🚀 go-pugleaf

George Worley wrote:
> 
> In article <6pna7e$315@umbc8.umbc.edu>
> on 29 Jul 1998 10:05:34 -0400, jjasen1@umbc.edu (John "E.R." Jasen)
> wrote:
> 
> >George Worley <gworley@brokersys.com> wrote:
> >> In article <35BE38C0.C3318E84@clark.net>
> >> on Tue, 28 Jul 1998 16:46:56 -0400, klaatu <klaatu@clark.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Merlin Dorfman wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> John "E.R." Jasen (jjasen1@umbc.edu) wrote:

<a great deal of snippage>

> >Ahh, so you cede that, in order for the military to survive such an
> >uprising, they'd have to hunker down on their bases, and basically adopt a
> >siege mentality?
> 
> Siege mentality?  No I didn't say that... if a some country was to
> declare war on the US the response would be the same, lock the doors
> on secure sites.... esp. those that had nuclear weapons... so that
> only those that need to be there are there.  Just think about this for
> a minute...  The citizens uprise against the government gain control
> of a nuclear silo... our neighbors get a little nervous as they don't
> know what is going on and launch an attack on missile bases (yes our
> enemy knows were our missile bases are)... the missiles start for the
> US but because of the melee Norad is unable to launch a counter attack
> so one never gets launched... most US citizens died with a matter of
> minutes after the blasts.  Those that survived the blasts will not
> live long as they continue to get radiation poisoning.  Nothing that
> you care for is left... do you really want this?

Of course not. I will state at this point that I had at one time been a very
vocal participant in certain aspects of a larger "militia movement" up until
about the time that Tim McVeigh and whoever-else blew up the center of
Oklahoma City. At that point in time I asked the exact question you do; "whose
ends do we herewith serve?" - and I didn't much like the answers I got but
held forth hope for a few good men, etc.

Later, I noted that the center of the movement, which was at one time
primarily anti-thug-federales (which is to say, against the ATF) seemed to be
diverted. In the internet melees in news:misc.activism.militia certain
opposing views seemed to be brought into conflict and the voices of
sensibility, centrism, and above all, moderation - were essentially either
silenced or drowned out by the antics and shouting.

Later still, I noted that the most activist posters, sites, and field groups
seemed to be moving into a political position which seemed to be far more
anti- government_qua_government, to wit, they were more directed against the
US Government and less in the direction of the Universal Armament National
Defense. Oddly, some factions took up the call to oppose US military buildups
in Iraq, and also showed disturbing alliances with foreign revolutionary
powers, with the evident goal being less one of US Constitutionalism, and more
a goal of perpetuating the Cult of the Revolutionary. In short, it seemed that
terroristic entities, which had suffered a great loss in income and operations
assignments, were attempting to promote their trade in the States. This
assessment was further confirmed (for me) by seeing a tape of a leader of a
group of "militiamen" who attempted to destroy a federal facility in West
Virginia. I can say this straight out: no person born in the United States has
that person's accent.

You can figure me as being on the side of truth, justice and the American way,
just like some comic book hero, but I also keep in mind that the point of
America is not lipservice to some piece of paper - the point of America is
Americans, in particular those who want to live free as free people in a free
country. I'm not going to get so caught up in ideology that I'd throw out the
baby with the bath-water. Few others would, either.

>  Start the process to
> over throw our government by violent means and see what happens... you
> not only have to fear the US Armed forces but you will have to deal
> with our enemies as well.

I think I mentioned that elsewhere, which is what got me on that rant above...
I do well recognize that there are external powers who would _dearly_ love to
destabilize the US, and the militia-movement and associated fringe movements
probably appeared, at one time, to be the perfect movement to use for
destabilization.

> 
> >Indeed, while that would provide for the military for a while, I think the
> >government behind it would be unhappy, as the rebels would then have run
> >of the country.
> 
> The military's first objectives in such a siege would be to secure the
> White House, the Capitol, and all of the rest of the government
> buildings in Washington, DC. as well is secure the missile silos and
> Norad.

That's simplistic, but essentially true. There's very little use in securing
the Monumental Core of Washington if there's a nuke on the way; at that point
in time, the thing to do is to remove the Constitutional elements (President,
Congress, and Courts) as rapidly as possible, to an undisclosed and secure
location.

> 
> You still live in a fantasy world as  even if 10 percent of the
> civilian population started the uprising, you still have the other 90
> percent to worry about a good majority of them that had guns and amo
> would side with the government so you don't only have the military to
> worry about but you have normal citizens taken pot shots at you as
> well...

See! We knew you'd get the whole point sooner or later! And I bet you didn't
even realize that you had.

> 
> So you have 3 different enemies after you.  No way to win.  At best a
> stalemate.

We like to call it "checks and balances".

-- 
Be kind to your neighbors, | "When the going gets weird the weird turn pro."
even though they be        | http://www.clark.net/pub/klaatu/home.html 
transgenic chimerae.       | Now. Chock full of uninteresting links. 
--------- Whom thou'st vex'd waxeth wroth ----------------
Non-UseNet re-transmission of this news article is a willful violation of US
Copyright Law and the Berne Convention. Statutory damages are $250,000.00
         Re-transmission of this e-mail expressly prohibited. 
The e-mail addresses  for the FCC Commissioners include 
wkennard@fcc.gov sness@fcc.gov hfurchtg@fcc.gov  gtristan@fcc.gov