Jump to content

Recommended Posts

          Over the years I have met MANY people who will stand and fight when the time comes (or so they say). The problem is they only want to get involved when the time comes, they want to keep their anonymity (or so they think). If you are a combat veteran, you are already a potential terrorist according to government documents, they will come for us anyway. These people do not want to be on a government watch list, or be known to be a patriotic American, they are every where, but no where at the same time. Personally I think the people who want be to ready for what ever comes,ie. (natural disasters, political unrest....whatever) should focus on developing systems, networks, intel,  and training for the people who will show up when the time arises.                  I think it is dangerous to have lower enlisted knowing the command structure,  only a select number of people should know who the leadership is. When someone is threatened with prison time, or injury to their loved ones they will tell everything they know and maybe things that are not true to help themselves. There should be degrees of separation between the different levels of leadership. I am sure it is already that way, that is why it is so hard to find "leaders" in the movement. SO I would say do not be discouraged if you cannot find people who want to be leaders, they are there. I think the problem is in the middle ranks, people who want to be the middle men or women. Even that should be at different levels, only KEY people should know who the next level leader is....a liaison if you will.

        So I believe the middle levels of leadership, with degrees of separation, should be the areas people focus on.....like the NCO's, every one know the NCO's are the ones who win battles.  Do not get disheartened if you cannot tap into leadership levels, focus on small unit ops, and be willing to integrate into a larger group when the time comes! 

        ALWAYS REMEMBER YOU ARE NEVER ALONE, that lady pushing that shopping cart next to you at the store or that cop running traffic checks could be a key leader in your area. Just keep the faith!!!!!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great insight!!! I believe that to be successful you need a close knit, highly motivated, trained and developed NCO cadre system as it’s  the number one key to the success of all military units.

Edited by Ranger0320

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You bring up a couple of very good points. There are probably a lot more people in our areas that are interested in being ready for what comes, and at the same time they are afraid that if others find out, they will be mocked/shamed for their ideas, bombarded with requests/demands for help when things go sideways and finally they think if they are not part of a group they are "safe" from the government. Sadly I don't have any solutions for these people. If you think you will survive as a lone wolf or just your immediate family, I fear you will be greatly over-matched. Another issue is when these people do finally join a group they will be low on the totem pole which usually means their ideas are not followed, they get put on the crappy details, and their skills have not been tested by the group so there is not a lot of confidence in them. This will result in frustration on everyone's part, a sense of un-appreciation on the new persons part, and a lack of trust or loyalty.

From my perspective I am much like those people. I don't want to advertise that I train and prepare. As a result I do not have a large group close to me should things go sideways. In fact the group of guys I train with are based out of northern Alabama. My main excuse is I go to MTSU so advertising my political, religious beliefs could become problematic for me, but honestly I don't think many would actually care - it is just an excuse for me to stay in my comfort zone. Again this is my view, YMMV.

But should you find a person who is interested, you have to embrace them (not necessarily trust them), and make them feel like they are a part of the group. That their ideas, concerns, and skills are valid (if not necessarily practical). As a side note, they might have family that they will have to take care of as well - help them feel welcomed in as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There has never been a time that we’ve lived through quite like this where Americans, regardless of race or political affiliation can feel that a storm is on the horizon! They may not know exactly what’s happening but they can feel the bad mojo! That being said I believe if ever a moment existed in time for open enrollment/recruitment or publication of our ideas or  mission statement THE TIME IS NOW!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would not work, how would you keep the IDIOTS that wants to jump to conclusions and kill everyone they meet or see, or keep some type of order, within the ranks.

 

It's obvious that you have never served in the military, or have been in an actual war zone or firefight.  From experience, Cooler minds will prevail, over unorganized groups. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheOldman said:

That would not work, how would you keep the IDIOTS that wants to jump to conclusions and kill everyone they meet or see, or keep some type of order, within the ranks.

