"Why Europe can't (won't) defend itself" Topic

I think a better example would be the partisans in Russian when the Nazi invaded. Yes, numbers of people armed themselves and inflicted damaged to the Nazi; Who, then reacted in typically Nazi fashion and wiped out entire villages and more.

Precisely. It is lucky for the people of the US that they will never have to deal with an occupying force, there is not much fun to be had in shooting bad guys when your friends and family are in the firing line.

I believe ya. Been to one a' them political rallies.

I don't go to any rallies … my weapons stay at home. To protect myself and my property. Just in case … BTW I speak English without any accent. Please don't berate many from rural areas thru out the USA. They are very hard workers and many have made very good soldiers. I had many of them in my units when I was in the Army.

Also note I live in a very nice moderate suburb. And intend to keep it that way. Albiet the city and farmland are minutes away.

Those militias and citizen soldiers didn't save the South in their own back yard, did they?

I think you may want to study up on the ACW in more detail. Then come back and then we can talk …

I think a better example would be the partisans in Russian when the Nazi invaded. Yes, numbers of people armed themselves and inflicted damaged to the Nazi; Who, then reacted in typically Nazi fashion and wiped out entire villages and more.

Yes sadly that happens in an insurgency/partisan warfare, in some cases. Of course it is wrong, but as I have said many times before many times very bad things occur in a war. And the Nazis as we know in many cases committed war crimes frequently a long with IJFs. It is well documented in history. And should be remembered.

There have always been civilians who turn paramilitary and rise up to resist an invading force, whether we're talking Russian and French partisans during WWII, the Vietcong in 'Nam or insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Yes, again in many conflicts partisans were/are involved. Even in the WWII PTO, in the PI, where the guerillas there attacked the IJFs frequently … It was a standard in many places during the WWII and beyond.

It is lucky for the people of the US that they will never have to deal with an occupying force, there is not much fun to be had in shooting bad guys when your friends and family are in the firing line.

You/we all should know better than that. I.e. the AWI, and the War of 1812. Yes the US is fortunate that we have large oceans on both coasts. And generally friendly neighbors. Based on my being an American all my life, knowing US history fairly well and serving honorably in our military as an Infantry officer for over a decade. In my long passed youth.

I'm pretty sure if such an event occurred e.g. as seen in the movies like Red Dawn … The US would have a pretty healthy insurgent war against the invaders. I'm pretty sure most Americans would agree. And no doubt it would probably be a bloody affair for all involved.

E.g. If the Nazis invaded the UK in WWII, as they had thought about. Would not the UK have had a pretty good insurgency going on? And yes I've seen the series "Dads Army". Very entertaining …

Legion the AWI was 250 years ago! And Red Dawn is just a fantasy for men who yearn to kill commies in their own backyard. Which is fine as a What if scenario for wargaming but is extremely far fetched even at the height of the Cold War.

I'm not sure about the German invasion of the UK, we are an island so quite easily defended, even with our small armed forces. On a vaguely related note, many people in Europe can and do hunt and can use firearms, although we're normally told never to point a gun at anyone.

A Cold War is a mutually beneficial scenario for all involved, it allows the participants to justify high levels of defence spending, it allows for nationalist chest beating (always goes down well with the voting public) and it is carefully choreographed so none of the belligerents actually ever come into conflict with one another.

Legion the AWI was 250 years ago!

Really !!!! We learn from history, especially our own … Study the Gettysburg and Vicksburg campaigns many lessons learned. Even from 250 years ago! Guess we should stop studying battles like Cannae too? link … That was even long before the ACW … 😮

And Red Dawn is just a fantasy

Really !!! And they really were not good movies either. I never saw the second one … You ?

men who yearn to kill commies in their own backyard.

You say that like it is bad thing …🤔

I'm not sure about the German invasion of the UK, we are an island so quite easily defended, even with our small armed forces.

Probably one of the reasons why they didn't invade … huh ? 🤔

although we're normally told never to point a gun at anyone.

Normally we don't unless we are threatened … BTW I don't hunt, my friends do. I don't want to kill anything that does not need to be killed …

I guess us backwoods rustics are not as evolved as are many of the Gentlemen members here …🤩

This has happened here before … when we talk about the USA and our Right to Bear Arms. Some Euros and even some Americans get all hot & bothered because some of us can own guns. And know how to use them … 😎

IMO if you are not an American, the fact that we can own firearms should really be no concern of yours.

