By Nathan Barton
Is it soup yet? Are we there yet? Are we at war yet?
Of course, we ARE at war and have been, pretty much continuously since about 1940 or so. (Yes, I realize that Congress did not declare war until 8 DEC 1941, but the US had been a de-facto ally and co-belligerent of the British Empire for some time.) We are fighting in Syria, in Afghanistan, in Iraq, in Yemen, and probably in Libya, South Sudan, Ukraine, and maybe a few other places that we might not find out about for years, if ever. (By “we” I mean the Fed Gov, and those of the Fifty States (most, as I understand it) who gladly send their own troops (National Guard) to those places.
But there is war, and there is war. Even (despite their names) the then-United States really was not significantly in harm’s way in the Great War (World War I) or the Second World War -that mixture of the Great Pacific War and the Second Great War (and a few others). Neither Hawaii nor Alaska – the only states in which there was actual combat in WW2 – were part of the Union then. And a few saboteurs, fire balloons, and sub-sightings do NOT constitute what anyone would call war. Instead, we sent millions of people and billions in treasure – the fruits of the labors of tens of millions and the resources (vegetable, animal, and mineral) of our continent around the world to be destroyed and destroy.
But at home, what? The major source of deaths in the Forty-eight States at the time were in military training accidents and industrial accidents. Virtually NO one was killed here as a direct result of enemy action.
That has continued through the wars which followed: the “Korean Conflict,” the insurgencies in Greece and Malaysia and elsewhere. The Southeast Asian War, spread across a half-dozen countries but NOT on any US territory. The Cold War, especially in Europe. Invasions of Grenada and Panama, “peacekeeping operations” in Egypt and Lebanon, the War on Drugs in Columbia and elsewhere. And the Gulf War: Desert Shield and Desert Storm in Kuwait and Mesopotamia. How much did “war” there translate to war here? Really, a single time.
And that very briefly, a single day. In fact, the Bloody Tuesday (9-11) attacks of 2001, just a little fewer than 3,000. A drop in the bucket compared to the deaths inflicted by FedGov forces in Afghanistan and Iraq and then a whole list of Middle Eastern lands over the last 16 years.
The FedGov has been involved in (or even instigated) wars in Libya, Yemen, Ukraine, over a period of years more recently.
But again, except for the dead and wounded (maimed and mind-blasted), and the incredible expenditure of treasure: wealth and resources, these wars have not waded ashore on the North American continent.
Now, the FedGov has greatly expanded the war (and the FedGov involvement) in Syria and Kurdistan, while continuing to fight in Afghanistan and Mesopotamia, and getting involved more and more in South Sudan and Libya and Yemen. And the war drums are being pounded about North Korea. While the situation heats up, cools off, and heats up again, in the East and South China Seas. Nor should we forget the deployments of NATO to the Baltic States, and the situation in Ukraine and nearby lands.
The number of dead and wounded – 99% NOT American – climbs. Daily.
It seems only a matter of time before one (or more) of these pots boils over. It is only a matter of time before someone with at least some significant power decides that it is time for Americans – for American government and industry and military home bases – to pay a part of the butcher’s bill. A bill that may be as high (in proportion) to what Americans paid in the War Between the States. Not a few thousand, or even a few hundred thousand. (The WBTS cost 750,000 of 31 million people their lives. In World War 2, Germany lost 9 million out of about 81 million people.)
Yes, I am speaking of 7.5 million people dead. Out of more than 300 million. At least. If the Fifty States suffer the casualties that Germany did, we’d be seeing 30-40 million dead. A staggering amount, whether “just” 7.5 or 40 million.
How could this happen? Forget the “Red Dawn” scenario, whether it is Cubans or North Koreans. Even they (or the Venezuelans) are can see that any open invasion of the Fifty States would be a bloodbath for them – the “gun behind every blade of grass” situation is still likely. Even if it were California or Massachusetts as the point of invasion!
And the “nuclear spasm” scenario is also very, very unlikely. A massive “first strike” by Russia or China is in no one’s interests, because (despite claims to the contrary) DC and the Pentagon would likely push the button to wipe out as much of both countries as possible.
Direct attack against the Fifty States is not out of the question, however. A limited nuclear strike, together with a massive “ones and zeros” electronic/digital attack offers great opportunity to strike down the Colossus. It might require careful planning, especially if the nuclear attack was in the form of an EMP pulse: an attacker would want to crash as much electronics and as many control and data systems as possible BEFORE dealing a death blow to the power, communications, and transportation systems of North America.
