My running joke on airplanes after the obligatory safety briefing is that anybody that doesn't know how to use a seat-belt needs turned over to the Air Marshalls as the only thing without a seat-belt anymore is a camel.
Well, I was wrong.
I was on a flight to Minnesota from Detroit yesterday, and the gentleman sitting next to me was obviously struggling trying to get the seat belt on. He would try it, unbuckle, adjust it, try it, then struggle to loosen it up pulling straight away on it.
Finally figuring out the guy had no clue, I showed him how the adjuster was loose when the buckle was perpendicular to the belt, and tightened when laid over and pulled. 45 seconds later he was good to go and I was deep in thought.
How long has it been since the seat belts in cars had to be actually "adjusted"? The seat-belt laws first started national mandates in 1984. So we're talking 30 years now. This guy was right around that age, so it's possible he's never seen a manual style seat-belt.
I am finding it hard to believe I am over a half century old, and things taken for granted now were the thing of Star Trek episodes when I was a kid. And other things we used everyday are now museum pieces that have to be explained to the youngsters.
LOL, life does move on. Whether you're paying attention or not.
"How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!" Samuel Adams, Letter to John Pitts, January 21, 1776
Tuesday, April 9, 2013
Sunday, March 3, 2013
Are the fundamentals in danger?
LOL. This started as a facebook post commenting on a post at SOFREP by Kelly Patton that really got me thinking. That post is here;
I had heard concerns like Kelly's blog from friends and .mil folks before but I refused to believe that one. "You're jerking my chain?" was my thought. Let's face it, there is always a certain amount of scuttlebutt and ax grinding going on. It's human nature.
First off, let me begin by stating that I was just a knuckle dragging enlisted Gunners Mate in my beloved US Navy.
GM's are not typically a source rating for brilliant tactics and global war fighting strategies to start with. Especially infantry tactics. Add to that auspicious foundation that I have been retired since 1998 and way out of the loop on anything .mil except the media, books, and friends. So, I figure what little I used to know regarding small unit tactics is well dated. These guys have been at war for a decade now, they have to have this down to an art form. Right?
So, I really never would have thought to comment on modern tactics and such as I'm not qualified to do so anymore. My subject matter expert days are historical at this point.
But, I'm going to do it anyway.
Now. I also always hated it when some old dude sitting at the VFW/Legion bar started the "Back in my day we did it better" crap. No, we didn't. We were damned good at what we did. When we were doing it. We made the most of the gear, techniques and tools we had. However, technique and skills evolve and move on over time. Fix bayonets and charge, while still effective occasionally, is not so much a common practice these days.
I'm proud of my training and the men I served with, do not mistake that. Nor do I hold us in lower esteem than the current generation.
However, these guys are faster, stronger, and have better endurance than ever before. Let's give credit where credit is due these young warriors have better gear, incredible amounts of training that is way beyond anything we ever dreamed of, and are motivated out the gazoo. The professionalism bar has been moved way up whether we want to admit it or not. I do believe that and I'll stand by that statement anywhere anytime. Not that there weren't units already holding a much higher standard, but those were the "special" units to start with, I'm referring more to the military as a whole.
So I've been reading some of the stories, reports, and books, all discussing various contact engagements and fights from the war and keyed in on the stopping and engaging the lone/"ghost" shooters. My brain fired on the "What the hell are they stopping and engaging one shooter for?" Especially if they don't have a lock on his position?
When we did riverinne operations in the SBU's (SWCC, before SWCC was cool), a shot fired our way meant;
There was no "all stop and hose down the banks" crazy talk. Sailors and aviators both know that speed gives you options, speed gives you maneuverability, and most importantly speed means life. There is a reason that the expression for 0 knots headway is "dead in the water".
I get that a truck on a road isn't a small boat in a restricted waterway, but it's the same principle. Once you stop, you're stuck, and if there is any enemy presence with any skills at all you are getting maneuvered on. And trucks parked on the road are a great target if there is artillery or mortars around. Very easy to adjust fire on. In the gun mounts we loved the "Troops in the open, Fire for Effect!" Infantry obviously were not so enamored of that call depending which side of that call they were on.
Years downstream, around 1992, when I first got enlightened to CQB/Low light in San Diego with some real deal trainers at Fleet Training Center, the guys that I learned the most from taught me to constantly move, constantly present a different problem to the bad guy. This is where I learned about John Boyd's OODA loop.
A static target constantly engaging from the same place is easy to beat. Fix his location, suppress the fire, aim at the spot he's coming out at, stop suppressing. When he pops back out, shoot him. Even easier, call his position out to a team mate and have them move to get an angle on him. It works every time.
On an unsophisticated opponent that doesn't know those moves as well or better than you do. The deal is, you don't want to be that guy. So you move. Even if it's from one side of cover to the other, simply changing the height you come out at, but keep changing up the sight picture he has to engage. This keeps him recalculating and evaluating, otherwise he will get dialed in on you and you are toast.
The practical reality of this simple concept came while we were running a tactics class. We had a ship to train on and used paintball guns for force on force low light scenarios. We had the students (20-30) maneuvering through the ship in several stacks, and the instructor staff (6-8) were the bad guys they were after. We would split up into our shooting pairs and head out independently to harass and engage the student security forces.
Once below decks it was completely dark, one had to practice good lighting techniques, communication, unit security as well as proper cover and movement techniques to survive the op.
These were also the stone age days before individual radios and "nets" came into play so all communication was verbal or hand signals. Below decks verbal coordination was the only functional method. So one had to say calm, focused, and convey the situation clearly and concisely to prevail.
In the course of a "problem" scenario my shooting partner and I were at a hatch stacked high and low and we were engaging some shooters at the far end of the passage way. We were trying to get to a student squad that had taken cover in an office space half way down the P-way. The other shooters at the far end were slowing us down in our goal of painting up said squad of acolytes.
No problem, we just need to whack this bunch first, then we'll get the guys that thought a space with only one entry was a tactically sound position. So, we would light and engage, and the students at the far end would light and engage. It was a standoff really. I remember thinking that "Wow, these guys were actually paying attention and getting it, better be careful." They kept bobbing around, changing positions in the hatch, pretty much doing a great job of not dying and making us work hard at maintaining our similar status.
