla of evidence that Kennedy (unlike seemingly every Democrat before him and every Democrat after him) was a non-interventionist?
  93. @Jack Hanson
    Being on the inside of the FedGov LE apparatus, I can safely say you're painting with a huge brush that has no basis in reality.

    Being on the inside of the FedGov LE apparatus, I can safely say you’re painting with a huge brush that has no basis in reality.

    Oh yeah, you secret police are the good guys.

    Let me know when your boss Comey’s done shredding the last of Hillary’s files to prevent prosecution, ok?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    Comey is not representative of the FBI, but don't let me stop you from seeing Cheka under the bed.

    The secret police wouldn't be who you have to worry about. The largest law enforcement agency in the FedGov is pretty firmly pro Trump (and its not the FBI, ATF, or DEA, or any other three letter agency).
  94. @Kaz
    You call bitching about SNL on twitter as behaving extra-presidential? Well I guess he isn't calling someone ugly or fat..

    lol. I’m sorry your usual snarkiness is being called out and smacked around by President Trump, little lefty.

    Sorry not sorry.

    Read More
  95. @Lagertha
    I call huge bullshit. Millennial man-boys, in particular, are on to the bull that Liberals have foisted upon them. The Armed Forces are full up of young people, today (most voted for Trump) that are not so easily convinced that they are farm animals a la' 1984. I think the ranks of people who want to be cops will be thinning...for nice cops. And, the growth, which we will all applaud will be the new crop of 'DieHard' cops who will just fracking waste bad guys! Everyone wants that; we all want bad guys wasted! Die Hard movies were the best. BTW, the Diehard franchise, how good was that that they knew the idea of really bad guys was forever good movies....especially in February - the "date movie" bonanza of making money thru bored-midwinter teenagers.

    . The Armed Forces are full up of young people, today (most voted for Trump) that are not so easily convinced that they are farm animals a la’ 1984

    If you can find me historical examples where the army—on its own—thwarted or removed a coup, I’d love to hear it. But the historical truth is that armies don’t do so.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lagertha
    Finland; following the War for Independence. The 102 Jaegers (all the officers) prevented a coup by Finnish socialists that were puppets of left leaning Reds and Russians, following the successful war for Independence.

    After getting rid of the Communists and Communist sympathizers (mostly deported), the military leaders realized that they need to have candidates democratically elected by the Finnish People instead of establishing a military Junta. And, duh, they didn't want to be blamed if they couldn't govern:)! Some of this information is relatively new to the public since several military leaders published their memoirs decades after their death. So, yeah; just this one example, which is obviously personal.

    I don't know the war history of Japan or China to know any examples there. With reference to the idiotic bad-bad Russia-talk these days, I find it funny how all the journalists and Democrats forget about the intense meddling (spying/psy-ops) by the CIA in Latin American ( I mean, the Allende to Pinochet history is frightening), Middle East, Soviet Union...it's annoying and sooo hypocritical.

    I can assure you, Soviet Union/Russia now, meddle in Finnish politics since the end of WW2. Finns just are tough beasts with no oil/gas/iron ore/uranium in their land. True Story: President Kekkonen, an unbelievably fit (and tall) president (he was president for a whopping 26 years until succumbing to dementia) who knew how to play hardball with the Soviets. He could drink more vodka/anything, than the Russians during delicate meetings in Helsinki. After the meeting was over (and the Russians were passed out at the conference/dining table), he would walk home alone in the night. It has been joked in Finland that his hollow leg saved Finland from the constant pressure of the Soviet Union.

  96. To insurgencies work if the population is basically split in half between pro and anti government factions? Or is something like Syria or Lebanon more likely?

    Read More
  97. I was at the game. Reaction to Trump was positive. Would be even more for Mattis, saw people with sweatshirts with him on the back.

    I don’t see a movement towards a coup in the US. Still too much of the military is based on Red Staters with a belief in America. What worries me more is careerism, is defense contractors, is entitlement attitude in military officers who stay past their initial 5 year commitment. But it just bugs me. Don’t think it is going to kill us immediately.

    Really, the military needs to be cut back a lot. Who are we going to fight, the Martians?

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonguy

    Really, the military needs to be cut back a lot. Who are we going to fight, the Martians?
     
    I've been saying that since the Cold War ended, where is my peace dividend dude?

    Trump knows this and tipped his hand when he said NATO was obsolete to worldwide pearl-clutching.
  98. @Almost Missouri
    Agree. I always point this out to people who mock the defense against tyranny aspect of the 2nd Amendment as being naïve versus a modern military: how did the world's best military do against third world guerillas over the last fifty years?

    Also, the terrain in Mesopotamia is flat and open: most favorable for a modern military, yet the guerillas still managed to hang on. Most of the US is not like that terrain.

    The true counter arguments are that third world guerrillas are less casualty-averse, younger, and their civil society is much less organized and so is much more dependent on order and will tolerate much to maintain it.

    That last sentence should read:

    “The true counter arguments are that third world guerrillas are less casualty-averse, younger, and their civil society is much less organized than the first world’s, which is much more dependent on order and will tolerate much to maintain it.”

    Getting sloppy. And I wasn’t even drinking last night.

    Read More
  99. @anon

    Agree. I always point this out to people who mock the defense against tyranny aspect of the 2nd Amendment as being naïve versus a modern military: how did the world’s best military do against third world guerillas over the last fifty years?
     
    The world's best military would make short work of "third world guerrillas" in a war situation. Unfortunately, they don't do as well in "police actions" which is what our military has been misapplied towards for the last 50 years.

    Germany, for example, had few problems with French guerilla's for the majority of time that they occupied France during WWII. If a guerrilla shot a German soldier, the Germans would walk into local shops on the street of the shooting, take out 10 random French into the middle of the street, execute them, and promise to do it again the next time some Frenchman got spunky. That stopped guerrilla activity very quickly. The German's weren't special. That's the way guerrilla's have been handled since forever. That's why there's not a lot of war stories featuring them. They don't work well with an invading army during an actual war.

    In "police actions," however, we can't/won't do that, so under those very constrained circumstances they as happy and active as jungle monkeys. But in an existential war, guerilla's aren't a problem for any significant occupying military, as long as the guerilla's have family and friends they care about. And they always do.

    “That’s the way guerrilla’s have been handled since forever.”

    In much of the world, yes, but when has it ever been US military policy to murder 10 random civilians in response to a guerilla shooting? And what we’re talking about here isn’t even foreign civilians. As many other commenters have pointed out, a coup government would be asking the military to pull the trigger on the class and communities that they come from. Good luck with that.

    Some might even welcome an event like this. It would finally clarify who exactly is on which side.

    https://www.getyarn.io/yarn-clip/f74e53d8-168d-41e5-8495-1df9c1ca740e

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    In the Korean War, it was US military policy to target civilian targets and infrastructure, and a large percentage of civilians were killed off, though this was through bombing rather than infantry:

    http://www.vox.com/2015/8/3/9089913/north-korea-us-war-crime

    "Over a period of three years or so, we killed off — what — 20 percent of the population," Air Force Gen. Curtis LeMay, head of the Strategic Air Command during the Korean War, told the Office of Air Force History in 1984. Dean Rusk, a supporter of the war and later secretary of state, said the United States bombed "everything that moved in North Korea, every brick standing on top of another." After running low on urban targets, U.S. bombers destroyed hydroelectric and irrigation dams in the later stages of the war, flooding farmland and destroying crops.
     
  100. @anonymous
    "The problem with such a coup is that there are something like 17 intelligence agencies currently operating in the United States."

    In a silicon valley lunch conversation with some smart guys from all over the world, the issue of why coups were relatively rare in the English-speaking (British descended) world came up. A Serbian guy was particularly concerned; if the central government fell apart, would the country be lost to chaos?

    One of my guesses as to why a classic coup is so unlikely in the traditional anglo-sphere (aside from immense accumulated cultural and social trust capital) is the prominent roles that relatively independent counties and sheriffs play. The sheriff's office goes back a long way, over a thousand years.

    Isn't the sheriff ultimately responsible for maintaining the peace and function of the county? If you wanted to raise a militia, or the military wanted to impose marital law, wouldn't the sheriff have something to say about that? The sheriff isn't in the Federal government's direct chain of command:

    Sheriffs in the United States:


    "...is responsible for keeping the peace and enforcing the law...

    ...Elected sheriffs are accountable directly to the constitution of their state, the United States Constitution, statutes, and the citizens of their county."

     

    There are lots of large, armed sheriffs departments out there. The military might have the bombs, but the sheriff has the women and children. And the power to deputize posses:


    "...Arizona is unique in that many sheriff's offices have formed semi-permanent posse units which can be operated as a reserve to the main deputized force under a variety of circumstances..."

     

    Posse comitatus:


    "The common-law... authority of a county sheriff... to conscript any able-bodied man to assist him in keeping the peace or to pursue and arrest a felon, similar to the concept of the "hue and cry." Originally found in English common law, it is generally obsolete; however, it survives in the United States, where it is the law enforcement equivalent of summoning the militia for military purposes."

     

    It's not happening here. (Unless the Black Death Zombie horde kills 90% of the population.)

    During the War of 1812 Ontario sheriffs frequently executed warrants issued by a local judge for the arrest of those suspected of treason against the Crown. Sheriffs can work for or against The Establishment but your point is sound, sheriffs operate outside of the federal chain of command. In a US military coup a sheriff might define treason as actions against the Constitution or actions against some General Handgrenade, depending on his political viewpoint and that of his local constituency. That’s how civil wars turn ugly fast, just ask the United Empire Loyalists about the collapse in the southern colonies. It’s no coincidence they drink sweet tea in Toronto.

    Read More
  101. @taco
    A successful coup in the United States wouldn't look like the Turkey coup at all.

    What they would do is assassinate the President, and possibly simultaneously assassinate the Vice President. The exact circumstances depend on a number of factors. They may want to feel out the VP for a year or two and see if he will play ball. If he will, then he is the replacement. If not, they will take him out too.

    Hypothesize that Air Force One is shot down or crashes while the President and Vice President are aboard. The Secret Service at the point would basically take the speaker of the house into custody. Whatever intelligence agents and generals were around the speaker at that moment would basically be in charge of the country. They could feed the speaker whatever "intelligence" they wanted to, and in that environment, the new president wouldn't have the means to do any independent analysis at all.

    "Mr. President, it turns out the previous president and vice president were making a deal with Russia to do XYZ, and the deal fell through, so the Russians had them killed. The following members of the administration should be considered suspicous: the attorney general, the secretary of state, this general, that admiral, etc."

    If they could make it look like an accident or a lone wolf job that might be even better. But if they can tie it to some perceived enemy, they can isolate the incoming president, and get him to execute an emergency purge of the government.

    I believe that this is how any coup would go down.

    The problem with such a coup is that there are something like 17 intelligence agencies currently operating in the United States. This type of thing would require broad consent across all 17 intelligence agencies that the current administration is so dangerous to the current paradigm that immediate action has to be taken, at high risk to everyone involved.

    If the Kennedy assassination was a coup (and I'm not saying it was) then it probably looked something like this.

    If we hypothesize that Kennedy was a coup, ask yourself: who won, the army, or the well armed ruralites? And the answer is: there was never an armed confrontation because the coup was achieved without anyone realizing it was a coup.

    To reiterate: I am not saying and I do not believe that the CIA killed Kennedy. I suppose it is certainly possible that that is what happened (its also possible that Obama was born in Kenya, Bush had inside knowledge of 9/11, and Russians hacked voting machines in Wisconsin) but I do not believe it is the most likely explanation.

    I can see that it was in LBJ’s interest to assassinate JFK, but why would any arm of govt join in? JFK was just an ordinarily-incompetent prez of no great consequence, and little threat to anyone in govt.

    Read More
  102. The readiness with which federal hoodlums murdered those religious nuts at Waco doesn’t suggest to me that they’d have much compunction about murdering more of their fellow citizens.

    Read More
  103. @BenKenobi
    All great points.

    Also, Animals is probably the best Pink Floyd album.

    Agreed. One of my favorite running jokes in early South Park episodes was Cartman triumphantly saying “Haha, charade you are!” when he believed he had turned the tables on an opponent.

    Read More
    • LOL: BenKenobi
    • Replies: @BenKenobi
    One of their subtler references.

    Definitely more subtle than a Kaiju battle between Barbara Streisand and Robert Smith of The Cure.
  104. @Jack Hanson
    Being on the inside of the FedGov LE apparatus, I can safely say you're painting with a huge brush that has no basis in reality.

    What’s your sense, Jack H.?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    Any agency head that goes along with trying to supplant Trump in favor of BLM/anti-cop left is going to find himself leading an army of zero. There's a lot of antipathy for Loretta Lynch and Jeh Johnson among the rank and file outside of places like the DoJ Civil Rights bureau. No one likes knowing they'll be tossed under the bus if its politically expedient.

    This is a another version of Hillary deciding she doesn't need all those stupid straight white men. We saw how that worked out.

  105. @J.Ross
    NO COMMENTS = FAKE NEWS
    This is how we take over the "fake news" forced-meme and turn it true.
    Remember when every mainstream news site had a comments section? Remember disrespectful peanut gallery denizens pointing out that the story they were commenting on was a lie? And then proving it with a hyperlink.
    And then no mainstream news site had a comments section.
    NO COMMENTS = FAKE NEWS
    Next time an office-mate tries to tell you about a "trending" story, ask if the site he or she got it from allows comments, then explain why that matters.
    NO COMMENTS = FAKE NEWS

    But of course the Left has used and still uses Potemkin comments section where dissent is quickly deleted, but the appearance of a legitimate comments section remains. Fake Comments for Fake News, one might say.

    Read More
  106. @oh its just me too
    that would be hilarious if those cadets were reprimanded or penalized for being 'political' when, a few months ago, black female cadets posed in uniform with the black power salute and I think a black lives matter sign? which is a big enough offense to be expelled and sent to the brig, but got off without any penalty whatsoever.

    that would be hilarious if those cadets were reprimanded or penalized for being ‘political’ when

    There’s too many of them.

    Read More
  107. @dfordoom

    most of the military come from the rural whites…they wouldn’t fight against their brethren
     
    Some serious wishful thinking there. The military will obey whoever pays them.

    most of the military come from the rural whites…they wouldn’t fight against their brethren

    Some serious wishful thinking there. The military will obey whoever pays them.

    There is a reason our elite are flooding the office corps with minorities – just like the NKVD was almost entirely ethnically jewish – because they ARE willing to turn their guns on us.

    I try to tell this to liberals who insist that it’s for ‘diversity’ – show me anytime in history the office corp has been radically ethnically transformed for ‘diversity’ – the current ‘goal’ I believe is to make white males the minority in the officer corp one professor blew the whistle at the naval academy – they are so desperate to replace whites that even orientals were being let in with SATs in the 300s

    Read More
    • Agree: No_0ne
    • Replies: @Opinionator

    one professor blew the whistle at the naval acade
     
    Cite?
  108. @Svigor

    If hypothetically factions within the military and security agencies decided to launch a coup in the USA, how would it likely play through ? Would it be dud like the Turkey coup, would it work but most people shrug their shoulders and go on with their lives like in Thailand or would it end into an intractable civil war like in Syria ?
     