BTW … this has nothing to do with the original topic … just say'n …

"I think you may want to study up on the ACW in more detail. Then come back and then we can talk …"

Not seeing much about the great Southern civilian insurrection that saved the South and kept it independent…..

Well if that is all you got from it … you better stick with the ECW …

Let me help you … link

link

Here are some of the Cliff notes: The Industrialized North out produced the rural South. And cut off their supplies coming from Europe.

Also – Guerilla Warfare in the ACW … link

Whether Regulars or Partisans/Guerillas it all played a part in the ACW.

"Setting aside the question of who might ever contemplate an actual invasion of the Continental USA (rather more of a logistical challenge compared to Estonia or Latvia), is ownership of suitable firearms so prevalent in major conurbations on the East and West Coast? And what happens when said invader starts to summarily execute civilians as reprisals – would there be the will to support the continued resistance in 21st century western societies?".

Read the history of Afghanistan and Vietnam, and how the "citizens" there dealt with their invaders.

I suspect those would be like a walk in the park compared to what will happen if an invader ever gets to US shores.

If nothing else, WWII should have proved "….what happens when you awaken a sleeping giant".

At least half the country still believes in good olde American values. I suspect that is and will be enough.

The real danger is from the enemies within.

Well as I have said before. If an invading force landed at NYC or NJ. The next morning they'd find all their vehicles up on blocks. With the tires and radios gone.

And I forget to mention it, when talking about the Right to Bear Arms. They tried arming bears but they kept dropping their weapons.🐻 As well as couldn't hit the broadside of a barn.

Yeah … I am poking fun at some of you … if you have not figured it out yet … 😆

"Whether Regulars or Partisans/Guerilla it all played a part in the ACW"

Yes I know, its obvious.

The point was though that there was a suggestion that American levels of gun ownership in Europe would make an invaders task untenable in the face of civilian insurrection. But in the case of the South that didn't happen, the Confederacy rolled over and folded.

At least half the country still believes in good olde American values. I suspect that is and will be enough.

And that's where it gets interesting.

Clever foreign powers play on rivalries and grievances.

Indeed say things get so bad that the middle of the country doesn't get along with the coasts anymore. A foreign power invades the coasts (or one of the coasts) but allows the middle of the country to remain as its own power.

Would the Texans et al really want to go to die for California if Californian values have become alien to them and if whoever is conquering California allows Texas et al to do as it pleases?

---

I suspect despite it's massive investment in weapons, Australia would just capitulate and become a pseudo vassal state. Economics would trump sovereignty.

The obese consumers of the cities will not put up a fight against anyone. The rural chunks of the country are ageing and many of them are very "comfortable" types. 63% of Australians are overweight or obese – unhealthy fatties don't make good soldiers or guerrilla fighters.

No doubt some of the urban city types would welcome the invasion as getting of the white supremacy.

Unlike in 1914 or 1941 the country no longer has an population of independent, hardy, healthy types who know how to live rough.

Modern Australians also have a saying "government should do something about it." This is applied to just about everything.

Thus don't expect the modern Australians to fight for their country.

Please don't berate many from rural areas thru out the USA.

I didn't "berate" anyone so don't take offense personally. At least I didn't say I've been to one a' them rootin' tootin' gun-totin' rallies covered by the news lately. :)

And they say a picture is worth a thousand words:

This is the reality of Iran and virtually most of the rest of the non-western world.

Huge percentage of Iranians live in slums like one below in Teheran.

It's certainly not the wide boulevards and modern skyscrapers of elite parts of the capital cities.

And these people only act when it affects them and their impoverished lives – eg 2019 Iranian protests were due to rising gas prices, not some dream of peace and democracy.

---

In fact I suspect "peace and democracy" would destroy Iran – huge chunks of the population would simply leave the country for Europe and it would allow separatists from minor regions to start agitating. Hardliners wouldn't give up so easily and I can see them establishing enclaves or conducting terrorist attacks.

Then there would the Gulf Arabs who would no doubt use this as an excuse to eradicate or subjugate Shias. They would probably gladly pump money into keeping the country down. Israel would probably continue to destabilise it as well.

I think literally the best case scenario for Iran without the Ayatollahs would result in it ending up like Iraq – dysfunctional, crippled, corrupt and barely surviving as a state. There's simply to much going against it to enable it to thrive if the Ayatollah's are removed.

Worst case is it's another Libya or Syria – perpetual state of brutal, vicious civil war buoyed by foreign powers.

Basically the country is stuffed either with the Ayatollahs or without them.

suggestion that American levels of gun ownership in Europe would make an invaders task untenable in the face of civilian insurrection.