Finally my brain recognized their fire was exceedingly accurate and consistent as the paintballs whizzed by nose and the hatch coaming at exactly the same place each time. "That's not a student shooting like that" popped into my head and I yelled out "Chas?" I got back "Gunner?" and realized that it was another instructor pair at the far end.
The students in the office space made that conclusion at the same time, realized what the thought was a possible life line and escape route was actually a hammer and anvil as we could hear the "OMG, WE'RE TRAPPED BETWEEN BAD GUYS!" and other expressions of joy emanating from the space. LOL.
Bad day for the students, good day for us, but it's to the point and everybody learned something. We had a perfect standoff. Skill sets between the instructors was pretty much level at that point. That particular team of instructors had been together for some time. We were good.
We were fortunate to be at the right place at the right time. Our civilian instructors were some of the best CQB guys in the country, and were developing the Navy's low light doctrine as well. To this day I count my blessings that I got to be there and work with those guys.
They had trained us right up to their level and it came down to reaction times in any given scenario. If we had not recognized the other shooters it would have come down to one side running out of ammo, or one side would have gotten lucky.
I had those lessons driven home, and reinforced every time a mistake was made over the years. Either by an error on my part, or my taking tactical advantage of another persons mistake. On any given day, you can run up against an opponent that is as good or better than you are. Or even worse, the sad sack that has no clue but gets lucky. That must be engraved on your soul if you pick up and carry arms. If you forget that lesson, even for an instant, you are going to have a damned bad day at some point.
I used to shoot IPSC a lot. I thought at the time it was a good practice tool for our skill sets. Running and gunning, multiple targets, high round count, this is great! Then, when we would get back to FOF training, I discovered I was getting bad habits. Engaging from open areas and concealment, not from cover, reloading in the open, all kind of weird stuff. But at matches I was trying to win the game and not survive a gunfight.
Well, you fight like you train, regardless of what you are training for. That is another truism and my sport started to carry over to my other gun handling environments. Fortunately I was still doing force on force training and got reminded quite quickly that the popsicle man is a bullet sponge against a good shooter. I decided to forgo the gaming and focus on realville.
That is what I believe the growing number of people writing about this are concerned about. It is not a rap against the troops, but more against complaceny.
Bad habits learned are hard to break. Very hard sometimes. Bad policies take even longer. Look at the difficulties we had when the Global War on Terror (GWOT) first started. We were geared to fight the Russians/Chinese. The big similarly equipped boogie man we figured would be fought in Europe/Asia. Not a bunch of Enfield toting goat herders in Afghanistan. "Afghanistan? Where? Are you nuts? Hell, we don't even have maps of that place!"
Our guys got up to speed quickly, but at what cost? This is what we have to struggle to prevent again. It's like the Army is using the IPSC model at times. While you can get away with it occasionally, it almost always bites you later.
In a permissive environment where we have pretty much fire/heavy weapon superiority you can get away with some bad habits. However, if you try that against troops with better training and heavier more sophisticated weapons than RPG's, even a handful could ruin an entire units day.
It will not always be drones and special operations against a small strung out opponent. China and Russia are still sitting there, smiling right now. So is North Korea. We need to keep the basics in mind. Always. It's that one little slip that costs you everything.
Before Vietnam they decided that dogfighting was a dead form of aerial combat and designed a fighter with no guns. Oops, gun pods went on the Phantoms. Let's not get our infantry in the same position. Lives are too precious to be spent re-learning lessons lost.
Endangered Fundamentals of Warfighting at SOFREP.COM
I had heard concerns like Kelly's blog from friends and .mil folks before but I refused to believe that one. "You're jerking my chain?" was my thought. Let's face it, there is always a certain amount of scuttlebutt and ax grinding going on. It's human nature.
First off, let me begin by stating that I was just a knuckle dragging enlisted Gunners Mate in my beloved US Navy.
GM's are not typically a source rating for brilliant tactics and global war fighting strategies to start with. Especially infantry tactics. Add to that auspicious foundation that I have been retired since 1998 and way out of the loop on anything .mil except the media, books, and friends. So, I figure what little I used to know regarding small unit tactics is well dated. These guys have been at war for a decade now, they have to have this down to an art form. Right?
So, I really never would have thought to comment on modern tactics and such as I'm not qualified to do so anymore. My subject matter expert days are historical at this point.
But, I'm going to do it anyway.
Now. I also always hated it when some old dude sitting at the VFW/Legion bar started the "Back in my day we did it better" crap. No, we didn't. We were damned good at what we did. When we were doing it. We made the most of the gear, techniques and tools we had. However, technique and skills evolve and move on over time. Fix bayonets and charge, while still effective occasionally, is not so much a common practice these days.
I'm proud of my training and the men I served with, do not mistake that. Nor do I hold us in lower esteem than the current generation.
However, these guys are faster, stronger, and have better endurance than ever before. Let's give credit where credit is due these young warriors have better gear, incredible amounts of training that is way beyond anything we ever dreamed of, and are motivated out the gazoo. The professionalism bar has been moved way up whether we want to admit it or not. I do believe that and I'll stand by that statement anywhere anytime. Not that there weren't units already holding a much higher standard, but those were the "special" units to start with, I'm referring more to the military as a whole.
So I've been reading some of the stories, reports, and books, all discussing various contact engagements and fights from the war and keyed in on the stopping and engaging the lone/"ghost" shooters. My brain fired on the "What the hell are they stopping and engaging one shooter for?" Especially if they don't have a lock on his position?
When we did riverinne operations in the SBU's (SWCC, before SWCC was cool), a shot fired our way meant;
- Suppress fire
- Get the hell up on step as fast as possible
- Get clear of any potential kill zone
There was no "all stop and hose down the banks" crazy talk. Sailors and aviators both know that speed gives you options, speed gives you maneuverability, and most importantly speed means life. There is a reason that the expression for 0 knots headway is "dead in the water".
I get that a truck on a road isn't a small boat in a restricted waterway, but it's the same principle. Once you stop, you're stuck, and if there is any enemy presence with any skills at all you are getting maneuvered on. And trucks parked on the road are a great target if there is artillery or mortars around. Very easy to adjust fire on. In the gun mounts we loved the "Troops in the open, Fire for Effect!" Infantry obviously were not so enamored of that call depending which side of that call they were on.