    It would have to involve the successful assassination or disappearance of PotUS (assuming we're talking about a federal coup), and considerable fog of war.

    If you're going to run a coup in DC, you'd better install a gov't that looks at least as legit as the one that preceded it. Otherwise you'd see counter-coups.

    If there was going to be a successful coup, it would involve faithless electors.

    Heavily armed rural whites will always be outgunned by the government.
     
    The gov't's had such a great run against enemies it had outgunned, since WWII, so I can see why you'd be so confident in their chances.

    The truth is, it would come down to who wanted it more. Generally speaking, both sides of the insurgency (I see conflation of insurgency and coup in this thread, but they're quite different) conversation in this country get it very, very wrong. The people who would like to see regime change and a house cleaning get it wrong because they don't see how very far the populace is from supporting a serious insurgency. The statists and crypto-statists (people who hate the state, but believe in its omnipotence), think the gov't is far more powerful than it is.

    The populace holds the cards. Even if you just limit it to the White rural population. They can bring any state to its knees. The gov't would race to the negotiating table, fold like a cheap tent.

    I like to play out what would happen if/when the government decides to confiscate firearms door-to-door like in Australia.
     
    This isn't Australia. I bet even in Australia, there are a bunch of weapon caches packed in cosmoline and buried all over the place. As it stands now, people aren't angry enough in the States, so there wouldn't be insurgency levels of resistance. But there would be insurgency-level of arms caching. And gun smuggling would become the new badwhite pastime.

    A successful coup in the United States wouldn’t look like the Turkey coup at all.

    What they would do is assassinate the President, and possibly simultaneously assassinate the Vice President.
     
    Subsequent "fog of war" stuff is correct, too. An American coup at this point would have to be all about deception, surgically removing the parts they want replaced.

    Thomas: how many months did it take the State to find that nut hiding out in the woods in Pennsylvania? Now imagine hundreds of them, all being resupplied by a supportive population. Like I said, coup-talkers overestimate both the power of the State, and the dissatisfaction of the people.

    Which is why Afghanistan is a settled protectorate.
     
    Yeah, I don't get the confidence, at all. The power of the (western) State is not in its military, but its legitimacy. And the USG still has a lot of legitimacy to burn (people like to be rrrreally aggrieved, before they stop working and start shooting). But, assuming that legitimacy is gone, and there was actually a serious insurgency, supported by a large percentage of the populace, I wouldn't bet on the gov't winning. Americans are not illiterate goatherds. Can you imagine what their IEDs would look like? Not to mention how restrictive the military's ROE would be.

    The true counter arguments are that third world guerrillas are less casualty-averse
     
    Right. You need people willing to die to clean out the stables. People who are so pissed, they start shooting. USA is very far from that.

    Not to mention how restrictive the military’s ROE would be.

    Against an eeevil right wing insurgency, the tactics of Genghis Khan would be revived by a globalist government.

    Read More
  109. Trump totally needs to Mensch-up and use that darn doomsday-football on his first morning in the office:

    If you want a vision of the future ruled by wimmin, imagine Skittles and cotton candy sharting unicorn prancing on a white, straight, male face-forever!

    Read More
  110. @Almost Missouri
    Agree. I always point this out to people who mock the defense against tyranny aspect of the 2nd Amendment as being naïve versus a modern military: how did the world's best military do against third world guerillas over the last fifty years?

    Also, the terrain in Mesopotamia is flat and open: most favorable for a modern military, yet the guerillas still managed to hang on. Most of the US is not like that terrain.

    The true counter arguments are that third world guerrillas are less casualty-averse, younger, and their civil society is much less organized and so is much more dependent on order and will tolerate much to maintain it.

    Just think of all the examples where local patriots threw out the Germans or Japanese in WWII.

    Shouldn’t take long.

    Read More
  111. @EdwardM
    Heavily armed rural whites will always be outgunned by the government. I think that what it would come down to is whether the white soldiers and lower-level officers who come from these communities would obey orders to fire on their friends. It could go either way.

    I like to play out what would happen if/when the government decides to confiscate firearms door-to-door like in Australia. Despite the noble cries of "from my cold dead hands," I don't think that most responsible gun owners would really take it to that level when the SWAT team shows up. It will all come down to whether the ATF/FBI agents obey orders. I guess the Feds will marshal the agents from Boston and San Francisco field offices to go to Alabama and Wyoming to carry out the task to improve their odds. I wouldn't count on resistance to succeed, though it could get messy.

    No doubt the left is acutely aware of this risk, hence their efforts to eviscerate the cultures of the military and federal police forces, and to try to nationalize local police departments. A few more generations of their recruitment, social programming, human capital management, and purges, and they may succeed.

    I think you’re completely correct.

    A professional military will be able to wipe out any localized resistance. If the police can’t do it, they will import special forces. You think a leftist administration would pay any attention to the Constitution if they’re threatened?

    Any armed insurgency has got to have a country as a base of support. The Taliban have Pakistan. The Viet Cong had North Vietnam, to the extent the Viet Cong had any independent existence at all.

    It would be the sheerest of disasters to start shooting at US forces or police. That would simply polarize them, and the professional soldiers would be challenged, not deterred, by the prospect of ambushes.

    The only way, and it is extremely powerful, to resist the government is massive, unarmed street protests. The biggest danger for the government is in ordering its troops to fire on unarmed civilians of their own country. The reaction of the troops is the critical factor, and it would be stupid to put them in the position of being fired on by their own people. So, in my opinion, anyone who advocates US citizens shooting at US police or military forces, even to keep their guns, is either a dupe or an agent. It’s an almost foolproof recipe for failure, and based totally on emotion rather than reason.

    If you want to have a revolution, there’s nothing that says you can’t infiltrate the police, military, and government agencies yourself. Turn the enemy’s playbook against him. Have a counter-Revolutionary long march through the institutions. And that would have the added benefit of urging the military and police to support, rather than ignore, the Constitution.

    Read More
  112. @Almost Missouri
    The casual way the pundit class calumnies the election and calls for the violent overthrow of the elected government is a little alarming. Last night pseudo-authority David Brooks was on PBS saying the Trump presidency may turn into an "authoritarian" state before the midterms. Like it's gonna be the Third Reich or something.

    You'd think that he--or at least his listeners--would be a little chastened by his unblemished record of 100% wrong predictions over the last 18 months. Not a bit of it.

    You’d think that he–or at least his listeners–would be a little chastened by his unblemished record of 100% wrong predictions over the last 18 months. Not a bit of it.

    Pretty much any response to predictions by people like that should begin with: “So why should I expect your prediction of X to be any more accurate than your prediction of the election outcome?”

    Read More
  113. the coup you all are talking about has already happened–in Nov, 1963. The deep state/shadow government has been in charge ever since, and nothing happens without their consent. Elections change nothing. I’m sure Trump has already been given the “talk”. Revolution by the people is what is needed.

    Read More
  114. @dfordoom

    If there was a war it would depend on who’s side heavily armed rural whites were on. That side would win imo.
     
    Those heavily armed rural whites would last about ten minutes if it came to a fight against the military and the police.

    You’re exactly right. In an open fight, the professional military would win against any insurgency not supported by an outside country. For those citing Afghanistan, they should keep in mind that the Taliban is supported by a major part of the Pakistani government. Also, those stating the rural whites are a major component of the armed forces should keep in mind that an army will tend to shoot back at somebody shooting at them.

    The only viable way to resist the government is through mass, unarmed demonstrations. If the police or military are directed to use force or fire on unarmed demonstrators, that will provide the biggest threat, by far, to the existing government. That is the situation where the armed forces are likely to turn their guns around, and any military general willing to countermand the orders will have a major part of the military ready to support him. So, governments generally think a long time before ordering the military to confront unarmed protesters. I understand during the Tienanmen protests, when the Chinese government finally decided to end the demonstration, they shipped in military from other parts of the country, since the local military was judged to be too cozy with the demonstrators.

    Once you begin shooting at your own military, though, you create a completely different dynamic. Those who advocate using guns against their own military are giving you a recipe for loss and disaster of the first magnitude.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson

    The only viable way to resist the government is through mass, unarmed demonstrations.
     
    See Algeria vs. the French.

    Those who advocate using guns against their own military are giving you a recipe for loss and disaster of the first magnitude.
     
    I am glad you were not here in 1776. Have you considered emigration?
  115. Folks, can we put aside once and for all the notion of a huge number of “rural whites” living in the US in 2016. Agriculture is VERY highly mechanized these days, and has been for half a century or more. Some of you write on this subject as though it were still 1905. The rural part of our population is estimated at about 3 % these days, ie., about 10-11 million people. This figure includes children and the elderly. Also, it may surprise some of you to learn that a sizeable minority of the 11 million rural residents are non-white (mainly black or Mexican), so we are talking maybe 7 to 8 million adult rural whites, a figure which includes females.

    They are good people, for the most part, but they did NOT elect Donald Trump, and they aren’t going to take over ANYTHING. Trump was elected by Midwestern working class folks and suburbanites.

    Read More
    • Replies: @enoriverbend
    Rural and farmer are not synonyms. The Census Bureau has the rural population at about 15%, although of course definitions can vary; and more than half of us own guns.
  116. @Anon
    I was never a follower or particular fan of Tucker Carlson, but his show is pretty entertaining with these people who, for some reason, choose to appear. It's like shooting fish in a barrel, but Tucker enjoys shooting fish in a barrel:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dH-ug5XgA1M

    That said, I think YouTube is probably what cost Hillary FAR more than "fake news." Watching negroes acting up while they themselves gleefully film it, over and over again, watching hardcore libs contradict themselves with no self-consciousness repeatedly, while demanding we dismiss our lying eyes, as well as tons of Cspan hearings in which dems are left sputtering under acute examination is FAR more instructive and motivating for an internet coherent voter.

    If Libs want an advantage, they should move to eliminate Cspan uploads to Youtube. It allows people who wouldn't ordinarily have the time to sit through congressional hearings to watch the most important moments for themselves. This was bad for Hillary. VERY bad.

    A casual Youtube viewer can just put "Trey Gowdy" in the search box, and be amazed for hours, without any pundit trying to spin it one way or another. That's what's killing the democrats, more than anything else. Censoring "fake news' won't help them. Only censoring Youtube, LiveLeak, and Worldstar HipHop can help them now, and I don't think that will be happening.

    Here's a taste of Trey Gowdy on Cspan. There's tons of video featuring Trey Gowdy reeming not just dems, but anyone who might be an asshole. The guy is like George Baily with a headache:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxmuNS6azaA

    I agree. I listened to so many Youtube pieces…was riveting. Gowdy is so good at self-editing. His tongue is like a Bowie knife; straight for the kill.

    Read More
  117. @Anonymous
    It looks like they're trying to lay the groundwork for a Tahrir Square or Ukraine Maidan style campaign during Trump's presidency, with massive protests in the major cities, amplified by media coverage, to try to get Trump impeached or removed from office. The particular event or thing that would initially trigger the movement and protests are unforeseen at this point, but this is obviously a psyops/info campaign by the CIA to delegitimize Trump and lay the groundwork for a potential uprising and removal. The most charitable interpretation of the CIA's actions here would be that the Russians have simply penetrated too far into Trump's orbit. This would also explain why Trump is being surrounded by generals.

    These nonviolent coups are based on the work of Gene Sharp, and many of the tactics have been field tested. They don't depend on military personnel, rather they try to use military attempts to quell the protests to further delegitimize the regime.

    If this situation turns into a hot conflict, it would quickly turn into a proxy war between Russia and NATO on the North American continent.

    Your comments are thoughtful.

    The use of the military on mass protests against Trump would be very unwise. Indeed, the counter to mass protests against Trump would be mass protests in support of Trump. The left would use violent tactics or street gangs, and that is where the right of the individual to own arms comes in. The right to own arms protects against extra-government street gangs and random violence, not against the government’s own forces.

    The left is obviously positioning itself for a major challenge to a Trump Presidency, but that doesn’t mean the only response to them is through force. Why can’t we adopt their tactics? The populists need to organize their own movements, especially after the Trump victory. The movement should be non-violent, open to ideas, and supportive of the actual Constitution. Parts of the movement may also be secret, since they may be in hostile territory (eg, in academic institutions).

    Read More
  118. @JohnnyD
    What worries me is Obama's ego. Trump's victory was basically a "screw you" to Obama and his legacy. You have to figure that Obama will try to hurt Trump's presidency before it begins out of spite.

    well, I think that would backfire. Trump appearing at the game yesterday was such a cagey move – was kinda’ shocked by it. It was a very good game, and, of course, Verne was the highlight – I doubt Verne wants to go to Sweden, however.

    It was a yuge check-mate move to keep anyone, especially the MSM, from trying pull anything. Dissing military, even if these are just students, will deep-six your career…or deplete your reputation in this current climate. All past year, the flag burning and anthem dissing was epic fail; epic fail for the MSM to justify it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Is it not tradition for president-elects to attend the Army-Navy game?
  119. The WaPo story is ridiculous, but remember Bezos connections with the CIA. Meanwhile Obama bringing African politics here even if he isn’t from Africa by refusing to acknowledge election as the Gambia’s Jammeh is doing now.

    Read More
  120. @Lagertha
    well, I think that would backfire. Trump appearing at the game yesterday was such a cagey move - was kinda' shocked by it. It was a very good game, and, of course, Verne was the highlight - I doubt Verne wants to go to Sweden, however.

    It was a yuge check-mate move to keep anyone, especially the MSM, from trying pull anything. Dissing military, even if these are just students, will deep-six your career...or deplete your reputation in this current climate. All past year, the flag burning and anthem dissing was epic fail; epic fail for the MSM to justify it.

    Is it not tradition for president-elects to attend the Army-Navy game?

    Read More
  121. @countenance
    I think this is why he's been behaving extra-Presidential ever since he won. In order to ensconce himself in the minds of many people as possible as the incumbent, in order to deter game-playing with possible recounts, the Electoral College actual vote, and potential coups. In other words, he's behaving like he's already President to dare them to try any of those shenanigans.

    Been reading Scott Adams, I see…

    Read More
  122. anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    “Re Posse Comitatus, the Act does not mention The Navy or the Marine Corps, and does not apply to the Army National Guard, or the Air National Guard.”

    I was trying to ask the other side of the question. Not anything about what militiary units can or cannot be deputized for law-enforcement (made a posse). Rather, the sheriff can deputize all-able body men in the county to “keep the peace” (that is, his own men):

    …authority of a county sheriff… to conscript any able-bodied man to assist him in keeping the peace…

    The Army National Guard or the Air National Guard (reserve, one weekend a month type troops) are made up of the very people on whom the government would be trying to impose their will. People who, along with their families, live under the authority of a sheriff, a sheriff’s office that will be there at the end of the day. Some of the Guardsmen would surely be sheriffs deputies.

