I just don’t get people believing substantive numbers of members of the military would suddenly side with us instead of the government. (They haven’t so far, even when given the opportunity) Anyone who’ll join the military has already shown a predisposition for following orders and embracing “self sacrifice”- letting their family and friends get nuked just means they have sacrificed even more and are more worthy of adulation.
Paul BonneauNovember 11, 2015 10:40 am
Kent, I believe you are wrong. I was in the Marine Corps from 1968-72, and even with the Viet Nam war (one not on our soil) there was a lot of passive resistance in the military. Things got broken or never got fixed, soldiers and Marines stoned all the time and even fragging officers. Certainly that would ramp up substantially in a civil war.
The military would be like every other branch of society. Some segments would remain loyal to the regime, others would passively resist and throw a monkey wrench in the works, others still would be actively resisting.
BTW if you read the OP carefully, the guy is NOT advising the nuking of cities, so he is not “bloodthirsty”. His position is more accurately described as “bootlicking”.
MamaLibertyNovember 11, 2015 10:42 am
It’s hard to say, Kent, and you may be right, but I keep reading about all of the military folk with PTSD (horrible emotional/mental trauma) and all those who kill themselves. These are not happy camp followers, and I suspect that those millions of veterans who live among us won’t be helping the “state” that gave them such trauma. Active duty? Maybe different, but I don’t think many of them are particularly happy either. They’ve been scammed and lied to, and they know that they’ll get the shaft when they get out. Those willing to “sacrifice” even more can’t be the majority.
I know a good many veterans, many my age. They are fit and ready to fight the “I Will Not Comply” battles, wherever they may take them.
Jim B.November 11, 2015 7:39 pm
Which is why I always believe the only reason/s to join the military is to learn 1) how to fight and 2) how to fight them if you have to. Only then should you take advantage of the G.I. Bill for college afterward.
Any other reasons are for suckers.
Paul BonneauNovember 11, 2015 11:02 pm
OT: Protonmail suffered a massive DDOS attack, possibly from a state-level actor.
I noticed some problems a few days ago, but it didn’t bother me that much since my email volume is low anyway.
LarryANovember 12, 2015 7:47 am
It’s an interesting game.
I’ve noticed that folks I’ve seen make this argument tend to be Democrats considering a Democratic takeover, for the good of the People. But;
Suppose the political winds shift, and Republicans win big, to the point they gain a super majority in both houses of Congress, and the White House. Suppose that leads to a very conservative majority on the Supreme Court. And suppose religious conservatives take over the Republican Party;
Suppose after a couple of election cycles Congress decides that, since they are writing laws based on the Ten Commandments, God doesn’t want them to hold any more elections;
Suppose they announce the next big public works project, True American Churches in every town, financed by tithes collected by the IRS, with a block on the 1040 where you list your TAC congregation, along with attendance records for you and your children;
Suppose instead of Dallas and Atlanta, the government threatens to destroy San Francisco and New York City.
Will Mr. Littell be telling his children and grandchildren, “Go along to get along?” Or will he want to borrow a gun?
Good grief, TJ Madison. That article is … well, for one thing it’s the deepest and most complex analysis of The Prisoner I’ve seen in many a day. I’ll have to go back and read it more slowly. But whoooof.
And tip o’ hat to you for remembering my tiny connection to and enormous respect for that series.
I just don’t get people believing substantive numbers of members of the military would suddenly side with us instead of the government. (They haven’t so far, even when given the opportunity) Anyone who’ll join the military has already shown a predisposition for following orders and embracing “self sacrifice”- letting their family and friends get nuked just means they have sacrificed even more and are more worthy of adulation.
Kent, I believe you are wrong. I was in the Marine Corps from 1968-72, and even with the Viet Nam war (one not on our soil) there was a lot of passive resistance in the military. Things got broken or never got fixed, soldiers and Marines stoned all the time and even fragging officers. Certainly that would ramp up substantially in a civil war.
The military would be like every other branch of society. Some segments would remain loyal to the regime, others would passively resist and throw a monkey wrench in the works, others still would be actively resisting.
BTW if you read the OP carefully, the guy is NOT advising the nuking of cities, so he is not “bloodthirsty”. His position is more accurately described as “bootlicking”.
It’s hard to say, Kent, and you may be right, but I keep reading about all of the military folk with PTSD (horrible emotional/mental trauma) and all those who kill themselves. These are not happy camp followers, and I suspect that those millions of veterans who live among us won’t be helping the “state” that gave them such trauma. Active duty? Maybe different, but I don’t think many of them are particularly happy either. They’ve been scammed and lied to, and they know that they’ll get the shaft when they get out. Those willing to “sacrifice” even more can’t be the majority.
I know a good many veterans, many my age. They are fit and ready to fight the “I Will Not Comply” battles, wherever they may take them.
Which is why I always believe the only reason/s to join the military is to learn 1) how to fight and 2) how to fight them if you have to. Only then should you take advantage of the G.I. Bill for college afterward.
Any other reasons are for suckers.
OT: Protonmail suffered a massive DDOS attack, possibly from a state-level actor.
https://protonmail.com/blog/protonmail-ddos-attacks/
I noticed some problems a few days ago, but it didn’t bother me that much since my email volume is low anyway.
It’s an interesting game.
I’ve noticed that folks I’ve seen make this argument tend to be Democrats considering a Democratic takeover, for the good of the People. But;
Suppose the political winds shift, and Republicans win big, to the point they gain a super majority in both houses of Congress, and the White House. Suppose that leads to a very conservative majority on the Supreme Court. And suppose religious conservatives take over the Republican Party;
Suppose after a couple of election cycles Congress decides that, since they are writing laws based on the Ten Commandments, God doesn’t want them to hold any more elections;
Suppose they announce the next big public works project, True American Churches in every town, financed by tithes collected by the IRS, with a block on the 1040 where you list your TAC congregation, along with attendance records for you and your children;
Suppose instead of Dallas and Atlanta, the government threatens to destroy San Francisco and New York City.
Will Mr. Littell be telling his children and grandchildren, “Go along to get along?” Or will he want to borrow a gun?
Another OT: Sounds like a must-see movie:
https://c4ss.org/content/41344
Response to LarryA:
Suppose Mom had a sack – would she be Daddy?
Submission is futile; resistance is advantageous.
I thought Mr. Codrea did an adequate job of deconstructing a silly narrative.
Something for you, Ms. Claire: http://21stcenturywire.com/2015/07/06/numbered-man-an-analysis-of-the-prisoner-1967/
Good grief, TJ Madison. That article is … well, for one thing it’s the deepest and most complex analysis of The Prisoner I’ve seen in many a day. I’ll have to go back and read it more slowly. But whoooof.
And tip o’ hat to you for remembering my tiny connection to and enormous respect for that series.