Years downstream, around 1992, when I first got enlightened to CQB/Low light in San Diego with some real deal trainers at Fleet Training Center, the guys that I learned the most from taught me to constantly move, constantly present a different problem to the bad guy. This is where I learned about John Boyd's OODA loop.
A static target constantly engaging from the same place is easy to beat. Fix his location, suppress the fire, aim at the spot he's coming out at, stop suppressing. When he pops back out, shoot him. Even easier, call his position out to a team mate and have them move to get an angle on him. It works every time.
On an unsophisticated opponent that doesn't know those moves as well or better than you do. The deal is, you don't want to be that guy. So you move. Even if it's from one side of cover to the other, simply changing the height you come out at, but keep changing up the sight picture he has to engage. This keeps him recalculating and evaluating, otherwise he will get dialed in on you and you are toast.
The practical reality of this simple concept came while we were running a tactics class. We had a ship to train on and used paintball guns for force on force low light scenarios. We had the students (20-30) maneuvering through the ship in several stacks, and the instructor staff (6-8) were the bad guys they were after. We would split up into our shooting pairs and head out independently to harass and engage the student security forces.
Once below decks it was completely dark, one had to practice good lighting techniques, communication, unit security as well as proper cover and movement techniques to survive the op.
These were also the stone age days before individual radios and "nets" came into play so all communication was verbal or hand signals. Below decks verbal coordination was the only functional method. So one had to say calm, focused, and convey the situation clearly and concisely to prevail.
In the course of a "problem" scenario my shooting partner and I were at a hatch stacked high and low and we were engaging some shooters at the far end of the passage way. We were trying to get to a student squad that had taken cover in an office space half way down the P-way. The other shooters at the far end were slowing us down in our goal of painting up said squad of acolytes.
No problem, we just need to whack this bunch first, then we'll get the guys that thought a space with only one entry was a tactically sound position. So, we would light and engage, and the students at the far end would light and engage. It was a standoff really. I remember thinking that "Wow, these guys were actually paying attention and getting it, better be careful." They kept bobbing around, changing positions in the hatch, pretty much doing a great job of not dying and making us work hard at maintaining our similar status.
Finally my brain recognized their fire was exceedingly accurate and consistent as the paintballs whizzed by nose and the hatch coaming at exactly the same place each time. "That's not a student shooting like that" popped into my head and I yelled out "Chas?" I got back "Gunner?" and realized that it was another instructor pair at the far end.
The students in the office space made that conclusion at the same time, realized what the thought was a possible life line and escape route was actually a hammer and anvil as we could hear the "OMG, WE'RE TRAPPED BETWEEN BAD GUYS!" and other expressions of joy emanating from the space. LOL.
Bad day for the students, good day for us, but it's to the point and everybody learned something. We had a perfect standoff. Skill sets between the instructors was pretty much level at that point. That particular team of instructors had been together for some time. We were good.
We were fortunate to be at the right place at the right time. Our civilian instructors were some of the best CQB guys in the country, and were developing the Navy's low light doctrine as well. To this day I count my blessings that I got to be there and work with those guys.
They had trained us right up to their level and it came down to reaction times in any given scenario. If we had not recognized the other shooters it would have come down to one side running out of ammo, or one side would have gotten lucky.
I had those lessons driven home, and reinforced every time a mistake was made over the years. Either by an error on my part, or my taking tactical advantage of another persons mistake. On any given day, you can run up against an opponent that is as good or better than you are. Or even worse, the sad sack that has no clue but gets lucky. That must be engraved on your soul if you pick up and carry arms. If you forget that lesson, even for an instant, you are going to have a damned bad day at some point.
I used to shoot IPSC a lot. I thought at the time it was a good practice tool for our skill sets. Running and gunning, multiple targets, high round count, this is great! Then, when we would get back to FOF training, I discovered I was getting bad habits. Engaging from open areas and concealment, not from cover, reloading in the open, all kind of weird stuff. But at matches I was trying to win the game and not survive a gunfight.
Well, you fight like you train, regardless of what you are training for. That is another truism and my sport started to carry over to my other gun handling environments. Fortunately I was still doing force on force training and got reminded quite quickly that the popsicle man is a bullet sponge against a good shooter. I decided to forgo the gaming and focus on realville.
That is what I believe the growing number of people writing about this are concerned about. It is not a rap against the troops, but more against complaceny.
Bad habits learned are hard to break. Very hard sometimes. Bad policies take even longer. Look at the difficulties we had when the Global War on Terror (GWOT) first started. We were geared to fight the Russians/Chinese. The big similarly equipped boogie man we figured would be fought in Europe/Asia. Not a bunch of Enfield toting goat herders in Afghanistan. "Afghanistan? Where? Are you nuts? Hell, we don't even have maps of that place!"
Our guys got up to speed quickly, but at what cost? This is what we have to struggle to prevent again. It's like the Army is using the IPSC model at times. While you can get away with it occasionally, it almost always bites you later.
In a permissive environment where we have pretty much fire/heavy weapon superiority you can get away with some bad habits. However, if you try that against troops with better training and heavier more sophisticated weapons than RPG's, even a handful could ruin an entire units day.
It will not always be drones and special operations against a small strung out opponent. China and Russia are still sitting there, smiling right now. So is North Korea. We need to keep the basics in mind. Always. It's that one little slip that costs you everything.
Before Vietnam they decided that dogfighting was a dead form of aerial combat and designed a fighter with no guns. Oops, gun pods went on the Phantoms. Let's not get our infantry in the same position. Lives are too precious to be spent re-learning lessons lost.
Wednesday, February 20, 2013
Democide: Socialism, Tyranny, Guns and Freedom. An essay by Matt Bracken.
From Matt Bracken.
My new essay in text format. Please copy and share anywhere you like.
Democide: Socialism, Tyranny, Guns and Freedom
Matt Bracken February 20, 2013
Democide is the elimination of a despised group by a government. It includes genocide, politicide, and other forms of state-sponsored mass murder. The hated minority headed for extermination may be defined by religious, racial, political, class, cultural or other attributes. Between 200 and 260 million people were the victims of democide in the 20th century, several times more than were killed in international wars during that period.
The first widely studied modern democide occurred in Turkey between 1915 and 1923, when the Turkish government decided to eliminate the country’s Christian minority, primarily ethnic Armenians and Greeks who had Turkish roots extending back to before the Islamic conquest. Two million Christians were murdered on forced marches into deserts without water or food. This democide occurred in view of Western reporters, who took photographs and posted contemporary wire reports. The fact that the democide was known outside Turkey did not deter the Turkish leaders.