    Look at how much trouble that one sheriff in Arizona who took an interest in immigration caused the government. If you were already completely mobilized and had a completely compliant military, sure, the sheriffs couldn’t do anything. But if you hadn’t already mobilized, what would the Guard do if a lot of sheriff’s departments did things like roadblock the armouries (didn’t the Turks just do that to our airbase that had tactical nukes?) or if the sheriffs had posses seize the armouries? It sounds silly, but just stopping the tanks with mobs worked in the Soviet Union (recall Yeltsin on the tank) and in Turkey. With the sheriff involved, the mob has the force of law on it’s side, if the sheriff chooses (though of course who was legally in the right and in the wrong would get worked out later, based on who won).

    I’m not claiming it’s a dominant factor, or even a big factor, in “coup-proofing”, just that it is a factor that any usurper-by-threat-of-force would have to consider.

    “Heavily armed rural whites are the largest demographic the military recruits. Always overlooked by the armchair skeptics.”

    Yea, I just don’t see it, it seems alien and seems to assume the military is made up of faceless Hollywood stormtroopers that mindlessly obey orders. Maybe if the US military was mostly made up of Syrian or Somali immigrants.

    Read More
  123. The real, legal and democratic “coup” was Trump’s victory over the parasitic elites hijacking the Republic for their own benefit.
    It was sort of a Jacksonian move by rebel elites and middle-classes to revert the harm done by decades of Rooseveltian and liberal rule.
    We can expect those ousted from power to try to stage a counter-coup. Frankly, I don’t see the military choosing sides, and there are far too many secret service branches for them to agree on anything . Some of them are bound to profit from Trump’s constitutional rule ( perhaps the FBI, once they sack that idiot Comey and put an insider in charge), so I don’t expect a counter-coup to prosper.
    Of course, you can count on Democrats raising hell during Trump’s term(s).

    Read More
  124. @Tiny Duck
    You guys need to get out of your bubble

    Go search for Angel Rye and Charles Blowa and observe how they DESTROY white conservatives

    I hope you know sites like this will be shut down in the near future. I was watching CNN today and people are angry about white nationalists and fake news.

    You guys are responsible for DYlan Roof and will be held accountable

    Come on and try to “hold me accountable”.

    Read More
  125. @Glossy
    It seems that the CIA is the only armed part of the government that's anti-Trump. Unfortunately it's also the only one that has an extensive experience with coups.

    How deep does the anti-Trump sentiment go within the CIA? It could be just the director, but the disturbing thing is that the current director is a career CIA man. What if he's representative? I don't know. Egg McMuffin is a career spy and look at him.

    Who are the CIA's rank and file? The Hollywood stereotype is WASPs, but Hollywood lies a lot. I've heard there are a lot of Mormons there because they know foreign languages and can pass background tests due to their clean living.

    Normally, the world over, the people who choose careers in armed branches of the government are conservative and patriotic. If the CIA's rank and file isn't like that, why would that be?

    “Normally, the world over, the people who choose careers in armed branches of the government are conservative and patriotic. If the CIA’s rank and file isn’t like that, why would that be?”

    I’m certainly no expert, but I think that CIA employees are often much more liberal (and probably a lot more flaky) than military men. The CIA even has, or recently had, at least one high official who was an open muslim convert. I once knew a guy, who was a beatnik-type trust-fund kid, a perennial student and amateur drug-dealer, who aspired to join the CIA. I don’t know that he ever made it in, but he was evidently the kind of person who was attracted to the job.

    There is of course one filter that defines CIA agents: they are the sort of people who like the idea of being spies.

    Read More
  126. @taco
    A successful coup in the United States wouldn't look like the Turkey coup at all.

    What they would do is assassinate the President, and possibly simultaneously assassinate the Vice President. The exact circumstances depend on a number of factors. They may want to feel out the VP for a year or two and see if he will play ball. If he will, then he is the replacement. If not, they will take him out too.

    Hypothesize that Air Force One is shot down or crashes while the President and Vice President are aboard. The Secret Service at the point would basically take the speaker of the house into custody. Whatever intelligence agents and generals were around the speaker at that moment would basically be in charge of the country. They could feed the speaker whatever "intelligence" they wanted to, and in that environment, the new president wouldn't have the means to do any independent analysis at all.

    "Mr. President, it turns out the previous president and vice president were making a deal with Russia to do XYZ, and the deal fell through, so the Russians had them killed. The following members of the administration should be considered suspicous: the attorney general, the secretary of state, this general, that admiral, etc."

    If they could make it look like an accident or a lone wolf job that might be even better. But if they can tie it to some perceived enemy, they can isolate the incoming president, and get him to execute an emergency purge of the government.

    I believe that this is how any coup would go down.

    The problem with such a coup is that there are something like 17 intelligence agencies currently operating in the United States. This type of thing would require broad consent across all 17 intelligence agencies that the current administration is so dangerous to the current paradigm that immediate action has to be taken, at high risk to everyone involved.

    If the Kennedy assassination was a coup (and I'm not saying it was) then it probably looked something like this.

    If we hypothesize that Kennedy was a coup, ask yourself: who won, the army, or the well armed ruralites? And the answer is: there was never an armed confrontation because the coup was achieved without anyone realizing it was a coup.

    To reiterate: I am not saying and I do not believe that the CIA killed Kennedy. I suppose it is certainly possible that that is what happened (its also possible that Obama was born in Kenya, Bush had inside knowledge of 9/11, and Russians hacked voting machines in Wisconsin) but I do not believe it is the most likely explanation.

    there are something like 17 intelligence agencies currently operating in the United States

    17 American agencies, that is.

    Read More
  127. @NorthOfTheOneOhOne
    In light of this:

    http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/military-enlistment-rates-by-state-and-region/

    It sounds like the modern US Army is more like the Army of Nothern Virginia than the Army of the Potomac. I doubt the leftist idiots at the WaPo will find any takers.

    Apparently the Obama Administration has taken notice:

    http://www.defense.gov/News/Article/Article/925081/force-of-the-future-aims-to-increase-militarys-geographic-diversity

    Once you get to the point of actual hostilities, the dynamics change completely and it’s very easy to lose. The biggest enemy of the Confederacy was Jefferson Davis, who carried out a military attack against a superior power and expected hostilities to just fade away.

    An inferior military power, to maintain an independent existence, has to learn to be diplomatic and to not threaten the nearby major military power, even if it means conceding marginal diplomatic or economic issues. The Ukraine is a major case in point. The Ukrainians supported a major (CIA-supported) coup which aligned the Ukraine against Russia, economically and militarily. Russia reacted to the threat in its close sphere of interest by sponsoring an independence movement in the Russian part of the Ukraine. This was perfectly predictable and perfectly preventable.

    So, if any movement to preserve the Constitution and the character of the US assumes all it has to do is take the gun off the wall and start blazing away, it’s going to lose big time. The proper way to carry out a Revolution is to act to your strengths and avoid your weaknesses.

    Read More
  128. @Whiskey
    Any coup would not be mounted by the CIA or military. Rather, the Courts.

    Hillary is running out two strings. First, "the Russians hacked to back Trump" leading to some judge ruling her the "victor" in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and Florida and hence the next President. Bezos is all on board, he's bet the farm on Hillary and Trump will hammer him silly for anti-trust and FTC violations.

    The second is as a poster here noted, "the Electoral College is racist. Or something." So again a federal judge rules Hillary the victor.

    How would the Supremes rule? My guess a 5-3 split, with Roberts the Craven bowing down to his masters they way he did with ObamaCare.

    In America, the power has traditionally lain not with the military, where there was never any real danger of a coup, but the courts and media. Both arms are profoundly threatened by Trump, who seems likely to limit the courts and pack them with his friends, while pushing anti Trust against media monopolies and duopolies.

    The real issue is if Trump simply ignores the court ruling and Hillary tries to rally the military to arrest him or what have you. We can't have forever an elite that loathes and despises its native people; sooner or later things will break.

    I think you have a point. However, the left got overconfident, and didn’t begin to organize co-option by the courts early enough. They don’t have enough time before the inauguration, and it would be obvious suicide to try to co-opt the Presidency once Trump is actually President. We may have dodged a major bullet; Obama has worked diligently to turn the military into establishment lap-dogs and to federalize the police, but figured Hillary would have at least 4 more years to complete the job. If he had dreamed that Trump would win, he might have pushed faster, and we’d be in far greater danger of an actual coup, initiated by the courts and supported by the security forces.

    Read More
  129. @Cagey Beast
    Yes exactly. I always find it funny how he shamelessly drums other people out of their own countries and institutions. I can remember him even ruling Edmund Burke beyond the acceptable bounds of conservatism due to his anti-Semitism! What's Canadian for "chutzpah"?

    What’s Canadian for “chutzpah”?

    “Moxie, eh?” ;)

    Read More
  130. Can Steve please ban anonymous comments already? All these concerns trolls pretending to be different people and spreading BS is getting too much to bear.

    Read More
  131. ESPN did show Trump appearing at the game. They didnt show the reaction though, as far as I know.

    Read More
  132. @dfordoom

    If there was a war it would depend on who’s side heavily armed rural whites were on. That side would win imo.
     
    Those heavily armed rural whites would last about ten minutes if it came to a fight against the military and the police.

    Never heard of guerrilla warfare, huh? And an awful lot of military and law enforcement personnel are not going to be eager to hunt down their fellow citizens.

    Read More
  133. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @anonymous
    "The problem with such a coup is that there are something like 17 intelligence agencies currently operating in the United States."

    In a silicon valley lunch conversation with some smart guys from all over the world, the issue of why coups were relatively rare in the English-speaking (British descended) world came up. A Serbian guy was particularly concerned; if the central government fell apart, would the country be lost to chaos?

    One of my guesses as to why a classic coup is so unlikely in the traditional anglo-sphere (aside from immense accumulated cultural and social trust capital) is the prominent roles that relatively independent counties and sheriffs play. The sheriff's office goes back a long way, over a thousand years.

    Isn't the sheriff ultimately responsible for maintaining the peace and function of the county? If you wanted to raise a militia, or the military wanted to impose marital law, wouldn't the sheriff have something to say about that? The sheriff isn't in the Federal government's direct chain of command:

    Sheriffs in the United States:


    "...is responsible for keeping the peace and enforcing the law...

    ...Elected sheriffs are accountable directly to the constitution of their state, the United States Constitution, statutes, and the citizens of their county."

     

    There are lots of large, armed sheriffs departments out there. The military might have the bombs, but the sheriff has the women and children. And the power to deputize posses:


    "...Arizona is unique in that many sheriff's offices have formed semi-permanent posse units which can be operated as a reserve to the main deputized force under a variety of circumstances..."

     

    Posse comitatus:


    "The common-law... authority of a county sheriff... to conscript any able-bodied man to assist him in keeping the peace or to pursue and arrest a felon, similar to the concept of the "hue and cry." Originally found in English common law, it is generally obsolete; however, it survives in the United States, where it is the law enforcement equivalent of summoning the militia for military purposes."

     

    It's not happening here. (Unless the Black Death Zombie horde kills 90% of the population.)

    You get stability in a society when you have achieved X. X is the percentage of white alpha males in a population with a minimum IQ of 100 who understand why you need to maintain public order in a society for that public’s own good. When a threat to society emerges, they group together, act in concert, close in, and wipe out the threat. (Trump vs. Hillary, e.g.)

    The biological success of white males over the last 2000 years (or further, if you want to take it back to the Indo-Europeans) is not an accident. There appear to be genes in the white population that are specific for building sophisticated societies and other complex social constructs. They aren’t just good at nation-building. They’re good at business-building. They’re good at culture-building. They’re good at transmitting their knowledge. Without these genes, browns-skinned people struggle with the success of Sisyphus to make their own countries work, and black-skinned people see their white-built societies fall apart like sandcastles (e.g. Detroit.)

    Without a minimum IQ level and willingness to put aside differences and cooperate with each other for the society’s own good, the nation-state doesn’t work. Other peoples just operate like big tribes who are in it for themselves, and whose commerce is at the local-market-booth level.

    Read More
  134. @anonymous
    Iraq is mostly desert with a few roads connecting distant population centers. Iraqi irregulars can immobilize the army by blocking individual roads, bridges and capturing key settlements.

    -
    Contrarian

    America has plenty of terrain where guerrilla warfare would work, and even in urban areas hit-and-run tactics can work. Look at the Symbionese Liberation Army. The managed to last more than two years, with some members running around loose as late as 2002, and they didn’t even have much popular support.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dfordoom

    Look at the Symbionese Liberation Army.
     
    Yes, look at what they achieved. Nothing. Of course we all remember the successful coup by the Baader-Meinhof group. Oh wait, that didn't happen either. And then there was the successful seizure of power by the Red Brigades in Italy. Oh hang on, that didn't happen either.

    I don't know what you're smoking but you might want to cut down a bit.
  135. @Big Bill
    Wow. The Constitution.

    So tell me, what do Russians and Jews pledge their allegiance to?

    Israel doesn't have a Constitution and I just can't see the Russians pledging their lives and sacred honor to preserve a piece of paper.

    Do they pledge themselves to fight and defend their nation? Their people? Their land?

    I am a married man, but I would never plead undying loyalty to my marriage license.

    Wow. The Constitution.

    Yes, indeed: Wow!! The Constitution!!! (ノ^ヮ^)ノ*:・゚✧

    So tell me, what do Russians and Jews pledge their allegiance to?

    Being neither a Russian nor a Jew, I wouldn’t know. ◉ _ ◉

    I am a married man, but I would never plead [sic] undying loyalty to my marriage license.

    Is the constitution America’s marriage license — or its marriage vows? (◔ૂ◔)

    Read More
  136. @J.Ross
    NO COMMENTS = FAKE NEWS
    This is how we take over the "fake news" forced-meme and turn it true.
    Remember when every mainstream news site had a comments section? Remember disrespectful peanut gallery denizens pointing out that the story they were commenting on was a lie? And then proving it with a hyperlink.
    And then no mainstream news site had a comments section.
    NO COMMENTS = FAKE NEWS
    Next time an office-mate tries to tell you about a "trending" story, ask if the site he or she got it from allows comments, then explain why that matters.
    NO COMMENTS = FAKE NEWS

    Agree completely. No Comments = Fake News.

    If the management isn’t confident enough to get feedback from readers then it’s just propaganda. Exhibit A is how the NYT only allows comments for a few “pile on the evil republican” stories, and even then they sometimes get burned by the independence of their readers.

    Say what you will about WaPo, but at least they allow comments. And if you read those comments during the election, you could see clearly the strength of the support for Trump, even among the somewhat limited demographic of readers of a legacy prestige publication.

    Read More
  137. anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Speaking of sheriff’s posses, here’s an unusual one that points out that posses can be large, or at least could be as of 1917 (regardless of how the legality turned out in the end):

    Bisbee Deportation:

    “The Bisbee Deportation was the illegal kidnapping and deportation of about 1,300 striking mine workers, their supporters, and citizen bystanders by 2,000 members of a deputized posse on July 12, 1917.

    …the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW)… began signing up several hundred miners as members…

    …The arrested were first held at a local baseball park before being loaded onto cattle cars and deported 200 miles… to Tres Hermanas in New Mexico. The 16-hour journey was through desert without food or water. Once unloaded, the deportees, most without money or transportation, were warned against returning to Bisbee.

