February 11, 2015 at 11:40 am #36303February 11, 2015 at 2:27 pm #36309
Thans Selco, For later.February 11, 2015 at 2:39 pm #36313
Thanks 74, yea, solved.February 11, 2015 at 3:05 pm #36315
Selco, I think at the beginning of a SHTF in the U. S. only the military veterans will not have a problem dealing with terror since they have done this before. People like me will have a problem at the beginning. This is why you are right on “prepare, practice and learn to focus on what matters to achieve our goals”. This is very important for all of us that have never been in the military or any war.
Retired and active police officers will be some what ready too.
Many of the people will not be ready for this here. The ISIS problem has reminded us how terror works. Many will run but in the end we will have to deal with it with brute force. This is the only thing they understand.February 11, 2015 at 3:11 pm #36317
“Some guys will even surrender without fight and beg for mercy, even they listened stories about „no prisoners“ for weeks. Often they are the people who can not imagine how truly evil people act. They think because they would not kill and torture other people they do not know nobody would. It makes no sense, but it is what terror does and why it works. It makes people act without sense, makes them do stupid things, to be confused and not logical.”
At times I was responsible for up to 19 people. Knowing each person and their limits was critical to achieving our missions.
Once when we were in a critical situation I could see and feel the sense of panic building up in the group and each person. It becomes something that you can see, feel and taste. By standing up and becoming a point of focus I talked the group down from the ledge. Each and everyone in the group was very skilled in their jobs but had not been in that type of trouble and actually had no idea of what to do next.
Seems to me a lot of folks will go through life and never come face to face with death.
There are people that want to kill you just to see how you die.
Know those types. Know your limits. Know how to deal with fear.
Fear will kill you or make you strong.
RobinFebruary 11, 2015 at 3:19 pm #36319
Robin great post, you are one of the experience ones that I was talking about. I hope that many like you will guide the rest so many will live throw it and be able to fight back. On your statement “Seems to me a lot of folks will go through life and never come face to face with death” I say 99.9% will never face death.February 11, 2015 at 3:30 pm #36321
Selco has mentioned it several times: When you must, fight with overwhelming force. Be the “shock and awe” others only dream about.
….and when you have calmed down, sit and think of the loves of your life. Don’t get all worked up about what has happened. It’s done. Don’t get bogged down in remorse.
You will live another day and only because the other guy was not as prepared as you.
RobinFebruary 11, 2015 at 3:41 pm #36322
Yea, good points, fear can kill you but also once when you get to know how works and what can do to you or others it can be used on very different ways.
It is what terror is all about.February 11, 2015 at 4:00 pm #36323
Robin When the time comes I will remember your quote here and try my best to prepare for this.February 11, 2015 at 4:22 pm #36324
Ha well I think 100% of people face death, just sometimes it comes while you are sleeping and old.
The leaders of ISIS far from only understanding force are using brutality intentionally to draw out anger and a massive campaign against them from the US & NATO. They want to be martyrs to bring less aggressive Muslim nations into the war in support of their deaths. It’s “Rope A Dope” tosucker in the enemy and ambush them with a larger force. Spread the war farther and wider and make your enemy spread it’s resources. Russia has the same plan btw, draw your own conclusions.
Savagery is an old tool used from the beginning. Many many cultures used pain and suffering to control other groups, so this is nothing new. It works best when the perpetrators have the upper hand in the level of force. Against a superior force savagery instills fear but not enough to keep the savage from getting wiped out. For example the American Indian tribes of Sioux. They make ISIS look like punks when you compare what ISIS does as torture, to the the horrid things done to a live human body by the Sioux. The Sioux all ended up on reservations starving after a few years. Somebody had mercy on the remaining Indians because total genocide was on a lot of minds. Every empire of the ancient world used cruelty against it’s opponents in all hemispheres.
Will the guys in a B52 dropping “daisy cutters” or an A10 with cluster bombs be scared of ISIS? I doubt it.