The Armenian Genocide, as it has become known, was also widely known inside Turkey, where the majority Muslim population either supported or at least passively tolerated the democide. It was impossible to miss the sight of thousands of Christians at a time being rounded up and force-marched through towns and into the burning deserts on one-way trips.
Stalin and Hitler both noticed the lack of world reaction to the democide of Turkish Christians and planned accordingly. In the Soviet Union, Stalin’s henchmen purged millions of “kulaks” (farmers deemed to have too much wealth), intellectuals, businessmen, and anyone who had ever traveled outside the USSR or even had had contact with foreigners.
In Germany and Nazi-occupied Europe, Hitler proceeded with his own “final solution to the Jewish problem.” Where the German national socialists simply eliminated Jews as quickly as possible in mass graves and gas chambers, Stalin’s international socialists deported their “class enemies” to Siberia, where they were put to work in Gulag slave-labor camps, with years of torture through cold, malnutrition and brutal working conditions preceding the release of eventual death.
Stalin also devised another means of democide when he ordered the forced starvation of the Ukrainians, and five million more innocent victims were added to his totals. In Communist China seventy million people were the victims of democide, murdered by overwork in slave-labor camps, by direct execution, and by regional forced starvation. Millions more were victims of democide in Pakistan, Cambodia, Rwanda, North Korea, and many other countries.
Democide, as the name implies, does not happen in the dark of night without any awareness of it in the country where it occurs. The Turks knew the Christians were being mass murdered. Average Germans were fully aware of what was happening to the Jews between 1938 and 1945, and a large majority either actively supported or at least tolerated it. (I strongly recommend reading Hitler’s Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust, by Daniel Goldhagen, to fully appreciate the wholehearted German support for the Jewish democide.)
Today, we sometimes hear that the Second Amendment has outlived its usefulness, that it is a relic of our barbaric past and is no longer needed in the modern era. Horrific mass shootings by deranged individuals are cited as the primary reason for Americans to surrender their most effective firearms and rely solely on a state monopoly of force for their protection. This government-dependent attitude is shortsighted, historically ignorant, and extremely dangerous.
In each of the cases cited above, a necessary preliminary step on the road to democide was the confiscation of privately owned firearms. In Turkey, “reasonable” gun control laws enacted in 1911 permitted the democide of two million Turkish Christians a few years later. In Germany, the “commonsense” 1928 gun control laws of the Weimar Republic preceded Hitler’s Holocaust by a decade.
The Weimar politicians did not intend for their gun control laws to lead to the slaughter of millions of people, but it is an historical fact that those gun control laws permitted the Nazis to carry out their Holocaust. How? By making it economically and militarily feasible to round up and mass murder entire towns without any significant resistance.
In fact, the Nazis quickly learned that they needed only a hundred ordinary military policemen to exterminate towns of a thousand Polish Jews in a single day. Contrast that fact with the Warsaw Ghetto uprising. If the Jews had not first been disarmed, using previous gun registration lists as a map for confiscation, the Holocaust would not have been possible.
Likewise in the Soviet Union and in every other case, democide was preceded by “reasonable and commonsense” firearms registration, followed eventually by gun confiscation and then by the extermination of a despised minority population.
During the past two centuries, while America has avoided tyranny, Turkey, Germany, Russia and the other nations mentioned above have spasmodically lurched between monarchs, democratically elected leaders, and often quite popular dictators, allowing them frequent opportunities to commit democide against their unwanted minorities.
The situation is fundamentally different in America, because we have a centuries-old tradition of private firearms ownership guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the Constitution. The Second Amendment does not “grant” us this right; it puts into writing our God-given natural right to effective self-defense, including armed defense against tyranny.
“Pure democracy” has been described as two wolves and a sheep voting on their dinner plans. The two wolves might see this election as an expression of their highest democratic values, but for the outnumbered sheep, pure democracy is highly problematic. On the other hand, a republic has been described as two wolves and a well-armed sheep voting on dinner plans. The well-armed sheep can veto the outcome of the dinner election simply by brandishing its firearm. The sheep has inherent rights as a sovereign individual, including the right to self-defense, a right that cannot be stripped away by a simple majority vote.
So, when a democratically elected American president speaks of “fundamentally transforming” his country, and of his need to act outside the constitutional framework, the population should be on guard. When that leader begins to push for strict new “commonsense and reasonable” gun control laws, including national firearms registration in the name of “public safety,” the citizenry should be on high alert.
Can any glib politician, pundit or ivory tower academic give us an ironclad guarantee that tyranny will never arise in the United States? Not even a popular tyranny, like those of Ataturk, Stalin, Hitler or Mao? Can anyone assure us that today’s “commonsense” gun registration lists will not be used for future gun confiscation? Of course not.
The future may be unknowable, but history is well understood, and American gun owners know and understand the history of democide in the 20th century. That is why they will never accede to what is currently portrayed in the predominantly left-wing mainstream media as “commonsense and reasonable” new gun control laws.
While American gun owners lament and regret the inescapable fact that deranged individuals in a free country may on rare occasions murder a dozen or a score of unarmed victims, they also understand that government democide murders by the million. And in every case, tyrants can conduct these democides only after disarming their unwanted minorities, rendering them helpless to resist murderous government pogroms.
American gun owners will never permit this historical pattern to be repeated in their country, because they understand that the government’s heavy hand will be kept in check only as long as they are armed. Ask yourself: Were the Armenians, the Jews or the kulaks treated better, or worse, after they were disarmed and rendered helpless by their oppressors, who thereafter held an absolute government monopoly on armed violence? The answer is too obvious to require elaboration.
Naive utopians and other “low-information voters” might not understand the historical pattern, and we don’t expect them to bother to learn it. Cynical and dishonest “progressives” who do understand the historical pattern cannot yet reveal their ultimate goal of creating a disarmed and helpless American citizenry. Nevertheless, millions of Americans understand their hidden aim with crystal clarity, seeing through the false sincerity of power-hungry leftist politicians who are actually Marxist wolves dressed in Democrat sheep’s clothing—for now.