    …Phelps Dodge, in collusion with the sheriff, had closed down access to outside communications…

    …A presidential mediation commission investigated the actions, and in its final report, described the deportation as “wholly illegal and without authority in law, either State or Federal.” Nevertheless, no individual, company, or agency was ever convicted in connection with the deportations.”

    “…The morning of July 12, the Bisbee Daily Review carried a notice announcing that:

    …a Sheriff’s posse of 1,200 men in Bisbee and 1,000 men in Douglas, all loyal Americans, [had formed] for the purpose of arresting on the charges of vagrancy, treason, and of being disturbers of the peace of Cochise County all those strange men who have congregated here from other parts and sections for the purpose of harassing and intimidating all men who desire to pursue their daily toil.

    A similar notice was posted throughout the town on fence posts, telephone poles and walls.

    At 4:00 a.m., the 2,200 deputies dispersed through the town…”

    Read More
  138. @anon

    Agree. I always point this out to people who mock the defense against tyranny aspect of the 2nd Amendment as being naïve versus a modern military: how did the world’s best military do against third world guerillas over the last fifty years?
     
    The world's best military would make short work of "third world guerrillas" in a war situation. Unfortunately, they don't do as well in "police actions" which is what our military has been misapplied towards for the last 50 years.

    Germany, for example, had few problems with French guerilla's for the majority of time that they occupied France during WWII. If a guerrilla shot a German soldier, the Germans would walk into local shops on the street of the shooting, take out 10 random French into the middle of the street, execute them, and promise to do it again the next time some Frenchman got spunky. That stopped guerrilla activity very quickly. The German's weren't special. That's the way guerrilla's have been handled since forever. That's why there's not a lot of war stories featuring them. They don't work well with an invading army during an actual war.

    In "police actions," however, we can't/won't do that, so under those very constrained circumstances they as happy and active as jungle monkeys. But in an existential war, guerilla's aren't a problem for any significant occupying military, as long as the guerilla's have family and friends they care about. And they always do.

    Seems to me the Viet Cong were very successful guerrillas. It was only when they came out in the open and tried to go toe to toe with US forces that they got clobbered. In the wake of the Civil War, the south successfully used guerrilla and terrorist tactics to thwart Reconstruction. Then there’s the Irish War of Independence, as well as Spanish and Portuguese resistance to Napoleon’s invasion of the Spanish peninsula. Napoleon had a third of a million men in Spain and Portugal, but almost all of them were continually tied up in dealing with insurgencies. You are much too quick to dismiss irregular warfare as a means of resisting domestic tyranny.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dfordoom

    Seems to me the Viet Cong were very successful guerrillas.
     
    The Viet Cong were effectively destroyed by 1968. The North Vietnamese Army, with massive outside assistance, won the Vietnam War.

    as well as Spanish and Portuguese resistance to Napoleon’s invasion of the Spanish peninsula.
     
    They did get a teensy bit of help from the British. Like an entire army of British regulars under the Duke of Wellington.

    Guerillas can do well when they have massive backing from outside powers. Exactly where are those "heavily armed rural whites" going to get that sort of help?
  139. It will be interesting to watch Obama’s political generals get purged or re-stationed in Alaska once Trump becomes the Commander in Chief. My guess is that the military has been collecting names and waiting for the right administration. This also goes for the neo-cons. As a civilian, I have no idea who is who but they know everyone and there will be some scores to settle.

    Read More
  140. @Lagertha
    The CIA and FBI and NSA have been fighting against each other for decades, duh, major, duh. This is a pivotal year for all factions to choose sides or: retire, or fall in line. SIMPLE. My grandfather had to deal with this in Finland in 1919. Choose....fracking choose: country or your petty self - should be easy.

    And, if you can't chose...well, according to my Grandpa's memoirs: you and your family will forfeit your farm, your property, you existence (border moved west)...pack up and march to the eastern (Russian) border. You are now, on your own. Good bye.

    Excuse me, but what are you talking about? What happened to your grandfather in 1919 in Finland? Are you referring to the Civil War of 1918 or Winter War (1939 – 1940)? During the Civil War border moved nowhere. During the Winter War practically nobody chose a side – nearly all men, including most communists, were in arms against the invader. If you are referring to the Civil War, I have never heard that anybody forfeited their landed property, not even those on the losing (“Red”) side. Then again, most of the Reds never actually owned land. They were mostly tenant farmers and agricultural laborers. Naturally there were criminal punishments for the rebellion and even executions (many of them of very dubious legal character).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lagertha
    too difficult to write about in this blog, but I'll give up this: My relatives were Jaegers/officers in both wars. Farmers in Karjala; and Lappi; doctors, engineers, teachers in Helsinki; sailers; Navy & Army in Finland. Put it this way, Mannerheim was a guest at our family events and faraway summer cottage...and we are very patriotic on Dec. 6th. And, yes, Finland did had communists who were given a chance to stay or go. I'm sure you know what Aunuksen Retki was all about.
  141. @Lagertha
    Native people (today's native people for all you PC's) in this country, always win. Tons of Republicans just won. Elites that try to manipulate armed forces just lost big time...or are forever thought of as a parasitic and duplicitous entity that can not be trusted, ever - what ever they speak is wrong and harmful. Hillary is a sociopath, in my opinion. siiiiiiighhh, relief, siiiiiiighhhhhhhh. And, as some of you know, I have thought this for over 2 decades.

    I think of her more as an Asset.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lagertha
    Yeah, I get that. Let's just hope we can convince more people that she is not even close to the level of many women before her time.
  142. @Whoever
    Most definitely would not be on board with any coup or other treason against our country.

    HAVING BEEN APPOINTED A MIDSHIPMAN IN THE UNITED STATES NAVY, I
    SOLEMNLY SWEAR THAT I WILL SUPPORT AND DEFEND THE
    CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES AGAINST ALL ENEMIES, FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC; THAT I WILL BEAR TRUE FAITH AND ALLEGIANCE TO THE SAME; THAT I TAKE THIS OBLIGATION FREELY, WITHOUT ANY MENTAL RESERVATION OR PURPOSE OF EVASION; AND THAT I WILL WELL AND FAITHFULLY DISCHARGE THE DUTIES OF THE OFFICE ON WHICH I AM ABOUT TO ENTER, SO HELP ME GOD.

    A politician who acts beyond the limits set out in the Constitution for his office is violating the Constitution and is a domestic enemy. That is why the pledge is to support Constitutional government and not particular individuals. If someone tries to assume the office of President without gaining the appropriate votes, or if a Congressman refuses to vacate his seat after loosing an election and his successor is sworn in, they are similarly violating the Constitution.

    The Constitution has nothing about judicial review in it. It was assumed all people would pretty much recognize when the plain words were being violated and know a constitutional violation when they saw it.

    Read More
  143. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Almost Missouri

    "That’s the way guerrilla’s have been handled since forever."
     
    In much of the world, yes, but when has it ever been US military policy to murder 10 random civilians in response to a guerilla shooting? And what we're talking about here isn't even foreign civilians. As many other commenters have pointed out, a coup government would be asking the military to pull the trigger on the class and communities that they come from. Good luck with that.

    Some might even welcome an event like this. It would finally clarify who exactly is on which side.

    https://www.getyarn.io/yarn-clip/f74e53d8-168d-41e5-8495-1df9c1ca740e

    In the Korean War, it was US military policy to target civilian targets and infrastructure, and a large percentage of civilians were killed off, though this was through bombing rather than infantry:

    http://www.vox.com/2015/8/3/9089913/north-korea-us-war-crime

    “Over a period of three years or so, we killed off — what — 20 percent of the population,” Air Force Gen. Curtis LeMay, head of the Strategic Air Command during the Korean War, told the Office of Air Force History in 1984. Dean Rusk, a supporter of the war and later secretary of state, said the United States bombed “everything that moved in North Korea, every brick standing on top of another.” After running low on urban targets, U.S. bombers destroyed hydroelectric and irrigation dams in the later stages of the war, flooding farmland and destroying crops.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    Korea was the least of it. In WWII, "strategic bombing" (i.e., blowing up civilians) killed hundreds of thousands in Japan and Germany. As LeMay and others admitted, had the Allies lost, they would have been convicted of war crimes.

    But "strategic bombing" intended to destroy "infrastructure" is different from a policy of demonstrative and formal murder of civilians by occupying forces intended to suppress insurgency, which is what the thread was about.
  144. @Chrisnonymous
    I've never understood how that works with separation of powers, etc. For example, if SCOTUS says the Constitution contains a protection of abortion, does that make pro-life activists domestic enemies? What if SCOTUS finds a loophole in the 2nd Amendment? You've taken an oath to consider gun advocates enemies then?

    I'm sure this has been addressed in military law circles, but what do you think as an oath-taker?

    For example, if SCOTUS says the Constitution contains a protection of abortion, does that make pro-life activists domestic enemies?

    Constitution’s got that covered:
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

    Read More
  145. @Jack Hanson
    Yeah, and Afghanis with Mausers can never stop the US.

    All it takes is one good ambush and cops would tell the bureaucrats "You do it".

    Mausers

    Enfields.

    http://nyti.ms/2hdZX3L

    Read More
  146. @Flip
    Coup in America

    https://www.fff.org/2013/07/09/no-military-coups-for-america-really/

    I’ve never understood the Oliver Stone angle of “The CIA killed Kennedy because Kennedy wanted to withdraw from Vietnam”

    Kennedy sent the troops into Vietnam. Is there any evidence that Kennedy actually wanted to do this? Is there a single scintilla of evidence that Kennedy (unlike seemingly every Democrat before him and every Democrat after him) was a non-interventionist?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    The day Kennedy was inaugurated, we had about 700 troops in Vietnam. They were not in combat. They were weapons trainers. We sold the south Vietnamese vast amounts of weapons and the trainers taught the South Vietnamese how to use them. The day Kennedy died we had about 40,000 combat troops in Vietnam.

    As soon as Kennedy was dead, the liberals such as Mark Lane and a plethora of others cranked out books and theories that the Secret Service, FBI, CIA, Joint Chiefs of Staff, KKK, oil industry, steel industry,, even the local Dallas police officers all killed Kennedy because Kennedy was a leftist hero who wanted to withdraw from Vietnam, make peace with Castro and the rest of the communist world and create heaven on earth for American blacks.

    It was reading those books by Mark Lane and the rest of the non goy communist leftists that made me so cynical about the media.

    Kennedy was a real anti communist cold warrior, just like the CIA was at the time.
    , @Flip
    Lots of evidence. Read James Douglass's JFK and the Unspeakable (or at least the reviews on Amazon).
  147. @candid_observer
    I do wonder what Trump is going to do to the people at the CIA who have gone all in on attacking him.

    It's not the usual thing for employees to go out of their way to trash the incoming CEO publicly. Can they be so smug that they don't think there will be consequences?

    Maybe they are pretty sure there will be no bad consequences but many rewards. Many leaders have been ousted by coups over the centuries.

    I don’t want to insult any vets, but it seems to me the military is just another affirmative action welfare government agency for blacks, Hispanics, gays, women etc. With the exception of the young White Goy men who do the actual fighting. But it seems every time I see military news its all about the latest black lesbian handicapped woman admiral or general. Or another announcement about the military’s commitment to diversity and inclusion and social programs.

    Been on a military base in the last 30 years? Like government buildings, hardly a White to be seen.

    Read More
  148. @Whiskey
    Any coup would not be mounted by the CIA or military. Rather, the Courts.

    Hillary is running out two strings. First, "the Russians hacked to back Trump" leading to some judge ruling her the "victor" in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and Florida and hence the next President. Bezos is all on board, he's bet the farm on Hillary and Trump will hammer him silly for anti-trust and FTC violations.

    The second is as a poster here noted, "the Electoral College is racist. Or something." So again a federal judge rules Hillary the victor.

    How would the Supremes rule? My guess a 5-3 split, with Roberts the Craven bowing down to his masters they way he did with ObamaCare.

    In America, the power has traditionally lain not with the military, where there was never any real danger of a coup, but the courts and media. Both arms are profoundly threatened by Trump, who seems likely to limit the courts and pack them with his friends, while pushing anti Trust against media monopolies and duopolies.

    The real issue is if Trump simply ignores the court ruling and Hillary tries to rally the military to arrest him or what have you. We can't have forever an elite that loathes and despises its native people; sooner or later things will break.

    You are so right about the courts. The federal courts have ruled this country since 1804 (Marbury vs Madison) President Andrew Jackson made some noise about disregarding the court but he caved in as have all Presidents.

    Any coup will come from the federal courts. The federal courts are the supreme enemy of Whites. School desegregation, school busing, support for black on White crime and the destruction of our great cities and most of all, most of all affirmative action for retarded blacks browns and anything but White.

    Whatever the constitution says and whatever anyone thinks the founders intended, the federal courts rule the country.

    And for about 70 years, the federal courts have consistently ruled against Whites.

    Read More
  149. @Tiny Duck
    You guys need to get out of your bubble

    Go search for Angel Rye and Charles Blowa and observe how they DESTROY white conservatives

    I hope you know sites like this will be shut down in the near future. I was watching CNN today and people are angry about white nationalists and fake news.

    You guys are responsible for DYlan Roof and will be held accountable

    Angela Rye, a new candidate for the title of whitest “black” woman ever.

    Read More
  150. @taco
    I've never understood the Oliver Stone angle of "The CIA killed Kennedy because Kennedy wanted to withdraw from Vietnam"

    Kennedy sent the troops into Vietnam. Is there any evidence that Kennedy actually wanted to do this? Is there a single scintilla of evidence that Kennedy (unlike seemingly every Democrat before him and every Democrat after him) was a non-interventionist?

    The day Kennedy was inaugurated, we had about 700 troops in Vietnam. They were not in combat. They were weapons trainers. We sold the south Vietnamese vast amounts of weapons and the trainers taught the South Vietnamese how to use them. The day Kennedy died we had about 40,000 combat troops in Vietnam.

    As soon as Kennedy was dead, the liberals such as Mark Lane and a plethora of others cranked out books and theories that the Secret Service, FBI, CIA, Joint Chiefs of Staff, KKK, oil industry, steel industry,, even the local Dallas police officers all killed Kennedy because Kennedy was a leftist hero who wanted to withdraw from Vietnam, make peace with Castro and the rest of the communist world and create heaven on earth for American blacks.

    It was reading those books by Mark Lane and the rest of the non goy communist leftists that made me so cynical about the media.

    Kennedy was a real anti communist cold warrior, just like the CIA was at the time.

    Read More
    • Replies: @PV van der Byl
    Alden, you are absolutely correct.

    Kennedy certainly did not intend for South Vietnam to be overrun by the communists.

    Kennedy, being Kennedy, was convinced his brilliant counter-insurgency strategy for South Vietnam would shortly bear fruit. It was of a piece with the Special Forces who were established in his Presidency and whose green berets were approved over the objections of the top Army brass.