On a local level in the US it’s hard to say how barbarism would manifest itself. All though I think savage behavior would bring groups together to wipe it out.February 11, 2015 at 5:23 pm #36331
There are many, many historical battles where “overwhelming forces” were taken out by smaller forces. Just the idea of “shock and awe” is not enough to steamroll an opposing force. Even in today’s warfare/tactics, this is still the case. Think about how well we truly “eliminated the enemy” in Iraq and Afghanistan. We did damage and would take them out in a straight up fight, but in all reality we are NOT winning that war.
Add guerrilla warfare and terrorism to that mix and what do you have? You have exactly what we are dealing with now: no idea when or how we will be attacked, environments where nobody is safe, individual acts of violence that are shocking enough to get worldwide media coverage, task forces dedicated to fighting these small groups, million to billion dollar costs in finding ways to neutralize the threats…… What does all this equal? A losing battle for the larger, stronger force.
We would be better off and the world would be much better served if we just segmented these areas off from the rest of the world and let them have at each other. We are not going to be able to “pacify” these groups. Of course it would be cultural, racial and political profiling, but it would force those in the Middle East to actually stand up to their internal oppressors.
http://ageofdecadence.comFebruary 11, 2015 at 6:08 pm #36332
Sled, what you state is true. Particularly about the current state of affairs. However where we are now is more about how force was applied after the shock & awe stage. We took our foot off their throats due to geopolitical forces. Using WW2 methods say like Dresden type bombing there would be no local problems in Iraq or Afghanistan. The rest of the world might be a problem but not those 2 places. Very few guerrilla wars have been ultimately sucsessful in all of the worlds history. I don’t expect the current mess to be any different. The real balance of powers will only change from a full on winner take all war. That’s why ISIS needs a unified Islamic world to conduct an asymmetrical global war. If we have conflict with ISIS, Russia & China at the same time it will be our end. They don’t need to be unified.February 11, 2015 at 6:16 pm #36333
I agree with 74, if we go into a war we need to go in to win at all cost. We need to destroy all that needs to be destroyed. That is war not what we have been doing since Vietnam. WWII we did that and we won Hitler. We can not be concern about what the world thinks. We just need to win the war.February 11, 2015 at 6:48 pm #36335
Agree with 74 and freedom. I think the weak point in the US is giving the politicians control over how the generals fight. Even the special ops guys have the politicians in the situation room looking over their shoulders. Except for O because he had a card game scheduled.
If the technology were available could you see O and Hillary asking Sherman why he was burning so much stuff on his way to the coast, or telling Patton he was using too much fuel getting his army to the Battle of Bulge.
You fight with bravery and honor but you fight to win, instead of fighting for public relations victories.February 11, 2015 at 6:58 pm #36336
<div class=”d4p-bbp-quote-title”>74 wrote:</div>Sled, what you state is true. Particularly about the current state of affairs. However where we are now is more about how force was applied after the shock & awe stage. We took our foot off their throats due to geopolitical forces. Using WW2 methods say like Dresden type bombing there would be no local problems in Iraq or Afghanistan. The rest of the world might be a problem but not those 2 places. Very few guerrilla wars have been ultimately sucsessful in all of the worlds history. I don’t expect the current mess to be any different. The real balance of powers will only change from a full on winner take all war. That’s why ISIS needs a unified Islamic world to conduct an asymmetrical global war. If we have conflict with ISIS, Russia & China at the same time it will be our end. They don’t need to be unified.
Guerrilla wars not successful?
American Revolution – conventional warfare is where we lost the most people
Afghanistan (both current and USSR wars)
Mongols…. Enough said there
Visigoths against Rome
The results can be debated for any war, but there are many decisive results in just that list.
Guerrilla warfare is a different tactic than force on force. That is all. Large forces have the disadvantage due to ability to react quick enough and properly close with to destroy their enemy when they can’t find them.
The problems in Iraq and Afghanistan go beyond politics and world views. The only real way to remove the enemy in a guerrilla war such as over there is to irradiate the entire population. That goes beyond politics or world views.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.