But unless and until these secret Stalinists and sundry other “progressives” can figure out a way to disarm Americans, they cannot execute their historically standard final solution to the “reactionaries-standing-in-the
Unlike the Armenians, Jews, kulaks and other exterminated peoples, Americans who support the Second Amendment will never be disarmed quietly by government edict prior to meekly boarding a train to a socialist “reeducation” camp. They will not be taken at government gunpoint on a one-way forced march into a desert or a Zyklon-B “delousing shower,” simply because they foolishly agreed to be disarmed by their future oppressors in the dubious name of “public safety.”
If American “progressives” truly intend to disarm the American people, they will have to do it the hard way, by taking their bullets first, one at a time. As the 300 Spartans announced to the vastly larger Persian army at Thermopylae, “Molon Labe!”
You want our guns? Then come and take them!
No registration—no confiscation—no extermination!
Freedom now, freedom forever!
My new essay in text format. Please copy and share anywhere you like.
Democide: Socialism, Tyranny, Guns and Freedom
Matt Bracken February 20, 2013
Democide is the elimination of a despised group by a government. It includes genocide, politicide, and other forms of state-sponsored mass murder. The hated minority headed for extermination may be defined by religious, racial, political, class, cultural or other attributes. Between 200 and 260 million people were the victims of democide in the 20th century, several times more than were killed in international wars during that period.
The first widely studied modern democide occurred in Turkey between 1915 and 1923, when the Turkish government decided to eliminate the country’s Christian minority, primarily ethnic Armenians and Greeks who had Turkish roots extending back to before the Islamic conquest. Two million Christians were murdered on forced marches into deserts without water or food. This democide occurred in view of Western reporters, who took photographs and posted contemporary wire reports. The fact that the democide was known outside Turkey did not deter the Turkish leaders.
The Armenian Genocide, as it has become known, was also widely known inside Turkey, where the majority Muslim population either supported or at least passively tolerated the democide. It was impossible to miss the sight of thousands of Christians at a time being rounded up and force-marched through towns and into the burning deserts on one-way trips.
Stalin and Hitler both noticed the lack of world reaction to the democide of Turkish Christians and planned accordingly. In the Soviet Union, Stalin’s henchmen purged millions of “kulaks” (farmers deemed to have too much wealth), intellectuals, businessmen, and anyone who had ever traveled outside the USSR or even had had contact with foreigners.
In Germany and Nazi-occupied Europe, Hitler proceeded with his own “final solution to the Jewish problem.” Where the German national socialists simply eliminated Jews as quickly as possible in mass graves and gas chambers, Stalin’s international socialists deported their “class enemies” to Siberia, where they were put to work in Gulag slave-labor camps, with years of torture through cold, malnutrition and brutal working conditions preceding the release of eventual death.
Stalin also devised another means of democide when he ordered the forced starvation of the Ukrainians, and five million more innocent victims were added to his totals. In Communist China seventy million people were the victims of democide, murdered by overwork in slave-labor camps, by direct execution, and by regional forced starvation. Millions more were victims of democide in Pakistan, Cambodia, Rwanda, North Korea, and many other countries.
Democide, as the name implies, does not happen in the dark of night without any awareness of it in the country where it occurs. The Turks knew the Christians were being mass murdered. Average Germans were fully aware of what was happening to the Jews between 1938 and 1945, and a large majority either actively supported or at least tolerated it. (I strongly recommend reading Hitler’s Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust, by Daniel Goldhagen, to fully appreciate the wholehearted German support for the Jewish democide.)
Today, we sometimes hear that the Second Amendment has outlived its usefulness, that it is a relic of our barbaric past and is no longer needed in the modern era. Horrific mass shootings by deranged individuals are cited as the primary reason for Americans to surrender their most effective firearms and rely solely on a state monopoly of force for their protection. This government-dependent attitude is shortsighted, historically ignorant, and extremely dangerous.
In each of the cases cited above, a necessary preliminary step on the road to democide was the confiscation of privately owned firearms. In Turkey, “reasonable” gun control laws enacted in 1911 permitted the democide of two million Turkish Christians a few years later. In Germany, the “commonsense” 1928 gun control laws of the Weimar Republic preceded Hitler’s Holocaust by a decade.
The Weimar politicians did not intend for their gun control laws to lead to the slaughter of millions of people, but it is an historical fact that those gun control laws permitted the Nazis to carry out their Holocaust. How? By making it economically and militarily feasible to round up and mass murder entire towns without any significant resistance.
In fact, the Nazis quickly learned that they needed only a hundred ordinary military policemen to exterminate towns of a thousand Polish Jews in a single day. Contrast that fact with the Warsaw Ghetto uprising. If the Jews had not first been disarmed, using previous gun registration lists as a map for confiscation, the Holocaust would not have been possible.
Likewise in the Soviet Union and in every other case, democide was preceded by “reasonable and commonsense” firearms registration, followed eventually by gun confiscation and then by the extermination of a despised minority population.
During the past two centuries, while America has avoided tyranny, Turkey, Germany, Russia and the other nations mentioned above have spasmodically lurched between monarchs, democratically elected leaders, and often quite popular dictators, allowing them frequent opportunities to commit democide against their unwanted minorities.
The situation is fundamentally different in America, because we have a centuries-old tradition of private firearms ownership guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the Constitution. The Second Amendment does not “grant” us this right; it puts into writing our God-given natural right to effective self-defense, including armed defense against tyranny.
“Pure democracy” has been described as two wolves and a sheep voting on their dinner plans. The two wolves might see this election as an expression of their highest democratic values, but for the outnumbered sheep, pure democracy is highly problematic. On the other hand, a republic has been described as two wolves and a well-armed sheep voting on dinner plans. The well-armed sheep can veto the outcome of the dinner election simply by brandishing its firearm. The sheep has inherent rights as a sovereign individual, including the right to self-defense, a right that cannot be stripped away by a simple majority vote.
So, when a democratically elected American president speaks of “fundamentally transforming” his country, and of his need to act outside the constitutional framework, the population should be on guard. When that leader begins to push for strict new “commonsense and reasonable” gun control laws, including national firearms registration in the name of “public safety,” the citizenry should be on high alert.
Can any glib politician, pundit or ivory tower academic give us an ironclad guarantee that tyranny will never arise in the United States? Not even a popular tyranny, like those of Ataturk, Stalin, Hitler or Mao? Can anyone assure us that today’s “commonsense” gun registration lists will not be used for future gun confiscation? Of course not.