    That is why he announced a withdrawal of 1,000 US servicemen On November 2. He thought they would soon be unnecessary to protect the South.

    What several commenters on this post have overlooked (e.g. Detective Club) is that something else happened on November 2, 1963 that turned out to be very important.

    The President of South Vietnam, Ngo Dinh Diem was assassinated with US provided weapons and according to a John F. Kennedy-approved plan.

    Think about that.

    Kennedy had been convinced that it was only the obstinacy and backwardness of Ngo Dinh Diem that had prevented anti-Communist forces from defeating the VC.

    In fact, Ngo Dinh Diem had provided what little political cohesion the South had. After his murder, the country experienced a series of coups by opportunistic South Vietnamese generals jockeying for advantage.

    That put the ARVN into such disarray that LBJ had to keep sending more US troops to keep it from collapsing.
    , @Detective Club
    On Nov. 22, 1963 the US had 16,000 military people in South Vietnam, not 40,000.

    You may have included CIA goons and spooks in your count (sorry, bad joke). The 1,000 US military people (including doctors and nurses) that were supposed to leave in December, 1963 were turned around and sent right back to South Vietnam by order of LBJ in the days after the JFK assassination.

    Mark Lane may have been a flaming Commie or Lefty but even Commies or Lefties, flaming or otherwise, can be right some of the time! The Kennedy killing was one of those times.

    If Kennedy was a true Blue anti-communist warrior, why did he scotch the idea of having the off-shore US Marines land at the Bay of Pigs in April, 1961? Why did stop the US military from invading Cuba in October, 1962 when the Joint-Chiefs were begging him to invade as soon as possible?

    From the POV of the CIA and the Pentagon, JFK was true Pink-o!
  151. @dfordoom

    If there was a war it would depend on who’s side heavily armed rural whites were on. That side would win imo.
     
    Those heavily armed rural whites would last about ten minutes if it came to a fight against the military and the police.

    I suspect Colonel Banastre Tarleton said the same thing about facing off against Colonel Francis Marion and General Daniel Morgan.

    Read More
  152. @Dave Pinsen
    When the army is comprised of local conscripts, there's a good chance they won't fire on their neighbors and relatives.

    When it's a professional army drawn from a continental country, it's not as safe a bet. But in the US, the Posse Comitatus Act limits the use of the military for domestic law enforcement (there have been rare exceptions, such as the use of active duty soldiers and Marines during the LA riots). But the federal government also has militarized police at the FBI, ATF, etc.

    Back in the '90s, there were some grass roots movements against militarized feds, proposals that warrants had to be executed with local sheriffs, that sort of thing, prompted in part by Ruby Ridge and Waco.

    But the Oklahoma City bombing and then 9/11 shifted the politics on that. Maybe it's time to shift back a bit.

    Our military transfers every 2 years. The soldiers in the bases are not locals. They are from all over the country. And a huge proportion of them are blacks and browns who hate Whites.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonguy

    Our military transfers every 2 years. The soldiers in the bases are not locals. They are from all over the country. And a huge proportion of them are blacks and browns who hate Whites.
     
    Where do you guys get all this fake news?

    All branches of the military and the Coast Guard have less minority representation than US society at large and by statistically significant amounts.

    This trend becomes more pronounced the closer one gets to combat arms units. The DoD has recognized this trend since the 90s and the underlying social/economic drivers for it.

    BTW, this is a complete reversal from several decades ago where the military, esp. the Army, was disproportionately minority compared to U.S. society.

  153. @RonaldB
    You're exactly right. In an open fight, the professional military would win against any insurgency not supported by an outside country. For those citing Afghanistan, they should keep in mind that the Taliban is supported by a major part of the Pakistani government. Also, those stating the rural whites are a major component of the armed forces should keep in mind that an army will tend to shoot back at somebody shooting at them.

    The only viable way to resist the government is through mass, unarmed demonstrations. If the police or military are directed to use force or fire on unarmed demonstrators, that will provide the biggest threat, by far, to the existing government. That is the situation where the armed forces are likely to turn their guns around, and any military general willing to countermand the orders will have a major part of the military ready to support him. So, governments generally think a long time before ordering the military to confront unarmed protesters. I understand during the Tienanmen protests, when the Chinese government finally decided to end the demonstration, they shipped in military from other parts of the country, since the local military was judged to be too cozy with the demonstrators.

    Once you begin shooting at your own military, though, you create a completely different dynamic. Those who advocate using guns against their own military are giving you a recipe for loss and disaster of the first magnitude.

    The only viable way to resist the government is through mass, unarmed demonstrations.

    See Algeria vs. the French.

    Those who advocate using guns against their own military are giving you a recipe for loss and disaster of the first magnitude.

    I am glad you were not here in 1776. Have you considered emigration?

    Read More
    • Replies: @dfordoom

    I am glad you were not here in 1776.
     
    You do know that the American Revolution was another example of local forces succeeding because they received massive support from outside powers don't you? You do realise the French not only offered support but thousands of French regulars? Not to mention the French navy winning the decisive battle of the war?

    Without the French America would still be part of the British Empire.
    , @fnn

    See Algeria vs. the French.
     
    The French won the war. De Gaulle understood the "Winds of Change" thing and knew that maintaining Algeria as part of "metropolitan France" would eventually mean the de-Europeanization of much of mainland France. It happened anyway, but De Gaulle sought to avoid it.
  154. On the front lines of the coup attempt, visualize Jennifer Rubin, Linda Chavez, Bret Stephens & Fareed Zakaria armed with soy lattes & biscottis. Fearsome stuff.

    Read More
  155. @Vendetta
    Heavily armed rural whites are the largest demographic the military recruits. Always overlooked by the armchair skeptics.

    If they are in the military their weapons are in the armories. The military is heavily black and brown, not White. Some of the big navy ships are only about 15 percent White. The carrier my nephew works on has only 3 Whites on the whole ship, him and the other 2 nuclear engineers that run the ship.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    Its always nice when the fabulism is as obvious as this.

    The combat arms are overwhelmingly white. But thank you for outing yourself as a ridiculous troll.
    , @anonguy

    If they are in the military their weapons are in the armories. The military is heavily black and brown, not White. Some of the big navy ships are only about 15 percent White. The carrier my nephew works on has only 3 Whites on the whole ship, him and the other 2 nuclear engineers that run the ship.
     
    What ships are only 15% white?

    What carrier is that that only has 3 whites and only three nukes?

    This is utter baloney, more fake news.

  156. @The Plutonium Kid
    America has plenty of terrain where guerrilla warfare would work, and even in urban areas hit-and-run tactics can work. Look at the Symbionese Liberation Army. The managed to last more than two years, with some members running around loose as late as 2002, and they didn't even have much popular support.

    Look at the Symbionese Liberation Army.

    Yes, look at what they achieved. Nothing. Of course we all remember the successful coup by the Baader-Meinhof group. Oh wait, that didn’t happen either. And then there was the successful seizure of power by the Red Brigades in Italy. Oh hang on, that didn’t happen either.

    I don’t know what you’re smoking but you might want to cut down a bit.

    Read More
    • Replies: @fnn
    OTOH, the IRA did pretty well for itself, though the Six Counties are still part of the UK. But it's hard to figure out what difference it really makes in today's Europe.
  157. @The Plutonium Kid
    Seems to me the Viet Cong were very successful guerrillas. It was only when they came out in the open and tried to go toe to toe with US forces that they got clobbered. In the wake of the Civil War, the south successfully used guerrilla and terrorist tactics to thwart Reconstruction. Then there's the Irish War of Independence, as well as Spanish and Portuguese resistance to Napoleon's invasion of the Spanish peninsula. Napoleon had a third of a million men in Spain and Portugal, but almost all of them were continually tied up in dealing with insurgencies. You are much too quick to dismiss irregular warfare as a means of resisting domestic tyranny.

    Seems to me the Viet Cong were very successful guerrillas.

    The Viet Cong were effectively destroyed by 1968. The North Vietnamese Army, with massive outside assistance, won the Vietnam War.

    as well as Spanish and Portuguese resistance to Napoleon’s invasion of the Spanish peninsula.

    They did get a teensy bit of help from the British. Like an entire army of British regulars under the Duke of Wellington.

    Guerillas can do well when they have massive backing from outside powers. Exactly where are those “heavily armed rural whites” going to get that sort of help?

    Read More
    • Agree: anonguy
    • Replies: @The Plutonium Kid

    The Viet Cong were effectively destroyed by 1968. The North Vietnamese Army, with massive outside assistance, won the Vietnam War.
     
    Only because they stupidly came out in the open during the Tet Offensive and fought the enemy on the enemy's terms. The North Vietnamese regulars didn't do much better. Militarily, the Tet Offensive was a major blunder on the part of the reds in Vietnam.

    They did get a teensy bit of help from the British. Like an entire army of British regulars under the Duke of Wellington.
     
    As I already pointed out, almost all of Napoleon's forces in the Spanish peninsula were tied up by insurgencies.

    Guerillas can do well when they have massive backing from outside powers. Exactly where are those “heavily armed rural whites” going to get that sort of help?
     
    Perhaps Russia, China or even Iran. Arms and other support could easily be smuggled in through Mexico and the Gulf Coast, and quite likely Cuba would gladly serve as a staging area for such support. A lot of folks out there would like to see American military forces tied up with a domestic insurgency so that they themselves could have a freer hand with matters abroad. For that matter, an insurgency might very well get substantial aid from renegade elements of the federal government itself. I can't help wondering how many of the cloak and dagger boys at the CIA would pitch in.
  158. @Charles Erwin Wilson

    The only viable way to resist the government is through mass, unarmed demonstrations.
     
    See Algeria vs. the French.

    Those who advocate using guns against their own military are giving you a recipe for loss and disaster of the first magnitude.
     
    I am glad you were not here in 1776. Have you considered emigration?

    I am glad you were not here in 1776.

    You do know that the American Revolution was another example of local forces succeeding because they received massive support from outside powers don’t you? You do realise the French not only offered support but thousands of French regulars? Not to mention the French navy winning the decisive battle of the war?

    Without the French America would still be part of the British Empire.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    And I'm sure the Russians would just sit back and twiddle their thumbs.
  159. @taco
    I've never understood the Oliver Stone angle of "The CIA killed Kennedy because Kennedy wanted to withdraw from Vietnam"

    Kennedy sent the troops into Vietnam. Is there any evidence that Kennedy actually wanted to do this? Is there a single scintilla of evidence that Kennedy (unlike seemingly every Democrat before him and every Democrat after him) was a non-interventionist?

    Lots of evidence. Read James Douglass’s JFK and the Unspeakable (or at least the reviews on Amazon).

    Read More
  160. @Charles Erwin Wilson

    The only viable way to resist the government is through mass, unarmed demonstrations.
     
    See Algeria vs. the French.

    Those who advocate using guns against their own military are giving you a recipe for loss and disaster of the first magnitude.
     
    I am glad you were not here in 1776. Have you considered emigration?

    See Algeria vs. the French.

    The French won the war. De Gaulle understood the “Winds of Change” thing and knew that maintaining Algeria as part of “metropolitan France” would eventually mean the de-Europeanization of much of mainland France. It happened anyway, but De Gaulle sought to avoid it.

    Read More
  161. @dfordoom

    Look at the Symbionese Liberation Army.
     
    Yes, look at what they achieved. Nothing. Of course we all remember the successful coup by the Baader-Meinhof group. Oh wait, that didn't happen either. And then there was the successful seizure of power by the Red Brigades in Italy. Oh hang on, that didn't happen either.

    I don't know what you're smoking but you might want to cut down a bit.

    OTOH, the IRA did pretty well for itself, though the Six Counties are still part of the UK. But it’s hard to figure out what difference it really makes in today’s Europe.

    Read More
  162. @whorefinder

    Being on the inside of the FedGov LE apparatus, I can safely say you’re painting with a huge brush that has no basis in reality.
     
    Oh yeah, you secret police are the good guys.

    Let me know when your boss Comey's done shredding the last of Hillary's files to prevent prosecution, ok?

    Comey is not representative of the FBI, but don’t let me stop you from seeing Cheka under the bed.

    The secret police wouldn’t be who you have to worry about. The largest law enforcement agency in the FedGov is pretty firmly pro Trump (and its not the FBI, ATF, or DEA, or any other three letter agency).

    Read More
    • Replies: @whorefinder

    Comey is not representative of the FBI,
     
    No true KGB agent, comrade, would ever get caught blatantly covering for a member of the party---we never get caught!

    but don’t let me stop you from seeing Cheka under the bed.
     
    If the shoes fit, little secret policeman.

    The secret police wouldn’t be who you have to worry about.
     
    Pay no attention to frumentarii/Praetorian Guard combo our police state has organized since the end of WW2 and accelerated in growth since 9/11! You are all great patriots, comrade!

    The largest law enforcement agency in the FedGov is pretty firmly pro Trump (and its not the FBI, ATF, or DEA, or any other three letter agency).
     
    If you're referring to the military, lol. As I've explained elsewhere, the military has a very poor track record throughout world history of counteracting coups by secret police such as yourself. They simply follow the orders of the powers that be, unless they install their own guy.

    Now go back to monitoring the web traffic of white males, ignoring background checks on Islamic immigrants (gotta make sure those terrorists do their job, and get you more funding and power in the process), and covering up the child porn downloads of the latest politician you're going to blackmail for more funds. Dennis Hastert must've been quite a coup for you.

  163. @Desiderius
    What's your sense, Jack H.?

    Any agency head that goes along with trying to supplant Trump in favor of BLM/anti-cop left is going to find himself leading an army of zero. There’s a lot of antipathy for Loretta Lynch and Jeh Johnson among the rank and file outside of places like the DoJ Civil Rights bureau. No one likes knowing they’ll be tossed under the bus if its politically expedient.

    This is a another version of Hillary deciding she doesn’t need all those stupid straight white men. We saw how that worked out.

    Read More
  164. @dfordoom

    I am glad you were not here in 1776.
     
    You do know that the American Revolution was another example of local forces succeeding because they received massive support from outside powers don't you? You do realise the French not only offered support but thousands of French regulars? Not to mention the French navy winning the decisive battle of the war?

    Without the French America would still be part of the British Empire.

    And I’m sure the Russians would just sit back and twiddle their thumbs.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dfordoom

    And I’m sure the Russians would just sit back and twiddle their thumbs.
     
    That's exactly what they'd do. Or do you imagine they'd intervene and risk starting a nuclear war? For the sake of a few losers with rifles in pick-up trucks?
  165. @Alden
    If they are in the military their weapons are in the armories. The military is heavily black and brown, not White. Some of the big navy ships are only about 15 percent White. The carrier my nephew works on has only 3 Whites on the whole ship, him and the other 2 nuclear engineers that run the ship.

    Its always nice when the fabulism is as obvious as this.

    The combat arms are overwhelmingly white. But thank you for outing yourself as a ridiculous troll.

    Read More
  166. @Svigor

    If hypothetically factions within the military and security agencies decided to launch a coup in the USA, how would it likely play through ? Would it be dud like the Turkey coup, would it work but most people shrug their shoulders and go on with their lives like in Thailand or would it end into an intractable civil war like in Syria ?
     
