The practicality of the militia

J

jonathon

New member
I believe that this thread seems more childish, and lacks room for a serrious discussion..

Do you believe that a militia in modern times is practical? I do.

In todays charged political climate, militia has become a "bad" word. The media has affiliated the various militias with racists, nazis, and other scum. The bad name carries over to everyone.

True American militias are not racist/sexists. Nor are they anti-government. Even more so, they are NOT political. The Constitution of the United States of America is not a political document, it defines our government, our society.

The strict goal of a true militia is to preserve and protect the Constitution of the United States, as defined by the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution.

A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.
Click to expand...

It is clear, it is simple, the duty of the American Militia is to protect our free society, from all foriegn and domestic threats. The American Militia has a duty to protect the Constitution from all enemies. This is not a political agenda, it is something that ALL Americans have a duty to do. Doesn't mean we take up arms, or anything like that. It can be done by simply getting the word out that some politicians do not honor our rights. Its that simple.

It is also a worthy cause for all Americans to train in the use of arms. We do not need to fear tyranny, terrorists, and other scum. We can choose to be defensless, or defended.

Some places to check out:

The Patriot War College
The Constitution Society
K.I.S.S Anti-Terrorism Alliance
Fort Liberty

Don't post here if your going to rant...
 
there absolutely should be a militia here in the us. now should it be a state militia or a federal militia i don't know. but it will help to curb some problems here in america. another question is what should they be allowed to do in terms of border enforcement, local crime, etc. seems like this might appeal to many leftists out there. but it is definately needed.
 
The suggestion for having an organized militia on the borders is a good one for sure... have to keep that in mind.
 
We are seeing how "Americans" react to the true militia acting, especially on the border with the Minuteman Project.

Wayne

*Oh, and yes, it is needed, a State one, not the federal one that goes by the name of the National Guard.
 
It is a good idea, if you can keep the group clean. Remember why those groups get a bad name, it is usually because some whackos gain control and do something stupid.
 
How legal are militia's? Seems anyone that gets off the ground gets a swift in the arse from the feds........ I don't see how it would be possible to have a non government (see: politically) run militia......Not in this day.
 
Think about this, the militia was essential to the winning of the Battle of Cowpens in the american revolution. The Mujahideen in Afghanistan could be considered a milita. The terrorists in Iraq are not a milita even they you what could be considered modern milita tactics. (Hit and run) However a true milita has the support of the local population, which the Terrorists in Iraq don't have. They are Foreigners who have come to stir up trouble.
 
Militia just a bunch of misunderstood good guys?

Jonathon: I actually posted this for you in the bottom of my thread, but just in case you don't see it there, check out this excerpt from DefenceJournal.com... militia members have a habit of getting arrested for violent conspiracies (the OKC bombing was just a successful one, but others have been broken up)... take a read at what these "Patriots" are up to, note the actual reasons for the arrests in the WV and KA militias, and tell me again how it is that these guys are helpful:

Every militia is anti-government to some degree. Some, like the Michigan Militia, advocate armed resistance to federal authority. They see international trade agreements (like NAFTA) and peacekeeping operations involving US troops as evidence of a sinister international movement toward one world government.

For decades Americans have seen terrorism all over the world-but not in the US. Even after the Oklahoma bombing, the American public still found it incomprehensible that Americans could perpetrate such a horror against other Americans. Even after Timothy McVeigh-s conviction, the general mood has been that terrorism is over. It was some kind of aberration.

The militia movement, however, continues to grow.

The Michigan Militia, with which Timothy McVeigh is alleged to have had connections, was formed by Norman Olson, a former US Air Force Officer. Police Against the New World Order is led by a former police officer, Jack McLamb, who was present at the Ruby Ridge incident along with James Gritz, a former Green Beret officer.

The leader of the Mountain Militia, Floyd Looker, recently stood trial in West Virginia for conspiracy to bomb three federal installations, including the FBI-s national Fingerprint records complex. Seven members of the Southern Kansas Regional Militia were arrested after their plans to attack Fort Hood in Texas came to the attention of the FBI.

Members of these ultra right-wing extremist militia do not fit the profile of the typical terrorist as Americans have seen them portrayed for decades. They are police officers, sheriffs and deputies, attorneys, doctors, and other professional and business people; even members of the US military.

A very potential dangerous group about which little is known is the Special Forces Underground (SFU), a clandestine organization within the United States military. Their existence was first discovered shortly before the Oklahoma City bombing by Klanwatch/Militia Task Force (a watchdog organization of the Southern Poverty Law Center in Montgomery, Alabama which tracks militia and hate groups) through postings on the American Patriot Fax Network.

The SFU was formed at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, on August 23, 1992, and is conservatively estimated to have between 100 and 300 members; though no one can say with any accuracy how many members it really has. They are recruited almost exclusively from active duty and former military personnel with training and experience in covert operations.

They do not recruit like other militia groups. They have patience born of their training. They wait, watch, and listen. Once they identify one or two potential recruits, they move in.

Today they are centered in Kansas City, Missouri and have a quarterly publication called THE RESISTER- The Political Warfare Journal of the Special Forces Underground. In their 'Statement of Policy,- they claim: 'We do not advocate the overthrow of the US government. We do advocate resistance to government tryranny. We do not advocate the initiation of force in doing so. We do advocate appropriate force-in-kind retaliation. We advocate active resistance against the United Nations.-

Most militia operate on similar principals but their members are fairly well known to authorities. Many have their own websites with names like, LogoPlex, Sovereignty, American Patriot Network, etc., to spread their beliefs and attract recruits. These websites are also excellent intelligence sources for law enforcement.