The future may be unknowable, but history is well understood, and American gun owners know and understand the history of democide in the 20th century. That is why they will never accede to what is currently portrayed in the predominantly left-wing mainstream media as “commonsense and reasonable” new gun control laws.
While American gun owners lament and regret the inescapable fact that deranged individuals in a free country may on rare occasions murder a dozen or a score of unarmed victims, they also understand that government democide murders by the million. And in every case, tyrants can conduct these democides only after disarming their unwanted minorities, rendering them helpless to resist murderous government pogroms.
American gun owners will never permit this historical pattern to be repeated in their country, because they understand that the government’s heavy hand will be kept in check only as long as they are armed. Ask yourself: Were the Armenians, the Jews or the kulaks treated better, or worse, after they were disarmed and rendered helpless by their oppressors, who thereafter held an absolute government monopoly on armed violence? The answer is too obvious to require elaboration.
Naive utopians and other “low-information voters” might not understand the historical pattern, and we don’t expect them to bother to learn it. Cynical and dishonest “progressives” who do understand the historical pattern cannot yet reveal their ultimate goal of creating a disarmed and helpless American citizenry. Nevertheless, millions of Americans understand their hidden aim with crystal clarity, seeing through the false sincerity of power-hungry leftist politicians who are actually Marxist wolves dressed in Democrat sheep’s clothing—for now.
But unless and until these secret Stalinists and sundry other “progressives” can figure out a way to disarm Americans, they cannot execute their historically standard final solution to the “reactionaries-standing-in-the
Unlike the Armenians, Jews, kulaks and other exterminated peoples, Americans who support the Second Amendment will never be disarmed quietly by government edict prior to meekly boarding a train to a socialist “reeducation” camp. They will not be taken at government gunpoint on a one-way forced march into a desert or a Zyklon-B “delousing shower,” simply because they foolishly agreed to be disarmed by their future oppressors in the dubious name of “public safety.”
If American “progressives” truly intend to disarm the American people, they will have to do it the hard way, by taking their bullets first, one at a time. As the 300 Spartans announced to the vastly larger Persian army at Thermopylae, “Molon Labe!”
You want our guns? Then come and take them!
No registration—no confiscation—no extermination!
Freedom now, freedom forever!
Monday, January 7, 2013
At what point does it become tyranny?
A friend of mine mentioned that we don't have a Democracy, we have a Representative Republic.
As Benjamin Franklin said, IF we can keep it. I think we've lost it already.
Seriously, I've been thinking more and more about this.
Does there come a point that we (Those that still respect the tenets of the constitution) need to consider seceding? I know, I know. "That's crazy talk!" But I'm serious about the concept. At what point do we as group have to stand up and scream "NO MORE!" At what point does complete disregard from our elected officials become tyranny?
There clearly is one massive cultural divide in this country. Those that consider the Constitution "suggestions". The ones that only respect the rights that they like. Those that think they are smarter than everybody else in the room at the cocktail party and thus can tell everybody else how it is going to be. Those that want a nanny state where they think they will be safe and taken care of, and those of us who are currently working and providing it for them. Then, the nanny staters think they have a right to dictate how we who provide their sustenance live our lives? Screw that.
Then our legislatures demonstrate taht they are perfectly content to spend us into national oblivion. And there are enough citizens that think this is a good idea to re-elect the adminstration? WTF?
I think we have already lost the nation as a republic, in part do to the great society, to the freaking welfare system, to social security, and now obamacare. We are at the tipping point, another year or two and we will be way past it and in too much debt to save it. If we do not do something fast, it's over. And if they disarm us, we will not be able to do anything. I have to face the facts from the last election, the "I want it free" crowd out numbers the rest of us.
Ok, if they want to live their lives like that they can. That is the whole point of the Constitution. But screw them. And their damn horses. And keep them out of my freaking corral. I cannot afford to pay for them. Not anymore.
So. If the liberals really want to live in an oppressive enclave, why don't we let them? The rest of us can take our chances outside the peaceful cities, you know, Detroit, Chicago, New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Miami, LA, and all the other violence free utopias. I bet I could last more than a couple of weeks if I'm lucky amongst the crazed 2nd amendment bitter clinging freaks.
I'm really getting tired of being told by people that could care less about me or mine how I have to live. We all know the elected officials are crooked, so why do we continue to let them impede our nation and it's development? What the hell are we doing? At what point is enough enough?
Over the last week I have seriously been looking at the end of my world as I know it. I have decided that I will not be subjugated, nor will I be dictated to. I also will not be told who I can or cannot bequeth my property to.
Not only would I never harm an innocent, I would lay my life down trying to protect them. So then, why would my government decide that as a law abiding responsible citizen that I should be subjected to harassment for the acts of a lunatic? And why in God's name would I lay down and let them? Are we sheep to be led to a slaughter?
I will not accept that from any man, woman, or legislative body. Not now, not ever.
I am at a point in my life I should be able to start standing down, enjoying my life, wife, and grand-kids without looking over my shoulder to big brothers thumb. I have spent the best part of my life protecting this country and it's people. 20 years out on the pointy end of the spear for right at $1000 a month pension. I missed most of my kids growing up, never spent enough time in one place to put down roots, and love my own company more than other people as a rule. I have worked my ass off since honestly to earn a living and have never violated the law. Well, other than traffic stuff anyway.
A lot of those folks I was deployed to protect espouse positions and beliefs that disgust me beyond belief. But that's ok, I don't have to agree or like them, that is the point or our nation. They are entitled as long as they don't infringe on or hurt the other people around them. Do what ever you like in your own house, don't force me to do it. Don't force other people to do it, watch or listen to it if they don't want to. Isn't that the basic premise?
Why then should I have to worry about the government declaring me a felon for doing nothing other than continuing to act like a free and responsible citizen? Who are they to decide what is acceptable for me to own or not? Hell, they tell us what kind of freaking cheese we can have available, what kind of light bulbs can use. WE INVENTED THE FREAKING LIGHT BULBS THEY ARE BANNING FOR CHRIST'S SAKE! THERE IS NO VIABLE REASON TO NOT USE THEM!
I say they went too damn far with the light bulb fiasco. In retrospect I think it was a trial balloon to see how far they could go and get away with it. Since the nation just let it slide by, they are now emboldened.
