Antigovernment Movement About Michael Brian Vanderboegh A veteran of the s militia movement, when he headed a group called the Sons of Liberty, Vanderboegh in co-founded another Patriot group, the Three Percenters, who vow to resist gun control laws with force if necessary. In more recent years, Vanderboegh has remained just as inflammatory on his Sipsey Street Irregulars blog and in other Patriot forums. In and , he emailed Connecticut State Police employees warning of bloody scenarios if they tried to enforce a new state gun control law, and also published the home addresses and phone numbers of the state senators who had voted for the measure. Vanderboegh passed away in August of after a lengthy battle with cancer. Break them NOW.

Author:Migul Daimuro
Language:English (Spanish)
Published (Last):23 June 2015
PDF File Size:15.14 Mb
ePub File Size:20.66 Mb
Price:Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]

His target is the mind and the will of the political leadership of his enemy -- to be specific, the few inches between their ears which are filled with brains to be influenced or, if not, popped like a grape with an unanswerable rifle shot from distance as an example to the others.

Another civil war in this country is the last thing I want. Two toughest kids on the block, I guess. Jed Eckert: That simple, is it?

Andy Tanner: Or maybe somebody just forgot what it was like. So why write about one? As archetypes of the useful dire warning, each dissected a specific possible failure mode, bringing it to the awareness of so many that, ironically, their particular type of debacle became much less likely.

Indeed, the "self-preventing prophecy" may be the highest and most useful species in all of the vast, imaginative genus of speculative fiction. In other words, our most vivid nightmares may have been utterly practical, helping to save our lives.

Clancy himself reacted to the 11 September attacks by Al Qaeda: "Four planes? That many people willing to die for the same cause at the same time? Not believable. It is precisely what I am trying to avoid. But the vignettes that will hopefully coalesce into a narrative that flows from the terrible opening to a logical conclusion and I hope a good read in between are also presented with such detail for a purpose.

If this book is to operate as a "useful dire warning," then both real sides in my imaginary civil war must be able to recognize the real threat to avoid the conflict. You may ask, which sides and what kind of conflict? All three concepts require explanation. When the Founders declared independence, they prefaced that declaration with a detailed indictment of the offenses of the King and his ministers.

It was the failure of the English Constitution which led to our first Revolution. It will be the failure of our own Constitution which will lead to our next civil war. A key reason the revolution succeeded was its strictly limited scope. The Founders sought only liberty, not equality or fraternity. They aimed to make a political revolution, not a social or an economic one.

Their Lockean social-contract political philosophy taught them that the preservation of individual liberty was the goal of politics. It was "the most perfect combination of human powers in society," John Adams wrote in , "for the preservation of liberty and the production of happiness"--until George III began to violate it. They sought only to restore the political liberty they had actually experienced for years, and they constructed their new government to preserve it So when, after years of letting Americans run their own affairs, the British government began to meddle malignly with their liberty once year-old George III became king in , following the death of his grandfather, George II, the colonists unsurprisingly responded to the interference with outrage.

The American Revolution, then, was doubly limited in its aims: limited to making only a political change without altering social or economic arrangements, and determined to set strict limits to its new government, fearful that any governmental power beyond the barest minimum necessary to protect liberty too easily could become a threat to liberty itself Madison The advocates of the "arbitrary power," of course, say that they have the right to tell you what to do because they were "democratically elected," ignoring the fact that the Founders themselves feared pure democracy as much or more as they feared any other kind of tyranny.

Without the limits of a constitutional republic, "democracy" is three wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner. The fact that the "arbitrarians" win elections claiming "mandates" and have rigged the court systems to prevent their diktats from being overturned means nothing to people who, like the Founders, believe that their rights to liberty and property are God-given and inalienable.

The most uncompromising of these are the Three Percent. The Three Percent -- the so-called "bitter clingers. The heroes of the southern fighting were not the officers of the Continental army but rather the natural leaders of the people, who had learned their skills in the continuing effort to seize the land of the Indians. By achieving better perspective of the past, something may be accomplished in the present.

For the hero of this book has fallen on evil times. Because he remains an individualist, he is a safe target. Major Patrick Ferguson called him a bandit, a barbarian, a mongrel. He had little respect for law and order. He could be quite ruthless. And, it should be added, the great-grandsons provided Lee and Johnson with the best fighting infantry the world had yet seen.

Moreover, in wars since, they have always been the cutting edge. However rejected in normal times, the redneck has always been welcomed when the nation went to war.

And because of the readiness to do his duty, this nation was founded and kept alive Given proper leadership, the mountain man can still be motivated. But in recent years such leadership has been largely lacking. The potential remains untapped, but it is there. As my father used to say in Happy Valley, "You may turn the damper up, you may turn the damper down, but the smoke goes up the chimney just the same. History, for good or ill, is made by determined minorities.