In stark contrast, the SFU maintains a very low profile. Most members are unknown even to each other. Even their address is deliberately low profile; a 'Boxholder' P.O. Box in Kansas City.

Most militia follow traditional military lines the 'troops' at the base and echelons of command up to the leader. This makes it easy for law enforcement to destroy an entire group by arresting its leadership.

SFU has no confidence in the 'aboveground' militia groups; 'The Patriot Movement in general and militia groups in particular need to get a firm grip on the realities of resistance and underground operations.' They follow the concept of secret cells and 'leaderless resistance' proposed by Louis Beam in February, 1992, which makes it almost impossible for the group to be infiltrated. At best, only an individual cell or cells, can be infiltrated.

Beam's concept of secret cells for the Patriot Movement is nothing new, however. Cells have been the standard structure for international terrorist organizations for nearly three decades.
Click to expand...
 
However a true milita has the support of the local population
Click to expand...

The militias in the American Revolution wern't always exactly liked by the populace, many of whom simply wanted to continue living the way they always had.
 
The militias in the American Revolution wern't always exactly liked by the populace, many of whom simply wanted to continue living the way they always had.
Click to expand...

That's true, there wasn't universal support for the American Revolution, and you had Tories and Patriots. However, while I don't know the actual percentage, there was certainly majority support for it - what began as some militia squimishes in MA became an organized colonial revolutionary army, and they had widespread support, otherwise they never would have succeeded.

In fact, there was international support. The colonies recieved extensive support from the French, and not only arms and supplies, but there were French soldiers fighting under French generals, French artillery assaults, and naval combat support from French warships.

It's not described in such detail here, but read about what was probably the pivotal battle of the Revolutionary war, the Battle of Yorktown... what is not really told here, is that there were French ships in the Chesapeake defeating British warships that would have brought reinforcements for Cornwallis, French artillery performing the fussillades on the British held fort, and French troops, fighting alongside the Americans. When Cornwallis surrendered, he actually surrendered to the French general, Rochambeau, but Rochambeau in a magnanimous gesture refused to accept the surrender, and told Cornwallis that he must surrender to General Washington instead :D
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Yorktown_(1781)

...so the French may be arrogant at times, and we have saved their asses over in Europe, but they are not all bad, having saved our asses in North America before then.
 
The American Revolution was a different situation. There was a clear and present danger that was readily identifiable. When the minutemen grabbed thier guns it was to fight the British. When they were no longer needed, they were disbanded.

Presently we lack a clearly defined and immediately threatening enemy for people to grab thier guns and go out to do battle with. This is where the nut jobs come in... thier off the wall beliefs that black helicopters follow them to the supermarket, aliens have taken over the whitehouse and the racial holy war is upon us... well... they all help justify the existance of these paramilitary groups in thier minds.

I'm not saying that everybody in these groups is a wacko nut job... I'm sure that's not true. However, I stand my belief that legimate militias aren't a bunch of people running around the woods in camo preparing for the end of the world or hatching plans to overthrow the government... legimate militias will take shape at such time as when they are needed and dissolve when the need for them has passed.
 
I'm not saying that everybody in these groups is a wacko nut job... I'm sure that's not true. However, I stand my belief that legimate militias aren't a bunch of people running around the woods in camo preparing for the end of the world or hatching plans to overthrow the government... legimate militias will take shape at such time as when they are needed and dissolve when the need for them has passed.
Click to expand...

Where some of you folks go wrong in your attacks on militia is saying they want to overthrow the government. That's your ignorance spewing media fed garbage. What is much more accurate is that the militia wants to restore the constitutional limitations to the government and have them recognize rule of law like they are suppossed to. In case they refuse, then we, as the militia (the ones who aren't fed by the media) have a duty to "restore".
 
Caleb,

The DefenceJournal piece reads like something regurgitated from the Southern Poverty Law Center's propaganda mill. :rolleyes:
 
ATW,
Armed goon squads from the DEA and the BATFE may not fit the definition of an army, but they're too close for my tastes. They do represent a clear and present danger to anyone trying to exercise his constitutional rights.

Would the founders see a difference between British soldiers and the band of JBTs that gathered in Waco because of some unconstitutional and unpaid taxes?
 
In fact, there was international support. The colonies recieved extensive support from the French, and not only arms and supplies, but there were French soldiers fighting under French generals, French artillery assaults, and naval combat support from French warships.
Click to expand...

I have a feeling that it was more of an 'In your FACE!' to the Brits than to actually help the Americans.

As for today's militias, yes, lots are helpful, nice, neighborly people. The ones you hear about, however, are not he so nice people. The local militia helping to find a lost child isn't newsworthy, the local militia planning to assassinate the govenor is.
 
jefnvk: Yes, there was definitely considerable enmity not only between the colonies and Britain, but also between France and Britain. I have wondered a little bit in fact about that business of Rochambeau refusing to accept the surrender of Cornwallis - was that entirely from magnanimity, or perhaps also to spite the Brits? I would think it would be an even greater blow to British military pride to surrender to the leader of the motley Colonial army, than to a general of the established (and worthy) French army. I would like to learn more about this. :D
 
Militia

Most of you seem to have either forgotten or never known is that the militia is everyone.
Try reading what the people who wrote the Constitution actually wrote.
Family, Constitution , Country first, Government last.
Don :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top