It's not about who is in the Oval Office. That is all simply kabuki theater ala the wizard of oz. "Ignore that man behind the curtain." It is the senate and house acting in concert behind the scenes that is selling us out. This could not be being accomplished without collusion and corruption at the highest levels of our government.
Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. I would say the rot is probably to entrenched to remove without killing the host. So what do we do?
Graft off a shoot, replant and try to bring the tree back? Or make firewood out of it?
I'm serious, we need an adult responsible conversation, but with the putzes in DC and the media there's no chance. It's all about polarizing, thus allowing control. The media sets it up, delivers the spike, and then lays out the solution all in one neat 30 minute package. It's a page right out of Lenin's play book. "A lie told often enough becomes the truth."
Is there an answer? Or are we doomed to simply be overrun and shoved into our little boxes getting fed Solyent green?
As Benjamin Franklin said, IF we can keep it. I think we've lost it already.
Seriously, I've been thinking more and more about this.
Does there come a point that we (Those that still respect the tenets of the constitution) need to consider seceding? I know, I know. "That's crazy talk!" But I'm serious about the concept. At what point do we as group have to stand up and scream "NO MORE!" At what point does complete disregard from our elected officials become tyranny?
There clearly is one massive cultural divide in this country. Those that consider the Constitution "suggestions". The ones that only respect the rights that they like. Those that think they are smarter than everybody else in the room at the cocktail party and thus can tell everybody else how it is going to be. Those that want a nanny state where they think they will be safe and taken care of, and those of us who are currently working and providing it for them. Then, the nanny staters think they have a right to dictate how we who provide their sustenance live our lives? Screw that.
Then our legislatures demonstrate taht they are perfectly content to spend us into national oblivion. And there are enough citizens that think this is a good idea to re-elect the adminstration? WTF?
I think we have already lost the nation as a republic, in part do to the great society, to the freaking welfare system, to social security, and now obamacare. We are at the tipping point, another year or two and we will be way past it and in too much debt to save it. If we do not do something fast, it's over. And if they disarm us, we will not be able to do anything. I have to face the facts from the last election, the "I want it free" crowd out numbers the rest of us.
Ok, if they want to live their lives like that they can. That is the whole point of the Constitution. But screw them. And their damn horses. And keep them out of my freaking corral. I cannot afford to pay for them. Not anymore.
So. If the liberals really want to live in an oppressive enclave, why don't we let them? The rest of us can take our chances outside the peaceful cities, you know, Detroit, Chicago, New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Miami, LA, and all the other violence free utopias. I bet I could last more than a couple of weeks if I'm lucky amongst the crazed 2nd amendment bitter clinging freaks.
I'm really getting tired of being told by people that could care less about me or mine how I have to live. We all know the elected officials are crooked, so why do we continue to let them impede our nation and it's development? What the hell are we doing? At what point is enough enough?
Over the last week I have seriously been looking at the end of my world as I know it. I have decided that I will not be subjugated, nor will I be dictated to. I also will not be told who I can or cannot bequeth my property to.
Not only would I never harm an innocent, I would lay my life down trying to protect them. So then, why would my government decide that as a law abiding responsible citizen that I should be subjected to harassment for the acts of a lunatic? And why in God's name would I lay down and let them? Are we sheep to be led to a slaughter?
I will not accept that from any man, woman, or legislative body. Not now, not ever.
I am at a point in my life I should be able to start standing down, enjoying my life, wife, and grand-kids without looking over my shoulder to big brothers thumb. I have spent the best part of my life protecting this country and it's people. 20 years out on the pointy end of the spear for right at $1000 a month pension. I missed most of my kids growing up, never spent enough time in one place to put down roots, and love my own company more than other people as a rule. I have worked my ass off since honestly to earn a living and have never violated the law. Well, other than traffic stuff anyway.
A lot of those folks I was deployed to protect espouse positions and beliefs that disgust me beyond belief. But that's ok, I don't have to agree or like them, that is the point or our nation. They are entitled as long as they don't infringe on or hurt the other people around them. Do what ever you like in your own house, don't force me to do it. Don't force other people to do it, watch or listen to it if they don't want to. Isn't that the basic premise?
Why then should I have to worry about the government declaring me a felon for doing nothing other than continuing to act like a free and responsible citizen? Who are they to decide what is acceptable for me to own or not? Hell, they tell us what kind of freaking cheese we can have available, what kind of light bulbs can use. WE INVENTED THE FREAKING LIGHT BULBS THEY ARE BANNING FOR CHRIST'S SAKE! THERE IS NO VIABLE REASON TO NOT USE THEM!
I say they went too damn far with the light bulb fiasco. In retrospect I think it was a trial balloon to see how far they could go and get away with it. Since the nation just let it slide by, they are now emboldened.
It's not about who is in the Oval Office. That is all simply kabuki theater ala the wizard of oz. "Ignore that man behind the curtain." It is the senate and house acting in concert behind the scenes that is selling us out. This could not be being accomplished without collusion and corruption at the highest levels of our government.
Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. I would say the rot is probably to entrenched to remove without killing the host. So what do we do?
Graft off a shoot, replant and try to bring the tree back? Or make firewood out of it?
I'm serious, we need an adult responsible conversation, but with the putzes in DC and the media there's no chance. It's all about polarizing, thus allowing control. The media sets it up, delivers the spike, and then lays out the solution all in one neat 30 minute package. It's a page right out of Lenin's play book. "A lie told often enough becomes the truth."
Is there an answer? Or are we doomed to simply be overrun and shoved into our little boxes getting fed Solyent green?
Sunday, January 6, 2013
Fiscal Cliff, or "Morons drive headlong into Sea!"
Fiscal Cliff put in a much better perspective.
Lesson # 1:
* U.S. Tax revenue: $2,170,000,000,000
* Fed budget: $3,820,000,000,000
* New debt: $ 1,650,000,000,000
* National debt: $14,271,000,000,000
* Recent budget cuts: $ 38,500,000,000
Let's now remove 8 zeros and pretend it's a household budget:
* Annual family income: $21,700
* Money the family spent: $38,200
* New debt on the credit card: $16,500
* Outstanding balance on the credit card: $142,710
* Total budget cuts so far: $38.50
Got It ?????
