Jump to content
SecurityGuy42

How To Handle Traitors In Your Unit During A Conflict?

Recommended Posts

This was in my recommended videos last week.  This guy pissed me off so much I couldn't finish the video.  He painted the whole movie as nothing but Right Wing propaganda against the benevolent Soviets.  But there was one thing that stuck with me, other than the fact this moron has no understanding of military or guerilla life or tactics.  And that was how should you handle people that betray your unit to the enemy during a conflict?  Take into account we are talking about a guerilla unit behind enemy lines.  So there is no access to Military Police or Judge Advocate General lawyers to handle a Court Martial.  Do you do what they did in the film and do a summary execution after the traitor admits what he did?  Do you let him go free with no punishment?  Do you hold him as a prisoner till the war is over?  What?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i saw the same video and agree, it felt like he was really hating on it. Especially when it came to the part where is said the children were expected to "not show emotion".  I thought the guy didn't know what he was talking about or was digging way to deeply into it. Was it propaganda? I would say yes, but i think it ends at the concept of us being armed for more than self defense, and that we need to be ready to fight at a moment notice. As for prisoners... thats a tricky one... above my pay grade right now but will give it thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, let's examine it.  I didn't watch the whole video, but a couple things struck me immediately.  The moderator is an apologist for the one-world government, evidenced by his opinionated narration.  My take is that this video itself is a propaganda piece, extolling the evils of a sovereign country in favor of the one-world collective.  It points out that defending your home, your country, your way of life is somehow a bad thing... wrong on all counts, at least in my view.  It completely discounts the fact that the USA was invaded by an armed force, with the sole purpose of establishing a new system of government.

 

Now, to the hypothetical question of traitors and what to do with them.  In the fictional movie, there is no "higher level" of civil government or military command; hence the decision rests solely with the unit commander.  If that were the case and speaking personally, I would listen to his side and weigh it against his treachery.  Unless there was some overwhelming reason for it (whole town would be executed if he didn't comply), I would probably execute him... simply to guarantee the safety and security of the unit.  

 

Mind well, that summary execution is the LAST RESORT and there should be overwhelming evidence to support that decision.  You will quite likely be called later, to account for your actions.  War crimes are serious business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before replying, I would like to warn everyone reading this that hostile observers are also reading it, noting down what is said, and hoping that they will find something

which can be used, perhaps out of context, to prepare a case against the militia movement.   Perhaps a legal case, certainly an attempt to brand the mlitia movement as

potentially violent terrorists.  So please please please think carefully about what you write.

 

The problem with answering this question is that it is only a meaningful question if there is no legitimate government any more.  That has to be made completely clear.

So long as there is a legitimate government -- which doesn't necessarily mean "a government I like", just one which holds its power through fair elections and is seen as

such by the majority of people -- then only that government can speak of 'treason' and 'traitors', and punishment for same, in anything other than a metaphorical way.

 

In other words, if we are in a situation where there is no legitimate government -- say, a post-nuclear holocaust situation, or where, as in Germany, fascists have seized the

government, cancelled elections, so it no longer represents the democratic will of the people, no longer ensures fair trials and our rights -- then how do we handle ANY crime? 

 

Never mind treason, how would we handle shoplifting?

 

I think the answer for Americans would have to be, until we can re-establish  a legitimate democratic government, we have to keep as close as we can to the laws of the one that

has been destroyed, or subverted. Treason has a clear definition, and a range of punishments are prescribed for anyone convicted of it.

 

But here we run into a second problem: resources.  In a civil war situation, neither side is likely to have recourse to the resources a proper government has,  in particular, prisons.

So a long prison sentence for ANY crime is ruled out.  This is a serious practical problem. Many guerilla movements have faced it, and solved it in the expected way,

as in this example (Raul Castro preparing to execute an informer, 1958). 

 

And there is another problem: in a civil war, each side thinks it is going to win. You don't think your sentence, if you are caught by the other side, will actually last.  That fact, as Trotsky

once pointed out, explains the widespread resort to shooting in a civil war, even if one or both sides DID have access to facilities where traitors could be imprisoned.

 

But ... we're not going to have a civil war, so this question will never come up. 