 

It's obvious that you have never served in the military, or have been in an actual war zone or firefight.  From experience, Cooler minds will prevail, over unorganized groups. 

 

Would you be referring to myself or someone else ?   Small teams like squad size is about all I would accept.   Rotate people into the various positions so everyone has a understanding of the roles.   I dont care about people who want some title and rank or demanding to be a leader.  It's a joke and part of the truth about why militias are laughed at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TheOldman said:

That would not work, how would you keep the IDIOTS that wants to jump to conclusions and kill everyone they meet or see, or keep some type of order, within the ranks.

 

It's obvious that you have never served in the military, or have been in an actual war zone or firefight.  From experience, Cooler minds will prevail, over unorganized groups. 

 

 

Excellent points!  If nobody is in charge, how could you possibly get ANYTHING done... much less accomplish a mission???  I see that as a short-cut to disaster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, John Last said:

 

 

Excellent points!  If nobody is in charge, how could you possibly get ANYTHING done... much less accomplish a mission???  I see that as a short-cut to disaster.

And I see it as the 9 millon Facebook miltias making up rank and demanding to be saluted.  Sorry I think when you train together and find out who's strong in some areas you can see who might be the primary one to lead that mission.  However I wouldnt follow anyone who thinks of himself as the leader or demands it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Michael Grauer said:

Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat. 

 

Amateurs talk strategy and professionals talk logistics 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Megatron said:

Why bother with rank and leadership. 

Keep the teams small and leaderless.   You won't have the problem s then

Make everyone there own leader, have the back of the man in front and behind you and theyll have your back, let the people lead themselves. I agree w you 100%

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Most are bashing the idea of a leaderless pack but to be real you do can the work of 20 men w just a small squad of 3, who is to say it isnt possible, youd lose less men that could be valuable and if you do it right you can make an effect on the field that confuses the enemy making them feel they are being ambushed by a large group and they will act sporadic when you have a small organized group w complete control of the situation, anything can happen in war i feel and if ppl get split up youd rather have men w the ability to survive and thrive by themselves then someone who is reliant on the squad leader and cant think for themselves, not necessarily no leader but everyone is there own leader in a sense, of course action would have to be taken against irrational members but then it comes down to a pack decision, just like everything should be, everyone gets a word in before anything is done, so it is fair and men know what they are walking into, adds a vibe of comfort which would help in a chaotic situation. 

Edited by J SkriptXXIII

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Megatron said:

And I see it as the 9 millon Facebook miltias making up rank and demanding to be saluted.  Sorry I think when you train together and find out who's strong in some areas you can see who might be the primary one to lead that mission.  However I wouldnt follow anyone who thinks of himself as the leader or demands it.

 

 

I see it as 5 guys squabbling over which route to take, or where to camp for the night/set up fighting holes, or who had watch more than who.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, John Last said:

 

 

I see it as 5 guys squabbling over which route to take, or where to camp for the night/set up fighting holes, or who had watch more than who.

Cool let me know how the fake rank ones workout.  Was talking to one guy who was a lt in this 1000 man militia but when asked how often they trained.    Nothing but crickets and in the years of existence nobody's ever met. 

 

I'll take 5 solid guys who work together over 1000 fake ones dreaming about glory. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Megatron said:

,

Would you be referring to myself or someone else ?   Small teams like squad size is about all I would accept.   Rotate people into the various positions so everyone has a understanding of the roles.   I dont care about people who want some title and rank or demanding to be a leader.  It's a joke and part of the truth about why militias are laughed at.