    It would have to involve the successful assassination or disappearance of PotUS (assuming we're talking about a federal coup), and considerable fog of war.

    If you're going to run a coup in DC, you'd better install a gov't that looks at least as legit as the one that preceded it. Otherwise you'd see counter-coups.

    If there was going to be a successful coup, it would involve faithless electors.

    Heavily armed rural whites will always be outgunned by the government.
     
    The gov't's had such a great run against enemies it had outgunned, since WWII, so I can see why you'd be so confident in their chances.

    The truth is, it would come down to who wanted it more. Generally speaking, both sides of the insurgency (I see conflation of insurgency and coup in this thread, but they're quite different) conversation in this country get it very, very wrong. The people who would like to see regime change and a house cleaning get it wrong because they don't see how very far the populace is from supporting a serious insurgency. The statists and crypto-statists (people who hate the state, but believe in its omnipotence), think the gov't is far more powerful than it is.

    The populace holds the cards. Even if you just limit it to the White rural population. They can bring any state to its knees. The gov't would race to the negotiating table, fold like a cheap tent.

    I like to play out what would happen if/when the government decides to confiscate firearms door-to-door like in Australia.
     
    This isn't Australia. I bet even in Australia, there are a bunch of weapon caches packed in cosmoline and buried all over the place. As it stands now, people aren't angry enough in the States, so there wouldn't be insurgency levels of resistance. But there would be insurgency-level of arms caching. And gun smuggling would become the new badwhite pastime.

    A successful coup in the United States wouldn’t look like the Turkey coup at all.

    What they would do is assassinate the President, and possibly simultaneously assassinate the Vice President.
     
    Subsequent "fog of war" stuff is correct, too. An American coup at this point would have to be all about deception, surgically removing the parts they want replaced.

    Thomas: how many months did it take the State to find that nut hiding out in the woods in Pennsylvania? Now imagine hundreds of them, all being resupplied by a supportive population. Like I said, coup-talkers overestimate both the power of the State, and the dissatisfaction of the people.

    Which is why Afghanistan is a settled protectorate.
     
    Yeah, I don't get the confidence, at all. The power of the (western) State is not in its military, but its legitimacy. And the USG still has a lot of legitimacy to burn (people like to be rrrreally aggrieved, before they stop working and start shooting). But, assuming that legitimacy is gone, and there was actually a serious insurgency, supported by a large percentage of the populace, I wouldn't bet on the gov't winning. Americans are not illiterate goatherds. Can you imagine what their IEDs would look like? Not to mention how restrictive the military's ROE would be.

    The true counter arguments are that third world guerrillas are less casualty-averse
     
    Right. You need people willing to die to clean out the stables. People who are so pissed, they start shooting. USA is very far from that.

    Right. You need people willing to die to clean out the stables. People who are so pissed, they start shooting. USA is very far from that.

    Why is it always about shooting, insurgencies, etc. You guys watch way too many movies or something.

    Don’t you guys remember how the East Bloc governments all failed without a shot being fired except for Romania in 1989 then followed by the Soviet Union in 1991 more or less bloodlessly.

    Domestic armed insurgencies weren’t even part of the equation.

    The governed simply withdrew their consent.

    BTW,the vast majority of gun owners I’ve encountered over the decades are generally hot air couch potatoes engaging in male escapist fantasies to compensate for the lack of machismo in their real life commuting to an office somewhere. There is a substantial segment that this does not apply to, but it is a tiny minority, I’d guess much less than 10% based on my admittedly anecdotal observations.

    The average American male under 40 or so has never even been in a fistfight in his life, but now they are all of a sudden going to put down the remote and the Doritos and turn into Viet Cong or Mujaheedin or something?

    That is fake news if I ever heard it, I’m thinking.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dfordoom

    BTW,the vast majority of gun owners I’ve encountered over the decades are generally hot air couch potatoes engaging in male escapist fantasies to compensate for the lack of machismo in their real life commuting to an office somewhere. There is a substantial segment that this does not apply to, but it is a tiny minority, I’d guess much less than 10% based on my admittedly anecdotal observations.
     
    Agreed, but that tiny minority is probably closer to 1% when push actually comes to shove.

    But hey, they talk a great game on the internet!
  167. @Alden
    If they are in the military their weapons are in the armories. The military is heavily black and brown, not White. Some of the big navy ships are only about 15 percent White. The carrier my nephew works on has only 3 Whites on the whole ship, him and the other 2 nuclear engineers that run the ship.

    If they are in the military their weapons are in the armories. The military is heavily black and brown, not White. Some of the big navy ships are only about 15 percent White. The carrier my nephew works on has only 3 Whites on the whole ship, him and the other 2 nuclear engineers that run the ship.

    What ships are only 15% white?

    What carrier is that that only has 3 whites and only three nukes?

    This is utter baloney, more fake news.

    Read More
  168. @Big Bill
    Wow. The Constitution.

    So tell me, what do Russians and Jews pledge their allegiance to?

    Israel doesn't have a Constitution and I just can't see the Russians pledging their lives and sacred honor to preserve a piece of paper.

    Do they pledge themselves to fight and defend their nation? Their people? Their land?

    I am a married man, but I would never plead undying loyalty to my marriage license.

    This page has a pretty good translation of the words Israel’s soldiers recite at their swearing-in ceremony.

    https://m.facebook.com/notes/avi-mayer/the-idf-oath-of-allegiance/10150799554558717/

    Read More
  169. @Shine a Light
    The easiest way to remove Trump from office, and it has the advantage of actually being constitutional, is for 24 Republican House members to switch parties and become Democrats. At this point the Dems become the majority party and get to impeach President Trump by a simple majority.

    Step 2 involves at least 5 GOP Senators switching parties to the Dems to give them the majority in the Senate. On top of that 16 more GOP Senators would have to vote for impeachment along with all the Democrats getting to the 67 vote requirement.

    It’s really that simple. They can make up any reason they like; there is no judicial review of Presidential impeachment.

    Perhaps so, but it seems to me that the never-Trumpers have changed their tune. Have a look at National Review.

    Read More
  170. @Jack Hanson
    Comey is not representative of the FBI, but don't let me stop you from seeing Cheka under the bed.

    The secret police wouldn't be who you have to worry about. The largest law enforcement agency in the FedGov is pretty firmly pro Trump (and its not the FBI, ATF, or DEA, or any other three letter agency).

    Comey is not representative of the FBI,

    No true KGB agent, comrade, would ever get caught blatantly covering for a member of the party—we never get caught!

    but don’t let me stop you from seeing Cheka under the bed.

    If the shoes fit, little secret policeman.

    The secret police wouldn’t be who you have to worry about.

    Pay no attention to frumentarii/Praetorian Guard combo our police state has organized since the end of WW2 and accelerated in growth since 9/11! You are all great patriots, comrade!

    The largest law enforcement agency in the FedGov is pretty firmly pro Trump (and its not the FBI, ATF, or DEA, or any other three letter agency).

    If you’re referring to the military, lol. As I’ve explained elsewhere, the military has a very poor track record throughout world history of counteracting coups by secret police such as yourself. They simply follow the orders of the powers that be, unless they install their own guy.

    Now go back to monitoring the web traffic of white males, ignoring background checks on Islamic immigrants (gotta make sure those terrorists do their job, and get you more funding and power in the process), and covering up the child porn downloads of the latest politician you’re going to blackmail for more funds. Dennis Hastert must’ve been quite a coup for you.

    Read More
  171. @EdwardM
    Heavily armed rural whites will always be outgunned by the government. I think that what it would come down to is whether the white soldiers and lower-level officers who come from these communities would obey orders to fire on their friends. It could go either way.

    I like to play out what would happen if/when the government decides to confiscate firearms door-to-door like in Australia. Despite the noble cries of "from my cold dead hands," I don't think that most responsible gun owners would really take it to that level when the SWAT team shows up. It will all come down to whether the ATF/FBI agents obey orders. I guess the Feds will marshal the agents from Boston and San Francisco field offices to go to Alabama and Wyoming to carry out the task to improve their odds. I wouldn't count on resistance to succeed, though it could get messy.

    No doubt the left is acutely aware of this risk, hence their efforts to eviscerate the cultures of the military and federal police forces, and to try to nationalize local police departments. A few more generations of their recruitment, social programming, human capital management, and purges, and they may succeed.

    Heck! no. When I was in the service, we were told that the AMERICAN PEOPLE were our boss. I am talking in the AF. I don’t know other services. So, no; hopefully our fighter aircraft serves our boss, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE! Heck Yes.

    Read More
  172. @Whoever
    Most definitely would not be on board with any coup or other treason against our country.

    HAVING BEEN APPOINTED A MIDSHIPMAN IN THE UNITED STATES NAVY, I
    SOLEMNLY SWEAR THAT I WILL SUPPORT AND DEFEND THE
    CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES AGAINST ALL ENEMIES, FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC; THAT I WILL BEAR TRUE FAITH AND ALLEGIANCE TO THE SAME; THAT I TAKE THIS OBLIGATION FREELY, WITHOUT ANY MENTAL RESERVATION OR PURPOSE OF EVASION; AND THAT I WILL WELL AND FAITHFULLY DISCHARGE THE DUTIES OF THE OFFICE ON WHICH I AM ABOUT TO ENTER, SO HELP ME GOD.

    DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES AGAINST ALL ENEMIES, FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC…

    Don’t forget that when the going gets tough, and keep that promise, we might need it sooner than later. Remember, at the end of the day, the American people as a whole is the boss, and not the gov. The gov. has usurped that power vested in the people of this great nation. Those people, i.e. agencies burying us with refugees who later massacre people like the Somali muslim few days ago, read, and search who is bringing these people in boat loads, and lets shame them. I heard that the ‘catholic something of Houston’ brought them here. We blame the gov, but sometimes these agencies are the ones who should bear responsibility for their people they bring into the USA.

    Read More
  173. @dfordoom

    Heavily armed rural whites will always be outgunned by the government.
     
    How many RPGs do those "heavily armed rural whites" have? How many man-portable air-defense systems will they have? How will they deal with drone strikes?

    A bunch of fat middle-aged men with rifles in pick-up trucks won't trouble trained regulars for very long.

    This is another example of the alt-right's detachment from reality.

    Why do you assume that all men with guns are Homer Simpson in a pick up truck? I would bet that a lot of them are former military men who are still in fighting condition.

    This is another example of the left’s detachment from reality.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonguy

    Why do you assume that all men with guns are Homer Simpson in a pick up truck? I would bet that a lot of them are former military men who are still in fighting condition.
     
    I'd bet that very few of them are. And only a minority, and a pretty small one, of military guys were ever trained as fighters and even fewer of them remain in "fighting condition", whatever it is you mean by that, post military service.

    Even the Marines, the service in "fightingest condition", well less than 20% of the ranks are grunts, ya know, the dudes with with rifles in "fighting condition".

    The majority of the guys in the military are Walter Mitty, not Rambo.

    , @Desiderius

    Why do you assume that all men with guns are Homer Simpson in a pick up truck?
     
    I'd rather share a foxhole with Homer Simpson than Pajama Boy.

    Man managed to father three children and support that family intact. That is no small accomplishment.
  174. @oh its just me too

    most of the military come from the rural whites…they wouldn’t fight against their brethren

    Some serious wishful thinking there. The military will obey whoever pays them.
     
    There is a reason our elite are flooding the office corps with minorities - just like the NKVD was almost entirely ethnically jewish - because they ARE willing to turn their guns on us.

    I try to tell this to liberals who insist that it's for 'diversity' - show me anytime in history the office corp has been radically ethnically transformed for 'diversity' - the current 'goal' I believe is to make white males the minority in the officer corp one professor blew the whistle at the naval academy - they are so desperate to replace whites that even orientals were being let in with SATs in the 300s

    one professor blew the whistle at the naval acade

    Cite?

    Read More
  175. @dfordoom

    If there was a war it would depend on who’s side heavily armed rural whites were on. That side would win imo.
     
    Those heavily armed rural whites would last about ten minutes if it came to a fight against the military and the police.

    That is an uninformed conclusion. The Taliban has endured decades; first against the Russians, then against the whole or NATO. Those rural whites as you call them, are mostly vets, who know their stuff, and I believe better trained than the Taliban in Afghanistan. So, yes, they will last. Also it might depend on who the people are for. If the rurals have the people behind them, then they will win.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RonaldB
    This sort of claim doesn't make any sense to me.

    The assertion goes like this:

    The rural areas have many vets with military experience and therefore will be able to carry out effective guerrilla warfare against an army.

    Here is the problem. The vets may have had previous training and experience, but they are older, the training has deteriorated from lack of use, and they are not organized. By contrast, the standing army is young, vigorous, undergoing rigorous and very current training, is highly organized, and has well-maintained supply and command chains backing it up. The standing army has training at least as good as the vets got, and the standing army is refreshing and updating its training regularly.

    Take the example of the Boer War. The Boers were extremely good fighters, very motivated, very excellent guerrillas, highly nationalistic and fighting against an invading power, Britain, in open terrain. The British won by putting the Boer civilians, almost all of them, into concentration camps. There were no civilians left free to support the guerrillas, and the concentration camps had a high death rate. So, an army willing to be ruthless can suppress a native insurrection, even a highly sophisticated one.

    I'll repeat my contention: it would be disastrous to shoot at US police and military as part of a civilian insurrection. Unarmed, mass demonstrations would be far more effective. Troops shooting at unarmed civilians would be far more dangerous to the government than an armed, rural insurrection.
  176. @Whiskey
    Any coup would not be mounted by the CIA or military. Rather, the Courts.

    Hillary is running out two strings. First, "the Russians hacked to back Trump" leading to some judge ruling her the "victor" in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and Florida and hence the next President. Bezos is all on board, he's bet the farm on Hillary and Trump will hammer him silly for anti-trust and FTC violations.

    The second is as a poster here noted, "the Electoral College is racist. Or something." So again a federal judge rules Hillary the victor.

    How would the Supremes rule? My guess a 5-3 split, with Roberts the Craven bowing down to his masters they way he did with ObamaCare.

    In America, the power has traditionally lain not with the military, where there was never any real danger of a coup, but the courts and media. Both arms are profoundly threatened by Trump, who seems likely to limit the courts and pack them with his friends, while pushing anti Trust against media monopolies and duopolies.

    The real issue is if Trump simply ignores the court ruling and Hillary tries to rally the military to arrest him or what have you. We can't have forever an elite that loathes and despises its native people; sooner or later things will break.

    How would the Supremes rule? My guess a 5-3 split, with Roberts the Craven bowing down to his masters they way he did with ObamaCare

    One of Trump’s duties down the road—after the first 100 days hullaballoo has past, and the wall is built, and illegals are frog marched to Gitmo—is to get someone to figure out the leverage Obama had on Roberts, get it, and then get Roberts to resign. It would be a huge media event (Roberts is young, he was expected to be the anti-leftist leader of the court for a half-century), but Roberts can blame it on a trumped-up medical condition. Trump tells Obama to keep his mouth shut or he’ll reveal how Obama cheated and got Roberts to rule on Obamacare. Heck, Roberts could even say he feels that he “lost” the respect for the Supreme Court and feels guilty about it. Sweep that traitor out by any means, and replace him.