 

We're going to patiently explain what needs to be done to restore the American Republic.. Anyone with one eye in their head can see that things are rapidly running downhill. More and more Americans will understand that

everything they have taken for granted about life in America is going to be changing, for the worse.  If, as may well happen, a large number of American citizens don't agree with us over time, and

prefer to live in the feces-laden nightmare combination of Venezuela and Zimbabwe that the Left is aiming for, then a natural separation will happen -- first, a separation of populations, as

traditional-minded Americans move to the Red States, and those who want to live the Progressive Nightmare move to the Blue States.  Followed by a peaceful separation of the two populations

into new states.

 

This will be an amicable divorce.  There is no need to talk of civil war, shootings, etc.  Legal and peaceful.  Violence, if there is any, will come from the other side, as it always has. But a large mass movement of determined Americans,  well armed, sober and sensible, patiently pursuring a legal and democratic path to preservation of their liberties,  always co operating with legitimate authority, will ensure that the other side behave themselves.

Edited by Doug1943

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WOW !

 

Okay , well ....... Let me start off by saying that I asked my wife if I could interrupt her Dave Ramsey show and watch what "Mr. Intellectual" had to say .

Well besides his constant flip-flopping reality for propaganda fiction and demeaning the movie characters in one hand as being nothing but a fictional person who whatever they did did not matter because they didn't exist ; then dismisses the actors as they were just acting out propaganda .

OY !

Just writing that sentence brought back the headache that hit me half way through that pompous Lefty's "I'm sooo smarter then everyone else" diatribe.  Actually reminds me of one of our older boys that we don't talk to any longer.

My wife was going bonkers even before me and boy oh boy was her verbiage getting colorful as the torture continued.

 

We both saw that movie when it came out in theaters , and we both agreed that it was a PRO-AMERICAN film that came out during the COLD WAR when we were still doing DUCK AND COVER drills in High School . Not forgetting the Soviet Union was alive and well at that time and spreading Communism into Central and South America , a clear violation of the Monroe Doctrine , that only got enforced at Grenada .

I'm not going to get started on all that now.

 

Okay enough of that , on to what to do with one who betrays others.

I'm not going to bore anyone with religious anecdotes which will just open the door to in-fighting over different interpretations . So here it is , buddies who share in a mutual cause KNOW what is allowed and what isn't , "I have your back and you have mine , and , "Friends don't screw over friends " , it's that simple.

Now from there we could infer that a Social Contract has been established and entered freely into by each individual's volision .

We can also infer that along with the vows of mutual support that there are prices to be paid if one should break said Social Contract.

I.e. , "Snitches get stitches and wind up in ditches ", "Blood in Blood out", "You lie you die" , or let's take this up in a more "refined "manner.....

 

“In it's purest form, an act of retribution provides symmetry. The rendering payment of crimes against the innocent. But a danger on retaliation lies on the furthering cycle of violence. Still, it's a risk that must be met; and the greater offense is to allow the guilty go unpunished.”
Emily Thorne

“It is the fear of retaliation that prevents most people from committing wrong against their enemy. A state or an individual who does not pay back its offenders can`t live honourably.”
Awdhesh Singh, Myths are Real, Reality is a Myth

 

So there ya go , no reason to overly think it and then try to ration it out , it's a simple reality that needs to be remembered and seared into one's being . A Covenant that clearly lays out the rewards and riches as well as the revenge and retribution

“The heart needs discipline. Without discipline there is no honor. Without honor we are nothing.“ What does it mean to you?

Thus endeth my sermon ....

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't have to watch all of the video.  I knew exactly where the narrator was going with HIS propaganda.

 

I've watched Red Dawn, including the remake, many times.  Any enemy invades my country, and I take up arms against them.  Anyone who betrays the Patriot cause dies.  I define a "betrayer" as someone who is inside the resistance, and betrays that resistance.  That person dies ... at the hands of the resistance.

 

One final note:  Everyone needs to read HR 1111, which is still pending, awaiting a DEM President and Congress.  HR 1111 would establish a Department of Peacebuilding, in place of the Department of Homeland Security.  I you read the proposed bill, you find out that it covers all the Left's bases, including civil war, providing for inviting foreign troops (not UN "Peacekeepers") into this country to fight against any rebellion.  By extension, it would also allow for the confiscation of privately-owned firearms by these foreign troops.

 

Dark days loom ahead, my friends.  We must keep our hands steady and our hearts true.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/1111

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't watch the video.  During a conflict and a spie is found with absolute truth then the person will be hung.  If foreign troops are captured they will be killed.  If any US troops that are not loyal to the constitution are captured they will be branded with a T for Traitor on their cheek.  If they are captured again they will be killed. 

