# Tactics to expect in a suburban environment...



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

*This thread is part of the "Coming Civil War" group of threads.
Please see the Primer/Premise thread --> HERE <-- for context and links to other related topics.*

When the cities are in ash, or have become centers for opfor operations, the focus will turn outward to the suburbs. We see it starting in the areas surrounding Portland, and a few other hotbeds. Riotous mobs moving into neighborhoods, causing all kinds of racket to wake people from their beds, demanding they move out of these neighborhoods out of some fantasy of "fairness". We've seen theft of property from homes where the owner apparently supports Donald Trump. We've even seen a home in Minnesota firebombed over it. Almost no coverage is given.

What should be expected from this crowd if this progresses, as I think it will?
Arson is their chosen weapon in the cities. Will they continue this into the suburbs? Will we see coordinated firebombings across neighborhoods? It wouldn't take much to spread a fire department so thin that they can't respond to every house fire. You better have something ready to deal with this if you're seeing it happen in your closest major city. Fire extinguisher. *A BIG ONE*, and a few smaller ones.

What else? Could this escalate to actually seeing roving bands of arms-toting miscreants opening fire on unsuspecting homes? It wouldn't be the smartest of plans to do so completely exposed. However, street gangs are already comfortable with drive-by attacks. We could see this tactic adopted, but on a widespread scale to keep the local PD busy. Can you fortify your home to prevent such an attack? Can you start to draw up plans to deny entry to your area by such individuals, such as a neighborhood block being cordoned off?

With no way of knowing when this will kick off, what should be expected while out in public, away from home? We know these riots have caught drivers unaware. Any vehicle on the road is considered fair game and will be pelted with bottles, rocks, bricks, and anything else they can get their hands on. They've even tried more than once to open the vehicles to extract the drivers. Lord only knows what that would have turned into. They want these conflicts. They record them, loudly scream out the license plate numbers, and expect the mob to do what it does, and ruin the lives of the drivers.
Your best bet is to avoid these gatherings if you're in a car. If you notice the mob, but they have not engaged you, turn around and get away. If, for whatever reason, you must pass through them, do it on foot and ditch the car long before they see it. Blend in. Shout the nonsense. Raise the first. Get to an edge, and slip away. You're in enemy territory and you must become a spy. Do the things you hate in order to survive. As one person or family, you won't be able to withstand them. Don't draw attention.
If you are in your car when the mob descends, do what you need to do, but *DO NOT GET OUT OF THE CAR*! Lock the doors. Dents can be repaired. The moment glass breaks or a door is opened, *FLOOR IT*! Get far away. Call the police while still driving and agree to meet an officer somewhere. Don't stop.

Is there any expectation of mobilized "units" actually forming out of the chaos?
There's talk on here about China/Russia/U.N. getting involved. Could they pose a threat to suburban homes, or likely confine themselves to the larger cities? A "Red Dawn" scenario seems unlikely to me, but I'm not totally discounting it.


----------



## ND_ponyexpress_ (Mar 20, 2016)

A FEMA or UN refugee camp in the cities should draw out your idiot neighbors... IMO, if you are stuck trying to survive in this suburban hell, dig.... find a way to dig a hole out of your basement into a cave of supplies.. and do a damn good job of hiding it.. group of 5 armed attackers.. defend your Alamo.. group of 20... hide.. they burn down your house, makes you less of a target. relocate at night..


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

ND_ponyexpress_ said:


> A FEMA or UN refugee camp in the cities should draw out your idiot neighbors... IMO, if you are stuck trying to survive in this suburban hell, dig.... find a way to dig a hole out of your basement into a cave of supplies.. and do a damn good job of hiding it.. group of 5 armed attackers.. defend your Alamo.. group of 20... hide.. they burn down your house, makes you less of a target. relocate at night..


 Over half the people in this country think the UN is great. they have never seen the evil they do in countries. Nor will they. FEMA is praised as a savior when they really are just a bunch of crooks.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

I fully expect that if there is a breakdown in law and order, that what we have seen in Portland, Seattle, Chicago and other cities will become wide spread.
And when people start shooting back, it will get worse.

IF that happens in any of the small towns around here, Ol' RPD and the Boss Lady will hunker down inside the perimeter.
Any miscreant that comes over my wire WILL BE SHOT.


