War Comes Home

[Mr. Premise]

http://www.counterpunch.org/lind12062006.html

This incident got no play in the national media when it happened. Interstate Highway 71 was shut down in Cincinnati in both directions for most of the day.

December 6, 2006

When Will the First IED Strike Cleveland?
The Boomerang Effect
By WILLIAM S. LIND

Last week, one of my students, a Marine captain, asked whether I had heard a news report about an "IED-like device" supposedly found near Cincinnati, and if I thought we would soon start seeing IEDs here in the U.S. I replied that I had not heard the news story, but as to whether we would see IEDs here at home, the answer is yes.

One of the things U.S. troops are learning in Iraq is how people with little training and few resources can fight a state. Most American troops will see this within the framework of counterinsurgency. But a minority will apply their new-found knowledge in a very different way. After they return to the U.S. and leave the military, they will take what they learned in Iraq back to the inner cities, to the ethnic groups, gangs, and other alternate loyalties they left when they joined the service. There, they will put their new knowledge to work, in wars with each other and wars against the American state. It will not be long before we see police squad cars getting hit with IEDs and other techniques employed by Iraqi insurgents, right here in the streets of American cities.

I know this thought

 

[Appollynon]

Good catch Donald I can see why you've achieved Fedaykin status. Im not sure what to make of this article, I think its true that some of the violence in the USA borders on 4Gen warfare. However I think the flavour of this article suggests that any violence occuring is somehow linked to the failures of the wars in the middle east, which I don't think is true in every case. I think when you have a social sturcture that is as oppressive as the US (and the UK), then there will be a certain level of civil unrest from the masses. I don't see the link though, between fighting the wars in the middle east and exporting the type of warfare and tactics used abroad back home, unless planned by the PTB? Maybe Im suffering form a lack of knowledge in this area or I am missing the point.

The article is saying that soon there will be mass violence in the US (as if there isn't enough already), and the poor police enforcers will bare the brunt of it. My reactions (which may be wrong) to this article and its content, seems to be that it sounds like a good excuse for using the armed forces on US soil, as the poor police will be unable to cope with the unrest and violence thats coming. It sounds as if the article is making a case (whilst quite deliberateley avoiding saying it outright) for martial law and tighter control of public activity due to an increase in violence on home turf.

Also instead of blaming this violence on the governments ideologies and botched policies, the blame will be put at the door of ethnic groups (likely minority groups), gangs, maybe cults or protestors against government policy, and returned war veterans also. I bet this is exactly what the government wants as it would give them a good excuse to enforce martial law or involve state troopers or national gaurd to protect people from the home grow terrrists next door. What a coup for them that would be.

What are your thoughts on the article Donald?

 

[Mr. Premise]

I thought Lind was saying that there will be more of this in the future but there hasn't been much yet, which makes sense to me. When people who have done two or three tours of duty return to the U.S., esp. if the economy is worse, there will be trouble. I don't think he is saying that there will be mass violence, just more and using tactics that weren't used in the U.S. before. For example the states of Ohio and Indiana have both had separate highway sniper problems in the last few years, but no IED's like this.

I spoke on the phone with an old friend who is a military veteran about this incident and he thought it was a protest by a returning veteran.

Some background: I was in Cincinnati the day it happened. Everyone at the office I was at was talking about it because it really messed up commutes. The road did open before the evening rush hour, though. But the strange thing was, aside from local TV news there was NOTHING about the incident in the National press. I was looking, too. Which says to me that the authorities are VERY worried about this sort of thing.

But I agree there is definitely an agenda to militarize law enforcement in the U.S. Lind is not advocating that, but if these types of incidents increase, other people will, especially if that Fascist Rudolph Guiliani or McCain become president.

Good catch Donald I can see why you've achieved Fedaykin status. Im not sure what to make of this article, I think its true that some of the violence in the USA borders on 4Gen warfare. However I think the flavour of this article suggests that any violence occuring is somehow linked to the failures of the wars in the middle east, which I don't think is true in every case. I think when you have a social sturcture that is as oppressive as the US (and the UK), then there will be a certain level of civil unrest from the masses. I don't see the link though, between fighting the wars in the middle east and exporting the type of warfare and tactics used abroad back home, unless planned by the PTB? Maybe Im suffering form a lack of knowledge in this area or I am missing the point.

The article is saying that soon there will be mass violence in the US (as if there isn't enough already), and the poor police enforcers will bare the brunt of it. My reactions (which may be wrong) to this article and its content, seems to be that it sounds like a good excuse for using the armed forces on US soil, as the poor police will be unable to cope with the unrest and violence thats coming. It sounds as if the article is making a case (whilst quite deliberateley avoiding saying it outright) for martial law and tighter control of public activity due to an increase in violence on home turf.

Also instead of blaming this violence on the governments ideologies and botched policies, the blame will be put at the door of ethnic groups (likely minority groups), gangs, maybe cults or protestors against government policy, and returned war veterans also. I bet this is exactly what the government wants as it would give them a good excuse to enforce martial law or involve state troopers or national gaurd to protect people from the home grow terrrists next door. What a coup for them that would be.

What are your thoughts on the article Donald?

 

[Appollynon]

After re-reding again the posts you've made this morning, I can see why there may be an increasen this type of violence due to the economic situation in the US. And when demoralised troops return home looking for jobs and can't find any, I guess they would get really peed-off at the government for getting them into such a position.

I was just thinking about the number of ex-convicts that are now being allowed into the army due to changes in the recruiting structures in the past year or so. I guess this could also be a very worrying situation if you consider that some of the convicts may decide to go back to a life of crime and violence when returning from their tours and finding no work, or only minimum wage work. They could use the tactics learnt from the army, and the insurgents.

This is a rather worrisome situation, and one that I guess may likely happen here in the uk, but maybe to a lesser extent. Thanks for clearing things up for me.

 

[Charles]

I was just thinking about the number of ex-convicts that are now being allowed into the army due to changes in the recruiting structures in the past year or so. I guess this could also be a very worrying situation if you consider that some of the convicts may decide to go back to a life of crime and violence when returning from their tours and finding no work, or only minimum wage work. They could use the tactics learnt from the army, and the insurgents.

As statistics have shown, there is a very high chance for a citizen of the US to be exactly that, an ex-convict. So I don't think this says very much. What should be added to the picture though is that most returning soldiers are entirely ponerized. I don't think that increased violence with returning soldiers has much to do with them being embittered by having lost the war.
We have seen (and see) this happening with Russian soldiers returning from their "war" in Tsjetsjenia. When over there, most of the soldiers are homesick of course, longing for their wife and/or children. But once back, they seem entirely incapable of re-adapting to the rhythm of every day life within a family structure. Their wives complain that they are no longer able to discriminate between good and evil, have lost any moral principles, and become violent at a whim. Most of the soldiers then realize that they want to go back to the war as soon as possible. And their wives do not complain about this.

I am pretty convinced that we will see an upsurge of violence with the return of soldiers to the US, with or without IED's.
I speculate that such will be used as an argument to use soldiers on the streets to "support" the police forces. Also, such strategy will remove potential "insurgents". And the ponerized soldiers will be glad to be manning such street force with a harsh command system, as they can then continue to play out their war created identity.
Of course such will result in even more oppression which will translate in more insurgency. A perfect diabolical spiral, if you happen to be a proponent of a police state.

 

[John Chang]

The War Nerd doesn't exactly have the right view on things, but he certainly is interesting to read - http://www.exile.ru/2006-November-03/the_doctrine_of_asymmetrical_war.html