Divemedic

As I have been saying for several weeks, it is obvious that the opening shots of Civil War 2 have been fired. We are in the early stages of phase 2 of a communist insurgency:

Phase II (guerrilla warfare phase) is the first level of armed violence. Irregularforces engage in sabotage, interdiction of communication and logistics links,assassination, and selective attacks against government forces. Insurgents expand their secure base areas and, where possible, link them to form strategic enclaves of political autonomy.

The ambush as a tactic has been around for thousand of years, dating back to ancient warfare. Ambushes give a commander a way to attack the enemy with the element of surprise. The ambush is a tactic that has been in use for over 3,000 years, and tactics have remained largely unchanged for over a thousand years. 


Miguel and JKB posted a link to a film of an ambush that was executed by Antifa/BLM forces in Provo, Utah. Here is the link to that video of the incident. 


The basics of an ambush are relatively simple to understand. Let’s start there, and then we can discuss how to defeat one.


An ambush is a tactic where a force uses a concealed position to engage an enemy with surprise and firepower. The side that initiates an ambush sets the time and place for it by enticing the enemy into the ambush, or observes the enemy’s routine and sets the ambush accordingly.


In a military setting, there are different ambushes. There are tactical and strategic ambushes, the Army also classifies them as near (hand grenade range) and far ambushes. We can ignore them for this purpose, and I will explain why later. 


The area where the ambush will be carried out will be an area where the ambushers have concentrated their firepower to inflict the maximum effect on the force to be ambushed. That area is referred to as the “kill zone.” 


The goal of an ambush is to entice or catch the target in the kill zone, and then hold that target within the kill zone for as long as possible, or at least as long as it takes to inflict the desired casualties on the target. 


So how do we defend ourselves from an ambush? The first way is to be unpredictable. Don’t be where an enemy can set up an ambush and wait for you. The ideal course of action is to avoid being in the kill zone in the first place. Follow the advice here for my thoughts on that. 

Unfortunately, this isn’t going to work for the ambush that we saw above. The ambushers don’t care about any particular target. They are simply looking for any random person to come along in a vehicle and then attack them. 


In the above case, a vehicle enters the kill zone and is held there by crowds of “protesters” in the street. The ambushers are counting on the fact that Americans are reluctant to run over pedestrians in order to escape. 


Now the Army has some suggestions on how to defeat an ambush, but they are not really practical for our purposes. They want troops who are trapped in the kill zone to engage the enemy with suppressive firepower so that follow on troops who are not in the kill zone can outflank and engage the ambushers. 


Since we are not at the point where platoon sized engagements are practical, we have to find a better way. 


The key to defeating an ambush is to minimize the ambushers’ advantages while maximizing your own. 


The ambushers have four main advantages:
1 they selected the ambush site
2 they have surprise on their side
3 they are not afraid to use force
4 we cannot use excessive force to defend ourselves, lest we wind up in jail


Our biggest advantages are:
1 we have mobility
2 the ambushers are tied to the kill zone and the protest area


So the first two things to mitigate their advantages while taking advantage of our own:
1 we have to move clear of the kill zone
2 we have to seize the initiative 


The simplest and easiest way to accomplish both is to floor it. We are in a vehicle, we are mobile, and they are not. We are limited to almost no weapons use, because the ambushers are (for whatever reason) not being prosecuted for their actions. Not so much for our side. Use force, and there is a good chance that you will lose everything in the legal shit storm that follows. 


Expect things to continue getting worse as time goes on. 

A researcher conducts a study that shows police do not shoot blacks at a higher rate than other races. So the college fired him. You bet your ass the next researcher’s study will have different findings.

This is how science gets corrupted to suit a particular result.

So tell me how Republicans are the party of small government. The governor extended the ban on evictions. That means that it has been 5 months since some landlords have gotten paid. They have no recourse but to allow someone to live on their property for free.

So what is a landlord to do if they can’t collect rent and can’t evict?

It seems to me that the government is taking property without recompense. The Fifth Amendment sounds like a winner for that.

nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Anyone know where the courts have ruled on that?

Renters who cannot or will not pay rent are angry that Florida Governor Desantis is allowing the moratorium on evictions to expire tonight at midnight. That moratorium has been in effect since April 2, meaning that tenants have been able to live rent free for at least 4 months.

Meanwhile, the owners of those properties have had to go without collecting a dime of rent for that 4 months. Demanding that someone provide something of monetary value to you is called slavery. My tip to renters is this: try to work something out with your landlord. If they won’t, then it is their property, not yours.

An economist is suggesting that the dollar should be devalued by a third. So people are now seriously suggesting that we devalue the dollar to make gold over $2000 an ounce.

With news breaking that a Chinese company recently sold 83 tons of fake gold, I want to remind everyone to use some sort of means of verification. I use a Fisch gold coin detector. Yeah, the complete set costs about $250. Catching one fake will pay for 7 of these.

At this point, we are all aware of the couple who defended their home from a mob by standing out front with an AR15 and a PPK. We have all seen the memes being generated as a result. What I can’t believe is that gun owners who would actually hope to expand the gun culture would join in.

This is the same mentality that causes a gun to hand his wife or girlfriend a 500 S&W revolver or a shotgun and then tape her getting knocked on her ass while he yucks it up at her stupidity. Sure, he got a cheap laugh, but he just turned a woman who was interested in shooting into a woman who wants nothing to do with guns.

Is that really the smart play? In this case, the gun owning couple obviously lives in a neighborhood that can jointly afford to hire armed security. So do you want them defending their own property and being pro gun, or do you want them hiring armed security while voting to disarm the rest of us?

Not so funny now, is it?

Social Security, interest on the debt, Medicare, and the like already total more than the Federal government takes in through taxes. Everything else, every dime the government spends, is borrowed money. Social security spending grows every year, because it must. Social Security and Medicare are breaking us.

So the powers that be have a solution. The idea is that Social security will become a means tested program. In other words, it is OK to cut off SS payments, as long as it is only “the rich” who are getting screwed. Make more than whatever arbitrary amount of money that they decide is “enough,” and all of the money that has been taken from you for the past 50 years- 15% of everything you have earned is an “unplanned donation” to those who make less than that.

Let’s say that a person made an average of $50,000 a year from the time he was 18 to the time he turned 40. Then made an average of $100,000 until age 55, and an average of $175,000 until normal retirement age, 67. At 67, he was making $200,000. Not far fetched for a person that was say, a doctor. Over his lifetime, this person would have paid about $740,000 in Social Security taxes. Had he invested that money over the 49 years of his working life, it would be worth nearly $10 million. Instead, he retires and finds out that since he makes too much money, he gets nothing. Millions has been stolen from him.

Does that sound far fetched? Both Donald Trump and Joe Biden are on board with the idea.

I understand that cuts must be made. However, singling out the successful so that they fund the unsuccessful will do nothing but force the successful to stop working. Who is John Galt?