----------



## Wedrownik (Sep 22, 2020)

One thing to be aware of is the innocent bait. Imagine this: young kid, or a teenage girl or girls are running and screaming: they're going to kill us. They start pounding on your door.... What do you do? They could really be in danger or they could be armed and meant to get you to let them in....

Seems that it's a damned if you do and damned if you don't scenario. I can't see myself leaving out someone who might need help but then again should I risk the safety of my family? Yes there are various ways that this scenario could be dealt with and mainly I think that depends on what else is going on around. Is your local law enforcement available to come and respond and help the potential bait?

I'm in a good situation that I have my front door with heavy wooden door, outside hallway and then metal security door. I could have my family lockup behind me and I could go evaluate, but then again that still leaves them in a bind if I get taken somehow.....


----------



## inceptor (Nov 19, 2012)

Kauboy said:


> Is there any expectation of mobilized "units" actually forming out of the chaos?
> There's talk on here about China/Russia/U.N. getting involved. Could they pose a threat to suburban homes, or likely confine themselves to the larger cities? A "Red Dawn" scenario seems unlikely to me, but I'm not totally discounting it.


No Red Dawn scenario. Not if but when they come, they will come as Peacekeepers. They will have been invited by progressive governors like Newsom and his cohorts in the PNW. Watch how they spread out from there.


----------



## Wedrownik (Sep 22, 2020)

I think that this won't fly: Americans won't let other military force in under any pretense of help.


----------



## inceptor (Nov 19, 2012)

Wedrownik said:


> I think that this won't fly: Americans won't let other military force in under any pretense of help.


It's part of the pact we signed with the UN at the beginning. The Peacekeepers are to go to areas of civil unrest and restore law and order. The US was one of the original signers to the agreement. No one ever thought that would happen here. Your a history buff, look it up.


----------



## Wedrownik (Sep 22, 2020)

Lol you got me there (partially). Main history area I concentrated on was WWII precursors and the after effect resulting in the division into the east and west camps.

Regarding the unrest though: US would have to get to the point of not being able to deal with it before UN could come....


----------



## inceptor (Nov 19, 2012)

Wedrownik said:


> Lol you got me there (partially). Main history area I concentrated on was WWII precursors and the after effect resulting in the division into the east and west camps.
> 
> Regarding the unrest though: US would have to get to the point of not being able to deal with it before UN could come....


Didn't the UN come into existence as a result of WWII? Seriously, look it up. All it would take is for the governors to invite them in. No one would know until the boots were on the ground.


----------



## Wedrownik (Sep 22, 2020)

inceptor said:


> Didn't the UN come into existence as a result of WWII? Seriously, look it up. All it would take is for the governors to invite them in. No one would know until the boots were on the ground.


Yes it did. The rules for UN involvement though have changed throughout the years. Their roles have expanded, diminished and expanded and diminished.

If you look at what UN did in the Serbian war, it was nothing... it was a joke.... there are other examples of their impotency.

Could they be used effectively? Yes.

Also they can't be just "requested ". Security council from what I understand has to vote for it as well.

Lastly governors do not have the right to request foreign military (UN or otherwise) to come to our shores. At that point they are stepping on Federal territory. Again - could it happen? Yes... but I hope our military would oppose violently &#128521;


----------



## inceptor (Nov 19, 2012)

Wedrownik said:


> Yes it did. The rules for UN involvement though have changed throughout the years. Their roles have expanded, diminished and expanded and diminished.
> 
> If you look at what UN did in the Serbian war, it was nothing... it was a joke.... there are other examples of their impotency.
> 
> ...


Take a look at the membership of the security council. We would be outvoted in the blink of an eye. Remember that old saying "It's easier to ask for forgiveness rather than ask for permission". They would have permission granted by the governors of said states. Yeah, Trump would go ballistic but the Chinese and possibly the Russians would still be here. Newsom has close ties to China as did Brown before him.

https://www.un.org/securitycouncil/content/current-members

They had no interest in the Serbian war. Small nations are easier to control.

Now they have a goal. Do some reading on the Great Reset. The World Economic Forum is promoting this like a new season of Survivor. The UN as a whole is heartily promoting this. They can fix the virus, our rioting and climate change in one fell swoop. It's the fine print that will getcha.

Once the US goes, the other nations will quickly follow. And that is the goal.