 

I also encourage the stockpile of hollow points and soft points to be on the battlefield.  One reason is because of the wounds they will cause and two because of those wounds it will effect their morale.  There going to know we are not fucking around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's very important to distinguish between two situations:

 

(1) a future war/civil war,  in which all law and order has vanished, all political allegiances are rendered moot, there is no established authority.  This situation will not last forever, hopefully, but it can last for a period. During that time, 'natural' law -- I don't mean this in the usual sense -- basic fairness, plus expediency, will rule.   Cicero said, "In war the laws are silent", but there will still be rough-and-ready 'rules'.  How do you handle someone who is AWOL, asleep on sentry duty, who steals someone's watch, etc.  

 

That's one speculative, what-if, scenario.

 

(2) But right now, under the conditions under which we live, if a traitor is discovered in our midst, nothing must happen to him. He must be told to get out.  His life or well-being must NOT be threatened.  (Isn't that right Mr FBI man? ... listening and recording this conversation.)  We are not going tofa lant commit any felonies nor advise commiting felonies.  Anyone proposing doing so ... saying, for example, that we should kill someone if we find out he's an Anti-Fa plant -- is probably himself an informant. 

 

I don't think that the FBI at the moment is going this sort of thing, but back in the 50s and 60s, they had an active disruption campaign against the Communist Party and the Klan.  One of their tactics was to plant documents, making it look like a certain leader was actually on the FBI payroll. The Communist Party in New York City lost a leader as a result of this trick.  As the Wikipedia article on COINTELPRO put it, "COINTELPRO tactics are still used to this day and have been alleged to include discrediting targets through psychological warfare; smearing individuals and groups using forged documents and by planting false reports in the media".

 

In a future civil war, traitors can be deadly.  But now, the very worst they can do is to get people fired from their jobs.  So we have to be careful with membership lists, use of real names, etc.  And above all, DON'T SAY STUPID THINGS THAT CAN BE USED LATER AGAINST YOU.   (Governor Blackface referred to credible threats to initiate violence at the big rally in Richmond. I have no doubt at all that many of those statements were genuine, by people who have not yet learned to control their mouths.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Doug1943 said:

It's very important to distinguish between two situations:

 

(1) a future war/civil war,  in which all law and order has vanished, all political allegiances are rendered moot, there is no established authority.  This situation will not last forever, hopefully, but it can last for a period. During that time, 'natural' law -- I don't mean this in the usual sense -- basic fairness, plus expediency, will rule.   Cicero said, "In war the laws are silent", but there will still be rough-and-ready 'rules'.  How do you handle someone who is AWOL, asleep on sentry duty, who steals someone's watch, etc.  

 

That's one speculative, what-if, scenario.

 

(2) But right now, under the conditions under which we live, if a traitor is discovered in our midst, nothing must happen to him. He must be told to get out.  His life or well-being must NOT be threatened.  (Isn't that right Mr FBI man? ... listening and recording this conversation.)  We are not going tofa lant commit any felonies nor advise commiting felonies.  Anyone proposing doing so ... saying, for example, that we should kill someone if we find out he's an Anti-Fa plant -- is probably himself an informant. 

 

I don't think that the FBI at the moment is going this sort of thing, but back in the 50s and 60s, they had an active disruption campaign against the Communist Party and the Klan.  One of their tactics was to plant documents, making it look like a certain leader was actually on the FBI payroll. The Communist Party in New York City lost a leader as a result of this trick.  As the Wikipedia article on COINTELPRO put it, "COINTELPRO tactics are still used to this day and have been alleged to include discrediting targets through psychological warfare; smearing individuals and groups using forged documents and by planting false reports in the media".

 

In a future civil war, traitors can be deadly.  But now, the very worst they can do is to get people fired from their jobs.  So we have to be careful with membership lists, use of real names, etc.  And above all, DON'T SAY STUPID THINGS THAT CAN BE USED LATER AGAINST YOU.   (Governor Blackface referred to credible threats to initiate violence at the big rally in Richmond. I have no doubt at all that many of those statements were genuine, by people who have not yet learned to control their mouths.)

 

 

In a future war, good, honorable men who "play by the rules" will be defeated and imprisoned (or worse).   They will re-cycle their troops, bring all their weapons to bear, and you will go down.  I do not condone murder, so each man must search his conscience and decide how he will handle those who enforce tyranny.