    And Kennedy. “Penumbras Live!” Kennedy. He needs to go next. He’s enjoyed the power to declare dogs to be cats long enough. Out the door, traitor.

    In my dream world, he replaces them with Ann Coulter and Ann’s personal favorite two picks (Ann gets Scalia’s current empty seat). Ann gets appointed first female Chief Justice and the Left’s heads explode. Roe v. Wade overturned, gay “marriage” overturned, concealed carry and open carry without a license now a constitutional right, Brown v. Board tossed, Civil Rights Act nullified for all except blacks.

    And then, in Trump’s second term…

    Let a man dream, won’t you?

    Read More
  177. @dfordoom

    Heavily armed rural whites will always be outgunned by the government.
     
    How many RPGs do those "heavily armed rural whites" have? How many man-portable air-defense systems will they have? How will they deal with drone strikes?

    A bunch of fat middle-aged men with rifles in pick-up trucks won't trouble trained regulars for very long.

    This is another example of the alt-right's detachment from reality.

    I guess you missed most of the 20th and 21st Century when guerrilla warfare by hardened, dedicated guerillas defeated professional militaries.

    But it’s ok, cling to your delusions. How’s the Hillary recount going?

    Read More
    • Replies: @dfordoom

    How’s the Hillary recount going?
     
    Don't know. Don't care. I'm a Trump supporter.
    , @dfordoom

    But it’s ok, cling to your delusions. How’s the Hillary recount going?
     
    I'm suggesting that in the scenarios we're discussing if it comes to a shooting war then whoever controls the military and the police wins.

    I'm not saying that's a good thing or a bad thing. Reality isn't good or bad. Reality just is.

    I'm also not suggesting that the answer is to give up or succumb to despair. If there's a strategy that you know is doomed to messy and very unpleasant failure then look for a better strategy. The answer is to make sure it doesn't come to a shooting war. There are other strategies.

    The one strategy that the elites want us to choose is a shooting war.
    , @Jack Hanson
    Dfordoom wants you to know he's a master tactician who has never missed a night of Warhammer40k.
    , @Peripatetic commenter

    How’s the Hillary recount going?
     
    I think they have given up on the recount and moved on to trying to get people to believe that the Russians put Trump into power.

    Pretty soon they will realize that no one believes that and they will move on to suggesting that he is a straight-white cis-gendered heterosexual heteronormative male and should not be allowed to be president.
  178. @Johnny Smoggins
    Why do you assume that all men with guns are Homer Simpson in a pick up truck? I would bet that a lot of them are former military men who are still in fighting condition.

    This is another example of the left's detachment from reality.

    Why do you assume that all men with guns are Homer Simpson in a pick up truck? I would bet that a lot of them are former military men who are still in fighting condition.

    I’d bet that very few of them are. And only a minority, and a pretty small one, of military guys were ever trained as fighters and even fewer of them remain in “fighting condition”, whatever it is you mean by that, post military service.

    Even the Marines, the service in “fightingest condition”, well less than 20% of the ranks are grunts, ya know, the dudes with with rifles in “fighting condition”.

    The majority of the guys in the military are Walter Mitty, not Rambo.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Boomstick
    Every Marine a rifleman.

    Really, a lot of this isn't that sophisticated. A modern civil war would probably be mostly bushwacking on urban terrain, and not that different from drive-bys but with better aim by the participants. A small 2-5 man insurgent squad rolls up and offs some official and his small security detachment. Then they split up and retreat to their rec rooms. The government uses the pervasive surveillance state to track down the perps. Both jockey for position in the cyberspace propaganda war.

    If you're an insurgent and you wind up directly fighting a tank or an attack helicopter or a SWAT team, you should probably stop and reflect on the poor life choices that got you there.
  179. @bomag

    Those heavily armed rural whites would last about ten minutes if it came to a fight against the military and the police.
     
    I wouldn't bet too heavily. The Iraqi irregulars didn't do too badly. Guerrilla warfare has evolved faster than conventional.

    The Talibans are beating mighty NATO. So the rural armed whites have a chance.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AceOfLances
    I am a bit out of my depth here as an interested reader in Nova Scotia; but I would like to bring up a point. Trump's America has invigorated rural whites all over the world, we've been watching very closely. It is an exciting time for all of us.
    Here in Canada, there are millions of 'fighting shape' resource workers, who grew up hunting and are familiar with dealing with tough environmental circumstances. I am going to say at least 500k white young white rural men whose livelihoods, religion, and ideology of freedom and liberty is intimately entwined with their American counterparts. We made a huge difference in many wars, mainly because of the fact that we are natural rangers and scouts, who did not require much training.
    I hope MAGA knows that their interests, and survival, are key to our own economic well-being. I assume the same goes for many other Commonwealth countries, for whom Trump represents a signalling to a return to a 'real America', instead of its, of late, hasty decline. You are not alone, and be it through official government working by will of the people, or voluntary enlistment (which we have a generous history of, even in the Viet War), at least us Canadians will be there, ready, to do our part, as light infantry in ranger, scout positions. Many Afghan vets I know worked very closely within American ranks, side by side, as with our navies and air forces. It may be small comfort, but I just wanted to offer this up, as the discussion here seems to be one that has not really focused on help from outside. You are the most important nation in the world, Russia coming second, as a Christian Power. You will have support, materials and resources from the North.
    Sorry to intrude, I'm not an intellectual person, but I do like to follow these matters :-). Cheers, and God Bless.
  180. @Alden
    Our military transfers every 2 years. The soldiers in the bases are not locals. They are from all over the country. And a huge proportion of them are blacks and browns who hate Whites.

    Our military transfers every 2 years. The soldiers in the bases are not locals. They are from all over the country. And a huge proportion of them are blacks and browns who hate Whites.

    Where do you guys get all this fake news?

    All branches of the military and the Coast Guard have less minority representation than US society at large and by statistically significant amounts.

    This trend becomes more pronounced the closer one gets to combat arms units. The DoD has recognized this trend since the 90s and the underlying social/economic drivers for it.

    BTW, this is a complete reversal from several decades ago where the military, esp. the Army, was disproportionately minority compared to U.S. society.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res

    All branches of the military and the Coast Guard have less minority representation than US society at large and by statistically significant amounts.

    This trend becomes more pronounced the closer one gets to combat arms units.
     
    Do you have data showing that clearly? I'm not disagreeing. It's just that I prefer having substantiation before repeating an argument.

    The best resource I saw in a quick search (and I don't consider USA Today particularly good) was:
    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/02/17/black-history-month-military-diversity/5564363/
    Sees things differently (but focusing on the army and blacks only biases their numbers):

    Today, about one in five soldiers are black, compared with nearly 27% in 1985 and 1995, according to Army figures. The share of black soldiers is still larger than the 17% of the U.S. population who are African Americans of military enlistment age and education.

    Representation in the Navy also has slipped slightly: 21% of its ranks were black enlisted sailors in 2005, compared with 17% today. The Air Force has remained fairly steady for nearly 30 years with about 17% of its enlisted personnel being African American.

    The smallest representation of blacks is in the Marine Corps, which has seen its rate of enlisted African Americans decline from more than 20% in 1985 to about one in 10 today, Pentagon numbers show.
     
    But the focus is on blacks rather than other minorities. I was surprised to see the 17% eligibility number based on age and education. I wonder how the AFQT cutoffs and criminal records issues affect that. Not coincidentally they also state:

    Surveys show that the percentage of black youth interested in serving had fallen sharply, from 26% in 1985 to 10% in 2009. Research indicated that a key factor was a decrease in support for military service among black "influencers" — political leaders, teachers and parents — during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, the Army found.
     
    And supporting part of your point:

    blacks in 2013 were still working in largely the same Army jobs — 22% in combat arms and 46% in support positions

     

    The best guess I found for combat arms overall was ~35% at https://www.quora.com/What-percentage-of-Soldiers-serve-in-combat-positions
    But that stat seems vaguely defined and I don't know if people use it consistently.

    More on US Army demographics from USA Today: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/09/11/army-officer-corps-dominated-by-white-men/14987977/

    One bit of trivia I found while looking for data. I did not realize how different the black/white racial proportions were by sex: https://www.statista.com/statistics/214869/share-of-active-duty-enlisted-women-and-men-in-the-us-military/

    P.S. Thanks for countering our local fake news. That three whites on a carrier comment was hilarious.
  181. @Jack Hanson
    And I'm sure the Russians would just sit back and twiddle their thumbs.

    And I’m sure the Russians would just sit back and twiddle their thumbs.

    That’s exactly what they’d do. Or do you imagine they’d intervene and risk starting a nuclear war? For the sake of a few losers with rifles in pick-up trucks?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    Lol yeah the USG is gonna launch nukes cause Russia arms yokels in pick up trucks.

    Which is it? The USG is an invincible juggernaut no one can defeat or so frail that Russia arming some rebels is cassus belli for nuclear war? It can't be both.

    It was only a matter of time with your amateur "analysis" and let slip you have no idea what you're on about. Sad!

  182. @anonguy

    Right. You need people willing to die to clean out the stables. People who are so pissed, they start shooting. USA is very far from that.
     
    Why is it always about shooting, insurgencies, etc. You guys watch way too many movies or something.

    Don't you guys remember how the East Bloc governments all failed without a shot being fired except for Romania in 1989 then followed by the Soviet Union in 1991 more or less bloodlessly.

    Domestic armed insurgencies weren't even part of the equation.

    The governed simply withdrew their consent.

    BTW,the vast majority of gun owners I've encountered over the decades are generally hot air couch potatoes engaging in male escapist fantasies to compensate for the lack of machismo in their real life commuting to an office somewhere. There is a substantial segment that this does not apply to, but it is a tiny minority, I'd guess much less than 10% based on my admittedly anecdotal observations.

    The average American male under 40 or so has never even been in a fistfight in his life, but now they are all of a sudden going to put down the remote and the Doritos and turn into Viet Cong or Mujaheedin or something?

    That is fake news if I ever heard it, I'm thinking.

    BTW,the vast majority of gun owners I’ve encountered over the decades are generally hot air couch potatoes engaging in male escapist fantasies to compensate for the lack of machismo in their real life commuting to an office somewhere. There is a substantial segment that this does not apply to, but it is a tiny minority, I’d guess much less than 10% based on my admittedly anecdotal observations.

    Agreed, but that tiny minority is probably closer to 1% when push actually comes to shove.

    But hey, they talk a great game on the internet!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius

    that tiny minority is probably closer to 1%
     
    That's still over 500,000 people, most pretty onery. I wouldn't want to be in charge of pacifying them.
  183. @whorefinder
    I guess you missed most of the 20th and 21st Century when guerrilla warfare by hardened, dedicated guerillas defeated professional militaries.

    But it's ok, cling to your delusions. How's the Hillary recount going?

    How’s the Hillary recount going?

    Don’t know. Don’t care. I’m a Trump supporter.

    Read More
  184. @Beat Army
    I was at the game. Reaction to Trump was positive. Would be even more for Mattis, saw people with sweatshirts with him on the back.

    I don't see a movement towards a coup in the US. Still too much of the military is based on Red Staters with a belief in America. What worries me more is careerism, is defense contractors, is entitlement attitude in military officers who stay past their initial 5 year commitment. But it just bugs me. Don't think it is going to kill us immediately.

    Really, the military needs to be cut back a lot. Who are we going to fight, the Martians?

    Really, the military needs to be cut back a lot. Who are we going to fight, the Martians?

    I’ve been saying that since the Cold War ended, where is my peace dividend dude?

    Trump knows this and tipped his hand when he said NATO was obsolete to worldwide pearl-clutching.

    Read More
  185. @anonguy

    Why do you assume that all men with guns are Homer Simpson in a pick up truck? I would bet that a lot of them are former military men who are still in fighting condition.
     
    I'd bet that very few of them are. And only a minority, and a pretty small one, of military guys were ever trained as fighters and even fewer of them remain in "fighting condition", whatever it is you mean by that, post military service.

    Even the Marines, the service in "fightingest condition", well less than 20% of the ranks are grunts, ya know, the dudes with with rifles in "fighting condition".

    The majority of the guys in the military are Walter Mitty, not Rambo.

    Every Marine a rifleman.

    Really, a lot of this isn’t that sophisticated. A modern civil war would probably be mostly bushwacking on urban terrain, and not that different from drive-bys but with better aim by the participants. A small 2-5 man insurgent squad rolls up and offs some official and his small security detachment. Then they split up and retreat to their rec rooms. The government uses the pervasive surveillance state to track down the perps. Both jockey for position in the cyberspace propaganda war.

    If you’re an insurgent and you wind up directly fighting a tank or an attack helicopter or a SWAT team, you should probably stop and reflect on the poor life choices that got you there.

    Read More
  186. A modern civil war would probably be mostly bushwacking on urban terrain, and not that different from drive-bys but with better aim by the participants.

    Actually, that would be sort of an old-fashioned civil war. A modern civil war, well, we just had one electing Trump. It was vicious, no? Now we have to make sure he gets inaugurated.

    All without shots being fired or even contemplated.

    Read More
  187. @dfordoom

    Seems to me the Viet Cong were very successful guerrillas.
     
    The Viet Cong were effectively destroyed by 1968. The North Vietnamese Army, with massive outside assistance, won the Vietnam War.

    as well as Spanish and Portuguese resistance to Napoleon’s invasion of the Spanish peninsula.
     
    They did get a teensy bit of help from the British. Like an entire army of British regulars under the Duke of Wellington.

    Guerillas can do well when they have massive backing from outside powers. Exactly where are those "heavily armed rural whites" going to get that sort of help?

    The Viet Cong were effectively destroyed by 1968. The North Vietnamese Army, with massive outside assistance, won the Vietnam War.

    Only because they stupidly came out in the open during the Tet Offensive and fought the enemy on the enemy’s terms. The North Vietnamese regulars didn’t do much better. Militarily, the Tet Offensive was a major blunder on the part of the reds in Vietnam.

    They did get a teensy bit of help from the British. Like an entire army of British regulars under the Duke of Wellington.

    As I already pointed out, almost all of Napoleon’s forces in the Spanish peninsula were tied up by insurgencies.

    Guerillas can do well when they have massive backing from outside powers. Exactly where are those “heavily armed rural whites” going to get that sort of help?

    Perhaps Russia, China or even Iran. Arms and other support could easily be smuggled in through Mexico and the Gulf Coast, and quite likely Cuba would gladly serve as a staging area for such support. A lot of folks out there would like to see American military forces tied up with a domestic insurgency so that they themselves could have a freer hand with matters abroad. For that matter, an insurgency might very well get substantial aid from renegade elements of the federal government itself. I can’t help wondering how many of the cloak and dagger boys at the CIA would pitch in.

    Read More
  188. @dfordoom

    BTW,the vast majority of gun owners I’ve encountered over the decades are generally hot air couch potatoes engaging in male escapist fantasies to compensate for the lack of machismo in their real life commuting to an office somewhere. There is a substantial segment that this does not apply to, but it is a tiny minority, I’d guess much less than 10% based on my admittedly anecdotal observations.
     