- Massive distributed denial of services (DDOS) attacks and launching attacks by electronic viruses, intending to crash as many networks and systems as possible, over a large area.
- Alternatively, small and very focused attacks, either electronic or a mixture of electronic and purely physical attacks, including local emp attacks (as postulated by various authors over the years), to shut down key nodes – the internet version of the next possibility.
- Brute force attacks on electrical systems and the power grid, to trigger brown-outs and black-outs in large areas of the country, to be immediately followed up with attacks on back-up power systems for communications.
Once the FedGov, private communications and transportation giants, and state and local governments are “out of position,” the situation becomes very fluid. Any number of things can happen, most of them bad for the Fifty States. So there would be a lot to gain in doing such an attack – either one of the above or nuclear.
How can such a limited nuclear attack be done? Initially, there would be few direct casualties, but the after-affects will be significantly higher, many times higher. Consider:
- Three or four high-altitude bombs intended to generate an EMP over a very large area (most of the continent) is expected to knock out power, virtually all motor (ground and air) vehicles of less than 25 years age, and of course, the internet (including mobile phones, smart phones, and television).
- Half-a-dozen nuclear bombs, primitive though they may be, in shipping containers, either timed or with suicide bombers, at the nation’s key seaports: LA, San Diego, New Orleans, Miami, New York and Baltimore (or Boston).
- A similar number of somewhat more advanced bombs, delivered by cargo (or even passenger) aircraft to a dozen international airports: Atlanta, Chicago, DFW, Charlotte, LAX, and Lindbergh (St. Louis).
Things do not HAVE to be nuclear, of course:
- There are various kinds of viruses and other militarized microorganisms which can be spread in various ways; by water or air, or food, even as spores in dust. They would no doubt require dozens of Patient Zeros to properly spread, but are still a possibility. Some kind of “zombie virus” which immediately begins spreading as victims attack others would be potentially quite effective.
- The single one method of spreading death and wounds to large portions of the Fifty States, however, still remains the psychological gambit; creating fear and terror and factions willing and able to deal violently with the perceived threat or other factions. The “French Disease” (from the bloody revolutionary terror) or the “German Illness” (from the horrors of the Thirty Years War or the last years of the Wiemar Republic), or a dozen other examples of mob madness and massive bloodshed. (These could be any number of things; expanded “Black Lives Matter” or “Occupy” or an extremist faction of Oathkeepers or something new like “Blue Lives Matter” or some other version of “we wuz robbed.”)
Each of these possibilities are not so destructive in and of themselves as only a few tens of thousands might actually die immediately and directly as a result of the attacks. It is the SECONDARY effects of these ventures that are the real killers, not just killing of hundreds of thousands or millions, but of large segments of the society and the economy that supports that society.
Although it has always been the case (consider the Huns and Mongols, or the English Civil War, or the Soviet-Russian destruction of Eastern Germany or Japan’s invasion of China) that communications and transportation systems have collapsed – leading to horrible conditions – there is potential for far worse.
Today, modern technology and the awful burden imposed by parasitical government and its clientele made for very fragile conditions. A bad hurricane, a widespread blizzard, flooding of major rivers, can devastate fairly large areas. But because there are larger areas around them which are NOT so impacted, society and the economy can heal themselves fairly quickly. But if the impacted region is a significant amount of the Fifty States, or if the disruption is great enough, then the real dying will begin.
The Four Horsemen will ride, as Fear and Terror infect the urban and suburban areas, but ESPECIALLY as they infect the government types at all levels: the small town police chiefs and town boards, the big urban city councils and police commissioners, county boards and sheriffs, and a good many state agencies.
The casualties of war will of course affect military and civilians, including police forces, and the death squads and other faux milice that we have seen in so many other places. And it will not be limited to killing and wounding people. The damage to infrastructure and property will be incredible by our standards, if common to the people of Mosul, Beirut, and dozens of other places.
But war IS coming, sooner or later – welcome to the War Zone.
Mama’s Note: And, as I’ve said so often, the only rational way to even attempt to avert this is for all people, everywhere, to begin to question the bogus “authority” of those who control all of this. And I believe that many are starting to question it, though far too many continue to believe they’ll be OK if they can elect “the right people” to wield that authority rather than taking full responsibility for themselves. So much easier to have Trump or Obama (or someone else) to blame when things go badly.
Who owns your life?