----------



## Wedrownik (Sep 22, 2020)

I'm not disagreeing with you that there are elements interested in getting foothold in US... point is though that 
A. We'd be forewarned due to actions of the security council
B. We'd have heads up from our military that there are foreign military elements approaching US soil
C. There is still enough military in California still both active and retired that this wouldn't fly.... our Law enforcement in most places (San Francisco and LA excluded) would not stand for it either.


----------



## inceptor (Nov 19, 2012)

Wedrownik said:


> I'm not disagreeing with you that there are elements interested in getting foothold in US... point is though that
> A. We'd be forewarned due to actions of the security council
> B. We'd have heads up from our military that there are foreign military elements approaching US soil
> C. There is still enough military in California still both active and retired that this wouldn't fly.... our Law enforcement in most places (San Francisco and LA excluded) would not stand for it either.


One thing you forgot on C. The exception would include law enforcement in all major cities on the west coast. I know we stopped the Chinese control over the Port of Long Beach but I do wonder how many people they still have working there. Bringing troops in on a container ship wouldn't be that hard with the right people in control.

IF it's to be done, it will be done covertly. That would be up and down the west coast by ship and then by air. Once here then Trump would have to go to the security council to start the removal process.

Actually I do hope you are correct on all points. But I have never seen a push this hard for us to let them in. Only time will tell.


----------



## Wedrownik (Sep 22, 2020)

Wedrownik said:


> I'm not disagreeing with you that there are elements interested in getting foothold in US... point is though that
> A. We'd be forewarned due to actions of the security council
> B. We'd have heads up from our military that there are foreign military elements approaching US soil
> C. There is still enough military in California still both active and retired that this wouldn't fly.... our Law enforcement in most places (San Francisco and LA excluded) would not stand for it either.


Now you're talking full scale invasion. I know a bit about the port law enforcement there and I would have to say they wouldn't be complicit, but I could see how the beaurocrats running the port could stack the deck against us.

Also, they would be limited as to how much they could bring in at a time... And should they get a foothold, it should be easy to push them back out.


----------



## inceptor (Nov 19, 2012)

Wedrownik said:


> Now you're talking full scale invasion. I know a bit about the port law enforcement there and I would have to say they wouldn't be complicit, but I could see how the beaurocrats running the port could stack the deck against us.
> 
> Also, they would be limited as to how much they could bring in at a time... And should they get a foothold, it should be easy to push them back out.


No, not a full out invasion. They would start out as a peacekeeping force. This is where most of the mostly peaceful protests have happened. They just needed the fires to keep them warm. The mission statement would be to do what the governors have been unable (really unwilling) to do.

There is a reason the rioting and burning have been allowed to happen without interference for this long. By law, Trump can't send in the military without the consent of those governors. AND they have all declined the assistance. Ask yourself why.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

inceptor said:


> No, not a full out invasion. They would start out as a peacekeeping force. This is where most of the mostly peaceful protests have happened. They just needed the fires to keep them warm. The mission statement would be to do what the governors have been unable (really unwilling) to do.
> 
> There is a reason the rioting and burning have been allowed to happen without interference for this long. By law, Trump can't send in the military without the consent of those governors. AND they have all declined the assistance. Ask yourself why.


I would question whether any support can be given to the notion that a "peacekeeping force" that needs to be covertly sneaked into the country could be seen as anything other than an invasion.

Also, Trump doesn't need any consent from the governors to send in the military.
The Insurrection Act of 1809 sets out three situations in which it can be acted upon:


> § 251. Whenever there is an insurrection in any State against its government, the President may, upon the request of its legislature or of its governor if the legislature cannot be convened, call into Federal service such of the militia of the other States, in the number requested by that State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to suppress the insurrection.
> 
> § 252. Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any State by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, he may call into Federal service such of the militia of any State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to enforce those laws or to suppress the rebellion.
> 
> ...


He isn't doing it now because he wants to be re-elected, and this will involve dirty business.
Once he wins, however............


----------



## stevekozak (Oct 4, 2015)

inceptor said:


> Take a look at the membership of the security council. We would be outvoted in the blink of an eye. Remember that old saying "It's easier to ask for forgiveness rather than ask for permission". They would have permission granted by the governors of said states. Yeah, Trump would go ballistic but the Chinese and possibly the Russians would still be here. Newsom has close ties to China as did Brown before him.
> 
> https://www.un.org/securitycouncil/content/current-members
> 
> ...