Megatron, I am talking about you, and many others; it obvious that you and a lot of other people on this site have never been in the Military, have never been in a war, have never been in a firefight, and watched your buddy get hit in the head, with a round, or something, or have seen the actual aftermath of a battle.   They think everything is glory, that they are a bad ass, can run 100 miles in full gear, can jump over the tallest buildings,  BS!!!!    They have no clue, they are still shitting yellow.   Then you want to join, or form a small team, squad size, like a  SF Mike Force , with no leadership, and you're going to  plan your missions, and kick everyone's ass.  Really ?   Do you think that a SEAL Team, or a SF Team is leaderless.  OMG!        And, just so you know, I am not wanting to be a leader, or the head of anything.  I have been in a war, I have seen action, and have bled for this country.    Lots of folks have no clue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Megatron said:

Cool let me know how the fake rank ones workout.  Was talking to one guy who was a lt in this 1000 man militia but when asked how often they trained.    Nothing but crickets and in the years of existence nobody's ever met. 

 

I'll take 5 solid guys who work together over 1000 fake ones dreaming about glory. 

 I understand your sentiment, but in reality going to need more people.

 

There’s a happy medium somewhere out there.At some point though some sort of structure has to be created. 

 

You could choose a military rank hierarchy, or even an unorthodox system.  At a certain point it’s just naturally necessary.

 

It’s fine to bump personality or have issues with peoples training regiment. 

Lets not gatekeep military rank structure as anything special though.

The militia is for everyone and people can choose what they want.  Even if that’s means “making up” ranks. If you would like “ranks” to be based on an authoritative entity perhaps you should  re-enlist.

 

if it bothers you change it. Plenty of opportunity to push forth new ideas. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TheOldman said:

Megatron, I am talking about you, and many others; it obvious that you and a lot of other people on this site have never been in the Military, have never been in a war, have never been in a firefight, and watched your buddy get hit in the head, with a round, or something, or have seen the actual aftermath of a battle.   They think everything is glory, that they are a bad ass, can run 100 miles in full gear, can jump over the tallest buildings,  BS!!!!    They have no clue, they are still shitting yellow.   Then you want to join, or form a small team, squad size, like a  SF Mike Force , with no leadership, and you're going to  plan your missions, and kick everyone's ass.  Really ?   Do you think that a SEAL Team, or a SF Team is leaderless.  OMG!        And, just so you know, I am not wanting to be a leader, or the head of anything.  I have been in a war, I have seen action, and have bled for this country.    Lots of folks have no clue. 

I believe Megatron is prior service National Guard If so you’re incorrect. 

You may have a valid criticism of Megatrons statement but his background is irrelevant to the critique  of it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TheOldman said:

Megatron, I am talking about you, and many others; it obvious that you and a lot of other people on this site have never been in the Military, have never been in a war, have never been in a firefight, and watched your buddy get hit in the head, with a round, or something, or have seen the actual aftermath of a battle.   They think everything is glory, that they are a bad ass, can run 100 miles in full gear, can jump over the tallest buildings,  BS!!!!    They have no clue, they are still shitting yellow.   Then you want to join, or form a small team, squad size, like a  SF Mike Force , with no leadership, and you're going to  plan your missions, and kick everyone's ass.  Really ?   Do you think that a SEAL Team, or a SF Team is leaderless.  OMG!        And, just so you know, I am not wanting to be a leader, or the head of anything.  I have been in a war, I have seen action, and have bled for this country.    Lots of folks have no clue. 

 

Lol I never been in the militiary or been to war.  Hmmm guess that was a strange thing with the army and werid didn't need a passport for that country where Saddam Hussein was    I guess I just dont know a thing.    *Edited by Admin*

 

**Edited by Admin**

Gentlemen, if we can't have a discussion without personal insult, it's best left unsaid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Liberty Prime said:

 I understand your sentiment, but in reality going to need more people.

 

There’s a happy medium somewhere out there.At some point though some sort of structure has to be created. 

 

You could choose a military rank hierarchy, or even an unorthodox system.  At a certain point it’s just naturally necessary.

 

It’s fine to bump personality or have issues with peoples training regiment. 

Lets not gatekeep military rank structure as anything special though.

The militia is for everyone and people can choose what they want.  Even if that’s means “making up” ranks. If you would like “ranks” to be based on an authoritative entity perhaps you should  re-enlist.