OK now,
Lesson # 2:
Here's another way to look at the Debt Ceiling:
Let's say, You come home from work and find there has been a sewer backup in
your neighborhood....and your home has sewage all the way up to your
ceilings.
What do you think you should do ......???
Raise the ceilings, or remove the shit?
Lesson # 1:
* U.S. Tax revenue: $2,170,000,000,000
* Fed budget: $3,820,000,000,000
* New debt: $ 1,650,000,000,000
* National debt: $14,271,000,000,000
* Recent budget cuts: $ 38,500,000,000
Let's now remove 8 zeros and pretend it's a household budget:
* Annual family income: $21,700
* Money the family spent: $38,200
* New debt on the credit card: $16,500
* Outstanding balance on the credit card: $142,710
* Total budget cuts so far: $38.50
Got It ?????
OK now,
Lesson # 2:
Here's another way to look at the Debt Ceiling:
Let's say, You come home from work and find there has been a sewer backup in
your neighborhood....and your home has sewage all the way up to your
ceilings.
What do you think you should do ......???
Raise the ceilings, or remove the shit?
Saturday, December 29, 2012
Letter to my elected officials.
I mailed these today. Not sure how to say it plainer. Back off the rhetoric, leave the good folks alone. Poking them never works out well.
I am writing to ask that you strongly oppose any attempt to strip second amendment protections from your constituents.
I am retired military, and a lifelong resident of Illinois. I moved back to Illinois on my retirement from Naval Service. I grew up in Keithsburg, IL and have many great memories of growing up here. Hours and hours of fishing, hunting, and shooting for sheer pleasure. I want the same for my children and grand-children. I intend to instill the same values in them and provide them with the same opportunities I had, should they desire to follow them.
Senator, I would submit that it is your job to protect that heritage for them. And I am writing to ask that you keep in mind that you represent a lot wider swath of people than simply the metropolitan areas which garner so much attention and tax money.
I have been reading what the Senator from California has proposed relating to potential gun control legislation. Frankly it is dreadful and completely unacceptable to me, my wife, children, and countless others.
Ms Feinstien claims it’s for “the children of Newtown”. As a lifetime hunter and shooter, who is personally familiar with her and her stated positions over the years, I know that is a bald faced lie. She is using the bodies of those children as an excuse to ram her agenda down our throats. It’s the same agenda she’s been trying to get done for years, now she has an emotional battering ram to use with it. I find it disgusting, and her more so for even considering it as an excuse.
Personally, I am not willing to allow my rights to be infringed upon for the acts of some evil men. Not now, not ever. I do not believe that attempting to legislate morality ever works. I do believe that knee jerk legislation on the law abiding simply causes ill will and resentment. Especially emotional legislation driven by a criminal/insane act. I do not deserve to be treated the same as those people. I have never committed a violent crime in my life nor will I. As such I will strongly oppose any attempts at restricting my freedoms any more than has already been done. To do so would not be right, moral, nor is it just per our constitution and rule of law.
As to the recent events around the country, I would die trying to prevent such an occurrence were I to witness such a thing taking place and be in a position to intervene. Regardless of whether my family was present or not. I would consider it my duty, regardless of the personal cost. That is the meaning of honor, to help those that cannot help themselves when necessary.
[page break]
When I enlisted, I took an oath very similar to your oath of office.
“I, your constituent, do 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; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.”
I spent my entire adult life doing so, and I still consider myself bound to that oath. Especially in regards to defending the constitution and holding its tenets to be true. As I understood it, the document is there to prevent the majority from trampling on the minority whom the mob does not agree with. And the oath does not only apply to the parts or amendments that I like, it applies to the entire document. The mob is out sir. Will you give it head or rein it in?
Presidents come and go, as do Senators, Congressmen, Governors, and all the other elected officials. Some good, some bad, some downright corrupt. Regardless, through all the peaceful transitions of power that our country is famous for, one thing has stayed constant. Our constitution and all that it stands for.
That constitution protects the guys like me. We don’t have a lot of money, we’re not the smartest guys in the world, but we love our country and our way of life. We strive to live our lives in an honorable way and not trample the folks around us. Thus bringing us to the right to privacy, the right to own our own land, and the other God given rights the Constitution is a guarantor to. Those rights do not come from government, they are granted by God.
As to the Second Amendment, it is the only one that specifically states "Shall not be infringed". It is written in simple language, and is very clear. There is no ambiguity there. Not even the First Amendment which gets much lip service and mock outrage is afforded that admonition.
Sir, I am a Life member of the National Rifle Association, as well as a Life Member of the Illinois State Rifle Association.
I am a law abiding citizen with no intentions of hurting anyone, but I have no intentions of letting someone hurt me or mine either. Senator, we just want to be left alone to live our lives as we see fit. I’m getting pretty danged tired of government sticking its nose in my tent without just cause.
I would submit you would be better off to get the runaway spending under control before you start trying to force law abiding citizens through hoops they may have no intention of slipping through. No matter who’s pushing.
Sunday, August 26, 2012
Well, it happened. Thought Police have fired up.
They arrested a 25 year old combat Marine for Facebook posts. Well, they didn't arrest him, they detained him for an emergency mental evaluation. For posts made on a closed facebook page.
http://bungalowbillscw.blogspot.com/2012/08/former-marine-arrested-by-fbi-for.html
Ladies and gentlemen, that was the day America as we know her died, and Amerika the facist republic was born.
Regardless of whether or not you agree with what he posted, or whether you liked it, and frankly I didn't for most of it, one typically isn't arrested for thoughts or speech.
Not of a non-specific threat anyway. If he had been walking down the street swinging an axe and looking for a specific general, ok then lock him up. I think this is a massive and serious over reach, and the general media seems to be ok with it.
We have lost the Republic, it was a good run while it lasted.
http://bungalowbillscw.blogspot.com/2012/08/former-marine-arrested-by-fbi-for.html
Ladies and gentlemen, that was the day America as we know her died, and Amerika the facist republic was born.
Regardless of whether or not you agree with what he posted, or whether you liked it, and frankly I didn't for most of it, one typically isn't arrested for thoughts or speech.
Not of a non-specific threat anyway. If he had been walking down the street swinging an axe and looking for a specific general, ok then lock him up. I think this is a massive and serious over reach, and the general media seems to be ok with it.
We have lost the Republic, it was a good run while it lasted.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)