By Nathan Barton
Over the past several weeks I’ve been asked by a number of people if there is a possibility of a military coup here in the United States in the immediate future. That makes this news story about a poll from YouGov VERY very interesting. Supposedly, 1 in 3 Americans would support a military takeover (a coup) under some circumstances, and 43% would support a military takeover if the FedGov started violating the Constitution. (Opps, never mind; how long has the FedGov been violating that piece of paper?) The public is (as expected) poorly informed. Regarding military officers, whom the poll says are trusted to do the right thing for the country and NOT for private gain by 70% of respondents, while Congressmen are expected to put their own gain ahead of the country by 71%. While that is probably correct if you look at ALL officers, from 2nd Lieutenants (and Naval Ensigns) on up, I fear that the senior ranks are NOT so willing to work for the good of the nation.
Mama’s Note: I’ve asked frequently just what is meant by “the good of the nation.” Same for the “will of the people.” I’ve never had a reasonable answer. That’s because each person has his or her own criteria for “the good” and their own idea about how it might come to being. The only “good of the nation” is individual liberty, where each person can pursue his or her own idea of what is good for them and their families, and only individuals have that authority or responsibility.
The situation gets even MORE bizarre with this article from World Net Daily which is headlined that “Army Special Forces are Enraged over [White house] Attacks,” because the text details how many people in uniform are upset, NOT just with the guy squatting at 1600 PA, but the senior command levels IN UNIFORM – flag officers (Generals and Admirals, those senior commanders I was talking about) who are playing political games and seen as selling the military and the nation down the river. They are the ones who are not taking a stand, and sometimes LITERALLY not falling on their swords, to stand up against the politicians and the political hacks appointed to rule over them, for the sake of liberty and justice.
What does this mean? First, remember that the oath we took was to defend the Constitution (and therefore, the Fifty States) “against ALL enemies, foreign and domestic,” and to “obey the LAWFUL orders of our superiors,” which includes the POTUS (when we really have one) as Commander in Chief, and the Congress who holds the purse strings and approves our appointment as officers. So, if the Congress or the White House (or, even, the Supreme Court) violates the Constitution and breaks their oaths (which are much the same as ours, THEIR superiors being the people of the States), military action is not just allowed, but REQUIRED. BUT, too much (and this is not just a military failing) priority and consideration is given to “can we succeed” and frankly, “can I survive.” Survival, especially for those of the rank of Colonel and General (Captain and Admiral in the Navy), seems to include “my position, power, retirement pay, and prestige.”
Power corrupts, and the senior ranks (not everyone in them, mind you) seem to be corrupted well past the point of being willing, as a group, to have to really put up that collateral of “lives, fortunes, and sacred honor” that is demanded. And there IS a point of consideration, that many of us have made over the years and centuries. When is that sworn duty nothing but a forlorn hope doomed to failure and death with no chance of success? A coup is a desperate action and demands at least SOME hope, some small probability of success, or you are just wasting the lives of yourself, your men, your comrades, and probably your family. But the political nature and vested interest of flag officers, together with more than six years of politically-correct purging of the ranks and forcing more and more ridiculous policies down the throats of the services, combined with deterioration in training standards (especially on things such as constitutional standards, ethics and moral philosophy) means that an effort to move against domestic enemies of the level we are speaking of is going to be insanely difficult without a significant percentage of personnel AND the civilian population in support.
It is almost the reverse of the longterm fear of so many conservatives (and libertarians, I must admit) (especially those without military experience) that the soldiers and Marines will come looking for the guns of the civilian population, and start herding us into the death camps. That is unlikely to happen BECAUSE of that need to have civilian support and cooperation, or at least acquiescence, of many other military personnel. Such round-ups, of weapons and/or people, is almost certainly to be done by “civilian” forces: cops and rent-a-thugs and political bully-armies, just as was done in Germany and Italy and Turkey and Thailand and elsewhere. Oh, the political leaders in America are stupid enough to try it – large percentage of lawyers in that number, but they’ll rue the day sooner or later, as they still further dull the blade that they have already so badly damaged.