 

About 8-10 years ago, the US Government purchased over a BILLION rounds of soft point ammunition for US Forestry Service, Dept. of Homeland Security, US Postal Service and others... so they do have it for "domestic consumption".  Such ammunition should not be used in war (strangely silent on domestic  conflict), says the Geneva Accords, but it's on the shelf... so know what awaits.  Honorable men won't use it, but they will be chewed to pieces by it.  There is an old saying:  All is fair in love and war.   Your enemy will use whatever he has (chemical weapons etc.)... maybe not at first, but he will: anything and everything at his disposal, to win the battle.  There is nothing honorable about war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone should watch this video:   I was surprised to find Fox News acting like CNN.

 

Lots of lessons here -- for one thing, you need to be prepared for an interview. This fellow didn't do too badly, but he could have done better if he had been briefed on the kinds of questions he would be asked. For instance, 'Are you white supremacists?'.  And if you can get your website or some contact information in, so that interested people can get in touch, all the better.   But the most important part of the video is in the middle: the poor fool who wrote about how he was eager to "kill feds".  See what happened to him.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/19/2020 at 11:49 PM, John Last said:

 

 

In a future war, good, honorable men who "play by the rules" will be defeated and imprisoned (or worse).   They will re-cycle their troops, bring all their weapons to bear, and you will go down.  I do not condone murder, so each man must search his conscience and decide how he will handle those who enforce tyranny.

 

About 8-10 years ago, the US Government purchased over a BILLION rounds of soft point ammunition for US Forestry Service, Dept. of Homeland Security, US Postal Service and others... so they do have it for "domestic consumption".  Such ammunition should not be used in war (strangely silent on domestic  conflict), says the Geneva Accords, but it's on the shelf... so know what awaits.  Honorable men won't use it, but they will be chewed to pieces by it.  There is an old saying:  All is fair in love and war.   Your enemy will use whatever he has (chemical weapons etc.)... maybe not at first, but he will: anything and everything at his disposal, to win the battle.  There is nothing honorable about war.

 

I think it's true that in all wars, 'rules' get broken. By that I mean the sort of 'rules' that civilized people have implicitly developed over the years, and also the formal 'rules of war'. There are lots of reasons for this.  Sometimes the rule-breaking is on a mass scale, and is officially encouraged. At other times it is just sporadic, rare, and takes mainly place out of the sight of the officers. [Compare the mass rapes committed by the Russians in Germany, with those committed by the Americans in Okinawa.]  Since no one knows what is coming in the US, we cannot say much about the hypotheticals of conflict.

 

But although we don't know the future, there are a few things we can say will be true, whatever happens.

 

(1) one thing that has restrained war somewhat is the idea that if we do it, they'll do it. And so things will even out between us, but the overall situation will be even worse (for both of us) than it was.  This is probably why neither side used poison gas in WWII, and why the Germans treated American, British and Canadian prisoners of war  fairly decently.

 

I read once that in WWI, snipers were not popular with their own side.  This was because if a sniper set up and began sniping at the Germans, when they had not been sniping at the Allies, then they would retaliate with sniping of their own. Since sniping couldn't really affect the outcome of the war, and since it would just make life even more unpleasant and miserable for everyone, the ordinary soldiers in the trench weren't happy about initiating a sniping campaign.

 

(2) It's very much to the advantage of either side, to have a 'good' reputation with the other side, with regards to its treatment of a defeated enemy. If a soldier knows that if he is captured, he will be tortured to death, he will likely choose to fight to the death rather than surrender.  But we want our enemies to surrender!  This applies more generally as well: in an armed conflict to determine who rules in a certain area, we want liberals to believe that, if we win, we will not be vindictive towards them: that the normal rules of liberal democracy, toleration, respect for rights, etc. will carry on as before, in areas ruled by us. In other words, we don't want to drive people into the enemy camp if we can help it.

 

(3) In all conflicts, political or military, there are people who are 'in the middle', not actively supporting either side. It's important to win their benevolent neutrality, if not support. In the US, which is a civilized country, they will have certain values which are decent ones. We don't want to be the side that tramples on these values, that shows no humanity, that gets a reputation for Schrecklichkeit . We will definitely be portrayed that way by our enemies, but we need not make their lies into truths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...