I don't think I suggested that ?

But in the case of the South that didn't happen, the Confederacy rolled over and folded.

That was not really the way it happened. Many males in the South were in the CSA and some in guerilla units as well. And initially the CSA had an advantage because of many living in rural areas, were hunting for their dinner and/or farming for a living. They had some very good marksmen[well as good as you could be with the musket at that time!]. Again many were used to hunting for their supper, etc. In many cases making them generally better marksman. Plus their Cavalry was also generally better than the Union's. Of course that is a bit of a generalization. But the fact remains the North had to catch up as the war went on with the South. In the quality of Infantry and Cavalry .

Plus you can't talk about the ACW without mentioning the CSA got some of the better Generals in the US Army at the time. E.g. Lee, Jackson, Longstreet, etc. vs. a long list of Union generals before Meade won at Gettysburg and Grant eventually becoming the Union General that won the war.

But it is too simplistic to just say it didn't matter about the South's better Infantry, Cavalry[and Leadership]. In many of the initial battles.

I didn't "berate" anyone so don't take offense personally. At least I didn't say I've been to one a' them rootin' tootin' gun-totin' rallies covered by the news lately. :)

Hey I live in the suburbs ! But I'm only a few minutes from farming and rural areas. Yes, the media loves to cover things like that to play into the narrative that all gun owners are redneck white supremacists. 😆

Clever foreign powers play on rivalries and grievances.

Indeed say things get so bad that the middle of the country doesn't get along with the coasts anymore. A foreign power invades the coasts (or one of the coasts) but allows the middle of the country to remain as its own power.

I don't think the USA is that divided even with all that is going on. And probably never would be. If it came to an invasion. Also note those that say they have a grievance with the USA. E.g. Antifa and the radical types in BLM, etc., are a small percentage of the entire population. They probably wouldn't last long.

Have many here who are not from the USA, ever been here. If all you know about the USA is what you see in the media. You are getting a bit of a skewed perspective from most news outlets.

Would the Texans et al really want to go to die for California if Californian values have become alien to them and if whoever is conquering California allows Texas et al to do as it pleases?

Well if they are in the military they go where they are told. And obviously the US Military has people from all over the US and even the PR and Guam, etc. As far as Texas guerillas going to the California to help them out. That probably wouldn't happen. The insurgents would probably stay in their state or region.

I just noticed I posted my Iran pictures on the wrong thread!

I thought so ! DOH !!!

You can copy all of those post you want to. And move them to where you want to. You probably know that. I've done before too…

"I don't think I suggested that ?"

The suggestion permeates the thread ("Wolverine!")

One time the population had a chance to demonstrate that supposed nationan characteristic it didn't happen.

And it didn't even face an occupier that was prepared to take out disproportionate vengeance upon civilian

PS apologies for mistooks and mistyped, the perils imof typing around 3am in an insomniaic haze :/

@Legion4

This has happened here before … when we talk about the USA and our Right to Bear Arms. Some Euros and even some Americans get all hot & bothered because some of us can own guns. And know how to use them … 😎

IMO if you are not an American, the fact that we can own firearms should really be no concern of yours.

As I have already said lots of Europeans own and presumably know how to use firearms, it's just that we actually use them for recreation or hunting, they aren't there on the off chance that someone invades or we need to kill someone.

I do think Europeans are a bit less afraid than people in the US though, we don't have this fear of outsiders, despite the fact that large parts of Europe were historically under occupation much more recently than anywhere the US. I'm not afraid of Russians, they're actually rather nice people, we have loads of them living in my area because they come over for the fruit picking.

PS apologies for mistooks and mistyped, the perils imof typing around 3am in an insomniaic haze :/

No problem … get some rest … 😴

they aren't there on the off chance that someone invades or we need to kill someone.

Nor are our weapons primarily here to do an insurgency against an invader. In most cases those that don't go hunting or target shooting have them for the possibility of home break in, etc. [Or well … an alien invasion👽 or zombie outbreak.🧟‍♂️🧟‍♀️]

Europeans are a bit less afraid than people in the US though, we don't have this fear of outsiders,

Like many Euros, I don't think many really understand how many in the US think, feel, etc. And vis versa of course …

The information we get is generally from the various forms of the media. Which as we know is not always accurate, unbiased, etc. But the vast majority in USA are not afraid of anyone. Nor fear an invasion, as Mexico and Canada are generally friendly neighbors. Albeit it a small number of criminals etc. cross our Southern border. Which has slowed significantly.