    Agreed, but that tiny minority is probably closer to 1% when push actually comes to shove.

    But hey, they talk a great game on the internet!

    that tiny minority is probably closer to 1%

    That’s still over 500,000 people, most pretty onery. I wouldn’t want to be in charge of pacifying them.

    Read More
  189. @whorefinder
    I guess you missed most of the 20th and 21st Century when guerrilla warfare by hardened, dedicated guerillas defeated professional militaries.

    But it's ok, cling to your delusions. How's the Hillary recount going?

    But it’s ok, cling to your delusions. How’s the Hillary recount going?

    I’m suggesting that in the scenarios we’re discussing if it comes to a shooting war then whoever controls the military and the police wins.

    I’m not saying that’s a good thing or a bad thing. Reality isn’t good or bad. Reality just is.

    I’m also not suggesting that the answer is to give up or succumb to despair. If there’s a strategy that you know is doomed to messy and very unpleasant failure then look for a better strategy. The answer is to make sure it doesn’t come to a shooting war. There are other strategies.

    The one strategy that the elites want us to choose is a shooting war.

    Read More
    • Replies: @whorefinder
    lmao. You really don't understand what would happen in an open police state imposed by the feds. It's laughable how ignorant how you think 19th and 20th century warfare maneuvering would break out. You'd best read up on guerilla warfare and it's applications recently, but you seem too dumb to know how to do it.

    but really, lol. I guess secret policeman Jack Hanson has been talking to you, eh?
  190. @ATX Hipster
    Agreed. One of my favorite running jokes in early South Park episodes was Cartman triumphantly saying "Haha, charade you are!" when he believed he had turned the tables on an opponent.

    One of their subtler references.

    Definitely more subtle than a Kaiju battle between Barbara Streisand and Robert Smith of The Cure.

    Read More
  191. @dfordoom

    And I’m sure the Russians would just sit back and twiddle their thumbs.
     
    That's exactly what they'd do. Or do you imagine they'd intervene and risk starting a nuclear war? For the sake of a few losers with rifles in pick-up trucks?

    Lol yeah the USG is gonna launch nukes cause Russia arms yokels in pick up trucks.

    Which is it? The USG is an invincible juggernaut no one can defeat or so frail that Russia arming some rebels is cassus belli for nuclear war? It can’t be both.

    It was only a matter of time with your amateur “analysis” and let slip you have no idea what you’re on about. Sad!

    Read More
    • Replies: @dfordoom

    The USG is an invincible juggernaut no one can defeat or so frail that Russia arming some rebels is cassus belli for nuclear war?
     
    So you don't think that Russia arming rebels who are fighting against the US government on its own soil would provoke an insanely aggressive response from the USG? You haven't paid too much attention to recent history have you? There are loonies in the USG who are sabre-rattling over allegedly hacked emails.

    Not that it matters since Russia would never in a million years be dumb enough (or arrogant enough) to do any such thing.

    The point I was making was that "heavily armed rural whites" would be zero threat in a coup situation without massive support (which means weapons systems like MANPADs and RPGs at the very least) from foreign powers and no foreign power is going to offer that support, therefore those "heavily armed rural whites" would be crushed within about ten minutes.
  192. @whorefinder
    I guess you missed most of the 20th and 21st Century when guerrilla warfare by hardened, dedicated guerillas defeated professional militaries.

    But it's ok, cling to your delusions. How's the Hillary recount going?

    Dfordoom wants you to know he’s a master tactician who has never missed a night of Warhammer40k.

    Read More
  193. @Johnny Smoggins
    Why do you assume that all men with guns are Homer Simpson in a pick up truck? I would bet that a lot of them are former military men who are still in fighting condition.

    This is another example of the left's detachment from reality.

    Why do you assume that all men with guns are Homer Simpson in a pick up truck?

    I’d rather share a foxhole with Homer Simpson than Pajama Boy.

    Man managed to father three children and support that family intact. That is no small accomplishment.

    Read More
  194. @dfordoom

    But it’s ok, cling to your delusions. How’s the Hillary recount going?
     
    I'm suggesting that in the scenarios we're discussing if it comes to a shooting war then whoever controls the military and the police wins.

    I'm not saying that's a good thing or a bad thing. Reality isn't good or bad. Reality just is.

    I'm also not suggesting that the answer is to give up or succumb to despair. If there's a strategy that you know is doomed to messy and very unpleasant failure then look for a better strategy. The answer is to make sure it doesn't come to a shooting war. There are other strategies.

    The one strategy that the elites want us to choose is a shooting war.

    lmao. You really don’t understand what would happen in an open police state imposed by the feds. It’s laughable how ignorant how you think 19th and 20th century warfare maneuvering would break out. You’d best read up on guerilla warfare and it’s applications recently, but you seem too dumb to know how to do it.

    but really, lol. I guess secret policeman Jack Hanson has been talking to you, eh?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    Lol I agree with you here but you're pretty mad over that cheka under the bed comment I see.
    , @dfordoom

    You’d best read up on guerilla warfare
     
    Good idea. Can you point me in the direction of some accounts of pampered First Worlders fighting successful guerilla wars (without any assistance from foreign powers) against governments in possession of the kind of military might and surveillance and security apparatus that the US government has?
  195. @in the middle
    That is an uninformed conclusion. The Taliban has endured decades; first against the Russians, then against the whole or NATO. Those rural whites as you call them, are mostly vets, who know their stuff, and I believe better trained than the Taliban in Afghanistan. So, yes, they will last. Also it might depend on who the people are for. If the rurals have the people behind them, then they will win.

    This sort of claim doesn’t make any sense to me.

    The assertion goes like this:

    The rural areas have many vets with military experience and therefore will be able to carry out effective guerrilla warfare against an army.

    Here is the problem. The vets may have had previous training and experience, but they are older, the training has deteriorated from lack of use, and they are not organized. By contrast, the standing army is young, vigorous, undergoing rigorous and very current training, is highly organized, and has well-maintained supply and command chains backing it up. The standing army has training at least as good as the vets got, and the standing army is refreshing and updating its training regularly.

    Take the example of the Boer War. The Boers were extremely good fighters, very motivated, very excellent guerrillas, highly nationalistic and fighting against an invading power, Britain, in open terrain. The British won by putting the Boer civilians, almost all of them, into concentration camps. There were no civilians left free to support the guerrillas, and the concentration camps had a high death rate. So, an army willing to be ruthless can suppress a native insurrection, even a highly sophisticated one.

    I’ll repeat my contention: it would be disastrous to shoot at US police and military as part of a civilian insurrection. Unarmed, mass demonstrations would be far more effective. Troops shooting at unarmed civilians would be far more dangerous to the government than an armed, rural insurrection.

    Read More
  196. Guerrilla warfare only works against foreign enemies not against your own country’s armed forces. Remember, they know the terrain as well as you do and they know who you are and where you and your extended family live, etc. How do you fight against drones?
    There’s no way a bunch of armed rednecks can hurt Uncle Sam. Unless you have part of the US armed forces siding with the rebels and the other faithful to the federal government, I just don’t see how a civil war is even possible in America.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dfordoom

    Guerrilla warfare only works against foreign enemies not against your own country’s armed forces. Remember, they know the terrain as well as you do and they know who you are and where you and your extended family live, etc. How do you fight against drones?
     
    Now you're cheating by bringing in stuff like facts and reality! ;-)

    Unless you have part of the US armed forces siding with the rebels and the other faithful to the federal government, I just don’t see how a civil war is even possible in America.
     
    Agreed.

    A successful revolution is a possibility if, and only if, a significant part of the ruling elite joins the revolution. If the elite splits it changes everything. Is there a possibility of that happening in the US? At the moment it seems pretty unlikely.
  197. @anonguy

    Our military transfers every 2 years. The soldiers in the bases are not locals. They are from all over the country. And a huge proportion of them are blacks and browns who hate Whites.
     
    Where do you guys get all this fake news?

    All branches of the military and the Coast Guard have less minority representation than US society at large and by statistically significant amounts.

    This trend becomes more pronounced the closer one gets to combat arms units. The DoD has recognized this trend since the 90s and the underlying social/economic drivers for it.

    BTW, this is a complete reversal from several decades ago where the military, esp. the Army, was disproportionately minority compared to U.S. society.

    All branches of the military and the Coast Guard have less minority representation than US society at large and by statistically significant amounts.

    This trend becomes more pronounced the closer one gets to combat arms units.

    Do you have data showing that clearly? I’m not disagreeing. It’s just that I prefer having substantiation before repeating an argument.

    The best resource I saw in a quick search (and I don’t consider USA Today particularly good) was:

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/02/17/black-history-month-military-diversity/5564363/

    Sees things differently (but focusing on the army and blacks only biases their numbers):

    Today, about one in five soldiers are black, compared with nearly 27% in 1985 and 1995, according to Army figures. The share of black soldiers is still larger than the 17% of the U.S. population who are African Americans of military enlistment age and education.

    Representation in the Navy also has slipped slightly: 21% of its ranks were black enlisted sailors in 2005, compared with 17% today. The Air Force has remained fairly steady for nearly 30 years with about 17% of its enlisted personnel being African American.

    The smallest representation of blacks is in the Marine Corps, which has seen its rate of enlisted African Americans decline from more than 20% in 1985 to about one in 10 today, Pentagon numbers show.

    But the focus is on blacks rather than other minorities. I was surprised to see the 17% eligibility number based on age and education. I wonder how the AFQT cutoffs and criminal records issues affect that. Not coincidentally they also state:

    Surveys show that the percentage of black youth interested in serving had fallen sharply, from 26% in 1985 to 10% in 2009. Research indicated that a key factor was a decrease in support for military service among black “influencers” — political leaders, teachers and parents — during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, the Army found.

    And supporting part of your point:

    blacks in 2013 were still working in largely the same Army jobs — 22% in combat arms and 46% in support positions

    The best guess I found for combat arms overall was ~35% at https://www.quora.com/What-percentage-of-Soldiers-serve-in-combat-positions
    But that stat seems vaguely defined and I don’t know if people use it consistently.

    More on US Army demographics from USA Today: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/09/11/army-officer-corps-dominated-by-white-men/14987977/

    One bit of trivia I found while looking for data. I did not realize how different the black/white racial proportions were by sex: https://www.statista.com/statistics/214869/share-of-active-duty-enlisted-women-and-men-in-the-us-military/

    P.S. Thanks for countering our local fake news. That three whites on a carrier comment was hilarious.

    Read More
  198. @whorefinder
    lmao. You really don't understand what would happen in an open police state imposed by the feds. It's laughable how ignorant how you think 19th and 20th century warfare maneuvering would break out. You'd best read up on guerilla warfare and it's applications recently, but you seem too dumb to know how to do it.

    but really, lol. I guess secret policeman Jack Hanson has been talking to you, eh?

    Lol I agree with you here but you’re pretty mad over that cheka under the bed comment I see.

    Read More
  199. @dfordoom

    If there was a war it would depend on who’s side heavily armed rural whites were on. That side would win imo.
     
    Those heavily armed rural whites would last about ten minutes if it came to a fight against the military and the police.

    Those heavily armed rural whites ARE the military and the police.

    Read More
  200. @Jack Hanson
    Lol yeah the USG is gonna launch nukes cause Russia arms yokels in pick up trucks.

    Which is it? The USG is an invincible juggernaut no one can defeat or so frail that Russia arming some rebels is cassus belli for nuclear war? It can't be both.

    It was only a matter of time with your amateur "analysis" and let slip you have no idea what you're on about. Sad!

    The USG is an invincible juggernaut no one can defeat or so frail that Russia arming some rebels is cassus belli for nuclear war?

    So you don’t think that Russia arming rebels who are fighting against the US government on its own soil would provoke an insanely aggressive response from the USG? You haven’t paid too much attention to recent history have you? There are loonies in the USG who are sabre-rattling over allegedly hacked emails.

    Not that it matters since Russia would never in a million years be dumb enough (or arrogant enough) to do any such thing.

    The point I was making was that “heavily armed rural whites” would be zero threat in a coup situation without massive support (which means weapons systems like MANPADs and RPGs at the very least) from foreign powers and no foreign power is going to offer that support, therefore those “heavily armed rural whites” would be crushed within about ten minutes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    You tired yet running around with those goalposts all over this argument?
  201. @whorefinder
    lmao. You really don't understand what would happen in an open police state imposed by the feds. It's laughable how ignorant how you think 19th and 20th century warfare maneuvering would break out. You'd best read up on guerilla warfare and it's applications recently, but you seem too dumb to know how to do it.

    but really, lol. I guess secret policeman Jack Hanson has been talking to you, eh?

    You’d best read up on guerilla warfare

    Good idea. Can you point me in the direction of some accounts of pampered First Worlders fighting successful guerilla wars (without any assistance from foreign powers) against governments in possession of the kind of military might and surveillance and security apparatus that the US government has?

    Read More
  202. @BB753
    Guerrilla warfare only works against foreign enemies not against your own country's armed forces. Remember, they know the terrain as well as you do and they know who you are and where you and your extended family live, etc. How do you fight against drones?
    There's no way a bunch of armed rednecks can hurt Uncle Sam. Unless you have part of the US armed forces siding with the rebels and the other faithful to the federal government, I just don't see how a civil war is even possible in America.

    Guerrilla warfare only works against foreign enemies not against your own country’s armed forces. Remember, they know the terrain as well as you do and they know who you are and where you and your extended family live, etc. How do you fight against drones?

    Now you’re cheating by bringing in stuff like facts and reality! ;-)

    Unless you have part of the US armed forces siding with the rebels and the other faithful to the federal government, I just don’t see how a civil war is even possible in America.

    Agreed.

    A successful revolution is a possibility if, and only if, a significant part of the ruling elite joins the revolution. If the elite splits it changes everything. Is there a possibility of that happening in the US? At the moment it seems pretty unlikely.

    Read More
  203. Judging from the reaction to Trump’s arrival at today’s Army / Navy football game among military cadets, young military officers wouldn’t be on board.

    Not to mention the vast majority of semi-automatic rifle owners, many who are former military, were Trump voters.

    Read More
  204. @OldMan
    Folks, can we put aside once and for all the notion of a huge number of "rural whites" living in the US in 2016. Agriculture is VERY highly mechanized these days, and has been for half a century or more. Some of you write on this subject as though it were still 1905. The rural part of our population is estimated at about 3 % these days, ie., about 10-11 million people. This figure includes children and the elderly. Also, it may surprise some of you to learn that a sizeable minority of the 11 million rural residents are non-white (mainly black or Mexican), so we are talking maybe 7 to 8 million adult rural whites, a figure which includes females.

    They are good people, for the most part, but they did NOT elect Donald Trump, and they aren't going to take over ANYTHING. Trump was elected by Midwestern working class folks and suburbanites.

    Rural and farmer are not synonyms. The Census Bureau has the rural population at about 15%, although of course definitions can vary; and more than half of us own guns.

    Read More