I giggled a little when I read your "Yeah, Trump would go ballistic but the Chinese and possibly the Russians would still be here" line. If you seriously think that foreign soldiers could come into the United States of America and try to set up camp, while President Donald J. Trump is President, and all that will happen is that he will "go ballistic" and it would just continue, then you are dreaming, pal. Yeah, he would go ballistic and then he would order the US Military to go ballistic on their foreign asses forthwith!! He would probably issue an invitation for any American wit one good eye and a rifle to go blue-helmet target practicing. The man is far from perfect, but a damn sniveling spineless coward he is not. Thanks the laugh!! :vs_laugh:


----------



## inceptor (Nov 19, 2012)

Kauboy said:


> I would question whether any support can be given to the notion that a "peacekeeping force" that needs to be covertly sneaked into the country could be seen as anything other than an invasion.
> 
> Also, Trump doesn't need any consent from the governors to send in the military.
> The Insurrection Act of 1809 sets out three situations in which it can be acted upon:
> ...


He has to be invited in or invoke the insurrection act. Yet neither has happened and the crap there continues. There is a reason it's continuing and it's not because they want to elect Biden. You don't allow your cities to burn for this long without a plan in place. One possible explanation would be the secession of the west coast states and they could then invite the UN in.

https://www.breitbart.com/2020-elec...st-secession-possible-civil-war-john-podesta/

There is also a reason that the UN has been pushing to get a foothold here in the US.

Now I'm not a military strategist, nor am I a political strategist yet it doesn't take either one to see a plan emerging. Governors and mayors don't allow major destruction of their places to get re-elected. There is also a reason that the Demonrats have been war gaming this all summer.


----------



## inceptor (Nov 19, 2012)

stevekozak said:


> I giggled a little when I read your "Yeah, Trump would go ballistic but the Chinese and possibly the Russians would still be here" line. If you seriously think that foreign soldiers could come into the United States of America and try to set up camp, while President Donald J. Trump is President, and all that will happen is that he will "go ballistic" and it would just continue, then you are dreaming, pal. Yeah, he would go ballistic and then he would order the US Military to go ballistic on their foreign asses forthwith!! He would probably issue an invitation for any American wit one good eye and a rifle to go blue-helmet target practicing. The man is far from perfect, but a damn sniveling spineless coward he is not. Thanks the laugh!! :vs_laugh:


If you think that all this is fantasy then you may get a surprise.

19 minutes after Trump was elected it was announced that the impeachment would start. It's been 4 years of onslaught since then. If you think all this ends on Tuesday, you will be mistaken.

I hope it all goes away soon. I've got things to do, places to go and people to see. I don't need or want any of this crap, yet it's coming.

And I do agree that blue helmets make great targets.


----------



## bigwheel (Sep 22, 2014)

Dang yall could make old folks need an extra heart pill or two. Thanks.


----------



## inceptor (Nov 19, 2012)

Wedrownik said:


> Now you're talking full scale invasion. I know a bit about the port law enforcement there and I would have to say they wouldn't be complicit, but I could see how the beaurocrats running the port could stack the deck against us.
> 
> Also, they would be limited as to how much they could bring in at a time... And should they get a foothold, it should be easy to push them back out.





stevekozak said:


> I giggled a little when I read your "Yeah, Trump would go ballistic but the Chinese and possibly the Russians would still be here" line. If you seriously think that foreign soldiers could come into the United States of America and try to set up camp, while President Donald J. Trump is President, and all that will happen is that he will "go ballistic" and it would just continue, then you are dreaming, pal. Yeah, he would go ballistic and then he would order the US Military to go ballistic on their foreign asses forthwith!! He would probably issue an invitation for any American wit one good eye and a rifle to go blue-helmet target practicing. The man is far from perfect, but a damn sniveling spineless coward he is not. Thanks the laugh!! :vs_laugh:


Yeah, y'all are right after thinking about it. There is no way the UN would enter US territory. Besides, both Russia and China are afraid of us so it can't happen.


----------



## stevekozak (Oct 4, 2015)

inceptor said:


> Yeah, y'all are right after thinking about it. There is no way the UN would enter US territory. Besides, both Russia and China are afraid of us so it can't happen.