Another one-third of the population sided with the King by the end of the war there were actually more Americans fighting FOR the King than there were in the field against him and the final third took no side, blew with the wind and took what came. The Three Percent still exists today, described by Barack Obama a few years ago as "bitter clingers. They intend, like John Locke and the Founders who studied him, to maintain their God-given natural rights to liberty and property, and that means most especially the right to keep and bear arms.

So, too, are descendants of the Texans, of whom S. Gwynne wrote in They were said to fear God so much that there was no fear left over for anyone or anything else The Texans were not the Spanish or the Mexicans.

They were tougher, meaner, almost impossible to discourage, willing to take absurd risks to secure themselves a plot of dirt, and tempermentally well-suited to the remorseless destruction of native tribes.

They did not rely on a cumbersome, heavily-mounted, overly bureaucratized, state-sponsored soldiery; they tended to handle things themselves, with volunteers who not only were not scared of Indians but actually LIKED hunting them down. That theory has not yet been tested. Remember, history, for good or ill, is made by determined minorities. They are one such minority. What remains, then, is the test of will and skill to determine who shall shape the future of our nation.

That test of will and skill will be fought by warfare in the Fourth Generation. It is an evolved form of insurgency. Fourth-generation wars are lengthy -- measured in decades rather than months or years Strategically, 4GW attempts to directly change the minds of enemy policy makers. This change is not to be achieved through the traditional method of superiority on the battlefield. Both the epic, decisive Napoleonic battle and the wide-ranging, high-speed maneuver campaign is irrelevant to them.

Their victories are accomplished through the superior use of all available networks to directly defeat the will of the enemy leadership, to convince them their war aims are either unachievable or too costly. These networks will be employed to carry specific messages to our policy makers and to those who can influence the policy makers. William S. The First Generation ran from to about the time of the American Civil War, and it was characterized, on the whole, by a battlefield of order.

The battlefield of order created a military culture of order, which endures to this day. For around the middle of the 19th century, the battlefield of order began to break down. Ever since, state militaries have had to grapple with a growing contradiction between their internal culture of order and the external reality of an increasingly disordered battlefield.

The Second and Third Generations represent two different approaches to that problem. Second Generation war was developed by the French Army during and after World War I, and is best summed up with the French saying, "The artillery conquers, the infantry occupies. Decision-making was centralized and hierarchical; orders were detailed and controlling, to permit synchronization of all arms; time was not particularly important; and success was measured by comparative body counts.

Second Generation armed forces focus inward on methods, processes and procedures, prize obedience over initiative initiative and synchronization are not compatible and depend on imposed discipline. Third Generation war, also known as maneuver warfare, was developed by the German Army in World War I; by , Blitzkrieg was conceptually complete, lacking only the tanks necessary for operational mobility. One of those reforms changed what was required of a Prussian officer; instead of being responsible for obeying orders, he became responsible for getting the result the situation required regardless of orders in 19th century war games, it was common for junior Prussian officers to be given problems that could only be solved by disobeying orders.

This in turn created a military culture that was focused outward, on the enemy, the situation and the result the situation demanded instead of inward on rules, orders and processes. In effect, Prussia had broken with the First Generation culture of order. On the defense, the objective became sucking the enemy in, then cutting him off, rather than holding a line.

Operationally as well as tactically the goal was usually encirclement. Speed replaced firepower as the most important tool, and dislocation, mental as well as physical, was more important than attrition. Culturally, not only was the German Army outward-focused, it prized initiative over obedience and it depended on self-discipline rather than imposed discipline. Much of the American military reform movement of the s, 80s and early 90s was an attempt to move the American armed forces from the Second to the Third Generation.

While the Marine Corps formally adopted maneuver warfare as doctrine in the s, most of what the Marine Corps does remains Second Generation. The other American services remain almost wholly Second Generation, to the frustration of many junior officers. Once again, as before , many different entities, not states, are fighting war.

They use many different means, including "terrorism" and immigration, not just formal armies. Differences between cultures, not just states, become paramount, and other cultures will not fight the way we fight.

All over the world, state militaries are fighting non-state opponents, and almost always, the state is losing. State militaries were designed to fight other state militaries like themselves, and against non-state enemies most of their equipment, tactics and training are useless or counterproductive. He recruited 96 men in 10 days and assembled them at Winchester on 14 July. He then marched them miles to Boston in only 21 days, arriving on Aug. The British found this to be "barbaric.

Morgan had served as a civilian teamster during the French and Indian War. Morgan, not surprisingly, hated the British army.


Long-time Militia Leader Mike Vanderboegh Has Died

They specialized in it. A right and a duty. Devil worshipping chaplains in the US Army? On Gun Laws More restrictive laws were coming.



His target is the mind and the will of the political leadership of his enemy -- to be specific, the few inches between their ears which are filled with brains to be influenced or, if not, popped like a grape with an unanswerable rifle shot from distance as an example to the others. Another civil war in this country is the last thing I want. Two toughest kids on the block, I guess. Jed Eckert: That simple, is it? Andy Tanner: Or maybe somebody just forgot what it was like. So why write about one?

Related Articles