I call your attention to some links:
When to Shoot the Colonels
"When to Shoot the Colonels": A West Pointer's ad seriatim commentary upon Baugh's essay.
Reprise on 'When to Shoot The Colonels'
It's important to read them in order.
My thoughts: Tom Baugh sent me a copy of his book. Now that the holidays are over, I can give it the attention it needs (along with Dave Kopel's newest book and the Neal Knox anthology, which I also received shortly before Christmas).
Baugh is correct when he tells us the military "exists to back our national will with force." I also think in this case, his assessment that"oath keepers...will be in in an impossible situation" does not consider all factors. It does not account for the uncertainty that made troops ultimately not mow down crowds when the Shah was deposed. It does not account for a Romanian Christmas of days gone by that ended with a tyrant bleeding in the dirt, killed by troops who once enforced his will.
The only thing we know for sure is none of us can predict the future. That said, we do have an ability to affect probabilities. I'd say the largest part of whether or not American soldiers would fire on American citizens--and whether Oath Keepers can play a key part in defusing that potential-- depends on us and what we do.
Wednesday, January 06, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I'm afraid that because Americans are such stupid sheep ( they're going to allow fat pervs to look at their naked bodies in airports, for god's sake), that they will continue to allow themselves to be robbed. By that I mean the economy will continue to worsen, and the only decent paying jobs will be in the military. This will be encouraged by both sides of the flag waving right/left paradigm. "Thank you for your service."
So if the ranks swell to millions of people, I think there will always be enough evil desperate people in our society to do anything-even throw children into a pit and machine gun them.
Anyone have thoughts about how Oath Keepers would have preformed at Kent State in the 1970's?
I'm genuinely excited to read the links provide, as sometimes I'm concerned that Oath Keepers are just protecting their own, and wouldn't give a damn about shooting the "hippie"/"abortion supporting"/"non-white"/"non-christian"/"liberals". Something tells me that one or two of the people in this crowd pride themselves as Oath Keepers, too. I wonder how an Oath Keeper would respond to order to execute school-aged children of a different nationality...
My skepticism is largely based on stereotypes, so please take no offense. That said, I'd still rather have Oath Keepers than not. It is, at minimum, an acknowledgment that personal morality triumphs blind marching orders.
Post a Comment