 

if it bothers you change it. Plenty of opportunity to push forth new ideas. 

 

 

We have and done that.  Hense it comes from experience.    Look the large groups don't work.  People are not that committed to training once a month and far to busy.  You're going be lucky if can get 5 solid people to do it.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It may be the case that  "where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them",  You don't have to have a big, impressive church in order to be a Christian.

 

But this indifference to size and organization and assets does not apply to most human endeavors, and certainly not to the military profession.

 

It's not just that, as Napoleon said, "God is on the side of the biggest battalions", although that is, everything else being equal (which it never is), certainly true.

 

There are two other reasons why numbers are important, besides the general desirability of outnumbering the enemy:

 

(1) Numbers allow specialization: it allows some people to become very good at one thing, and others to become very good at another, and so on from two things to dozens, hundreds of things -- better than anyone would be if everyone tried to master everything. It's the secret of economics: specialization and the divsion of labor. (See here: https://fee.org/articles/specialization-and-wealth/ )

 

There may be some super-people who can simultaneously master the arts of amateur (and other) radio communication, combat injury medicine, a high degree of marksmanship, gunsmithing, automobile mechanics repair, construction engineering, photographic interpretation, cooking and everything associated with it (food storage) ... while also acquiring their Private Pilot's License and a degree in law.  I've never met one but maybe one or two exist. 

 

Most of us are doing well if we can get halfway-competent in one of these things, and a very basic competence in a few others.  But to get specialists in several dozen skills ... you need several dozen (more than that, in real life) people.

 

A real military force has a large degree of specialization and division of labor.  At the lowest level, the standard infantry tactic of 'fire and maneuver' requires a (trading back and forth) 'division of labor' on the battlefield. (And it takes numbers to be able to do this -- two fireteams at a minimum.)  But more importantly, the soldier with the rifle on the front line, has a 'tail' of a dozen others behind him, to make sure he is fed, re-supplied, transported, given medical care if needed, given heavy-weapons support if needed, and is the beneficiary of an intelligence-gathering and interpreting network. 

 

This is the sort of thing you never see in video games or Hollywood productions, because it doesn't sell. And, unfortunately, it's from the entertainment industry that most of us have learned how to think about the world.  Rambo is the model.  I don't believe in conspiracy theories, but if I did, I would believe that Hollywood did this deliberately, to misguide patriots.

 

(2)  Two or three people, or even a million cells of the same, cannot defeat an enemy army and then take political power and establish, or re-establish the Constitutional Order.  A small 'cell' of a few people can act as a 'Resistance', as happened in WWII. They can contribute to tying down enemy troops who would otherwise be deployed elsewhere. 

 

But ... the Resistance only made sense, in the expectation of an eventual invasion by a real army, which would defeat the enemy and establish its own state (government). And  'a real army' means large numbers and a hierarchy of command.  As much as the libertarian/anarchist/rebel in all of us may wish that this were not so, it is so. There must be a body with political authority.

 

So, as  a supplementary force, a small 'invisible' cell is not without its uses, IF it is in communication with, and under the command of, a 'real' military. Other than this, it's just a minor nuisance to the enemy, and might even be harmful to its own cause.

 

However, we should be aware of the 'security' concerns that many people have, which prevent them from, or make them cautious about, getting involved with the militia movement.

 

These concerns are real, and need to be addressed in several different ways. But this post is too long ... so 'security'  must be left for later.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Megatron said:

 

 

We have and done that.  Hense it comes from experience.    Look the large groups don't work.  People are not that committed to training once a month and far to busy.  You're going be lucky if can get 5 solid people to do it.

 

 

 

That may be the current situation, but can’t be the solution.

I get you might be just riding it out for a reset, but most of Us are not.

 

I don’t see accepting regulating Ourselves to being small as the solution to fixing the coordination of big groups.

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...