Oh, don't get me wrong. I don't doubt that they might try it at some point. I was just taking exception to you seeming to believe President Trump would just be sitting back frothing at the mouth and not doing anything about it. I could them trying to do it, I am just certain that they would soon be met with such force as to make their mother's ancestors cry. :tango_face_wink:


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

inceptor said:


> Yeah, y'all are right after thinking about it. There is no way the UN would enter US territory. Besides, both Russia and China are afraid of us so it can't happen.


No need for sarcasm, but his point is sound.
The U.N. is supposedly an international force, not from a particular country...
But China and Russia would have their soldiers obliterated if they tried to send troops to our shores, whether asked for or not. Trump is very much anti-war, and believes our nation should be protected. He won't send troops to foreign lands to take their oil. He's never supported such action. But he would UNLEASH HELL on any force that arrives at our shores.
Governors might be able to ask foreigners to cross state lines, but they have ZERO authority to call any foreign entity to cross national boundaries.
That's federal, and only federal.
The entire country would need to be in such a state that our government can't handle the situation, before the U.N. would have any authority to step in. A few states on fire does not a national crisis make.


----------



## inceptor (Nov 19, 2012)

Wedrownik said:


> Now you're talking full scale invasion. I know a bit about the port law enforcement there and I would have to say they wouldn't be complicit, but I could see how the beaurocrats running the port could stack the deck against us.
> 
> Also, they would be limited as to how much they could bring in at a time... And should they get a foothold, it should be easy to push them back out.





Kauboy said:


> No need for sarcasm, but his point is sound.


Can't help it at times. My wife thinks it's in my DNA.



Kauboy said:


> The U.N. is supposedly an international force, not from a particular country...
> But China and Russia would have their soldiers obliterated if they tried to send troops to our shores, whether asked for or not. Trump is very much anti-war, and believes our nation should be protected. He won't send troops to foreign lands to take their oil. He's never supported such action. But he would UNLEASH HELL on any force that arrives at our shores.
> Governors might be able to ask foreigners to cross state lines, but they have ZERO authority to call any foreign entity to cross national boundaries.
> That's federal, and only federal.
> The entire country would need to be in such a state that our government can't handle the situation, before the U.N. would have any authority to step in. A few states on fire does not a national crisis make.


Think about it. The majority of Peacekeepers would be Chinese and Russians. They have the most to gain.

But this is an alternative view. CA, OR, WA, NV and now CO have formed a pact. The Western States Pact. What if they decide to secede? CA has been threatening this for a few years. They could call on the UN for assistance.

Frankly the UN wants to take us down. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying they can or will. All I know is that they are pushing hard to get in here. And they have been pushing that narrative hard.

Don't forget that it was the UN that said there was no way the China Flu couldn't be transmitted to humans. Trump got info early and shutdown travel from China. That same day patient zero entered the US. Also that same day Pelosi finally delivered the article of impeachment to the Senate. Trump was called a xenophobe for closing that. Yet if he didn't listen we would be in much worse shape. Early estimates had 2 million dead.

It seems that no one wants to do the research but its there. Easily and readily available. But bad things like that can't happen here so why bother? I personally don't like conspiracy theories. Rumors I investigate before I can believe it. There is enough credible information out there to make this a distinct possibility.



> *The entire country would need to be in such a state that our government can't handle the situation*, before the U.N. would have any authority to step in. A few states on fire does not a national crisis make.


I think we will see if we will get to that point soon enough.

Me, I wish this would all just blow over quickly and go away. I want to go back to being retired. I have things to do and places to go. I don't need or want this crap. But I learned early on when you turn your back and dismiss something that should have been obvious, it will bite you in the ass.


----------



## Chiefster23 (Feb 5, 2016)

Me, I wish this would all just blow over quickly and go away. I want to go back to being retired. I have things to do and places to go. I don't need or want this crap. But I learned early on when you turn your back and dismiss something that should have been obvious, it will bite you in the ass.





Boy oh boy! Do I ever agree! I just wish I could wake up and be planning my outside chrismas decorations instead of wracking my brain about what preps I forgot to get, what to do when antifa comes calling, and how I’m gonna handle a Biden presidency if that asshole wins.


----------



## Piratesailor (Nov 9, 2012)

The western pact of states is something that I’ve mentioned and the group of states most likely to leave the union and call for international help.

And hell would indeed be unleashed..


----------