Would anyone want criminals and/or terrorists entering their country ? We all know the answer to that …

Like many Euros, I don't think many really understand how many in the US think, feel, etc. And vis versa of course

The issue is that many people on here do seem to want to impose their world view on people elsewhere in the world.

If people in Europe don't want to maintain huge militaries it is up to them, just as it up to the US to decide whether it wants to continue to support them or not. The main stated threat to Europe is Russia, but it is not perceived to be an overt military threat to Europe. The Russians may fight proxy wars with the west but is very careful not to engage in direct action against Europe or the US and vice versa.

Military proliferation is a very costly business, and due to the structure of Europe, which lacks a centralised military budget is difficult for individual countries to justify. Harking back to the past has its uses but most countries are looking to the military and security challenges in the future.

Terrorism and asymmetrical warfare is the most common form of threat these days so armies and security agencies are set up to counter these sorts of threat, hence the importance of cyberwarfare, so you know when and where something will occur. All the tanks and soldiers in the world won't help you if you don't know where to deploy them.

You have not told me anything I don't already know …

The issue is that many people on here do seem to want to impose their world view on people elsewhere in the world.

You mean like going to A'stan to stop AQ and other terrorists from attacking us at home [9/11] and worldwide[Kenya, IIRC]? To build up the ANA and ANP so they can handle this without us being beside them. And maybe stop the slaughter among themselves that has been going on in that failed state for decades upon decades.

I agree GWII in retrospect was an error. But once Saddam was executed Iraq should have been a better place. But just like in A'stan. They are all strongly wedded to their religious beliefs, tribal, ethnic, warlord/mullah, etc., affiliations. And they again went back to old habits. When ISIS became a threat in the US and Europe. We had no choice but to act. In both Europe and to a less extent in the USA and Canada. Their radicalized followers were killing us in the streets.

The only will I see being imposed on others is to not attack us in our homeland. We went to those places to kill them there so they won't be trying to kill us here. IIRC in the streets of the UK, France, Germany, etc., many "infidels" were brutally killed by radicalized homegrown Jihadis as well as some from a number of moslem countries. Who came there to do the same, in the name of ISIS and AQ. So yeah we must have a different outlook from many Euros. We don't like our people being killed in the streets.

importance of cyberwarfare, so you know when and where something will occur.

No news there, all the branches in the US Military and intel agencies know this well. The US Army recently added a new branch – Cyberwarfare. They take their place along side the other branches like Infantry, tanks, FA, Aviation, etc.

The US Militaries' and Intel agencies' cyberwarfare functions are some of the best in the world at this point. And getting better. But as I always say what we know out here is only a small amount of what exists or is going on. Again as I said … it's generally all classified, for the most part.

I know this as I had a Top Secret Clearance since I was a 1LT. What I knew then would fit on a 4 x 6 card. And it is pretty much all over the net today. But I only knew what I had to know to do the mission if need be. Otherwise it was none of my concern. That left a whole lot of classified I didn't know or need to.

All the tanks and soldiers in the world won't help you if you don't know where to deploy them.

Yes but you better have them around if you need them. Playing catch up only costs you more in the long run. The US learned this lesson in both World Wars and Korea.

Legion, a couple of posts ago you asked how many non-Americans on here have visited the US. Good question!

I don't know about posters here, but to give an indication, according to UK Government statistics 3.8 million Brits visit the US every year. Now most of those will not go every year and a lot will be 'first time' visitors. So out of a population of 68-odd million quite a large percentage have been to the US at some point!

To throw in a bit of anecdotal evidence, I would estimate over half the people I know have been to America at least once. Most of them three or four times.

Despite the impression one might get from the Internet, British people generally rather like America.

"We don't like our people being killed in the streets."

Well, who does?

Problem is, this works both ways.

Foreign terrorists kill Americans in America. How angry does that make you? How much do you want revenge? That's a normal human reaction, right? So put yourself in the place of a goat-herder in Afghanistan who is not interested in politics, or extremism, but just wants a quiet life. Then some military from the other side of the world bombs his village and kills his granny. How is he going to feel? Angry? Vengeful? Of course he will.

But. As an American you have a powerful military you can send out to exact revenge. Your Afghan goat herder? Not so much. So what can he do? Well, he could become radicalised and attempt further terrorist attacks.

This has been the unintended consequences of the West's dabbling in the Middle East. And it's not just America, Britain and other Western countries have been involved as well.

The real question now is how do we fix this mess now? I've no idea but I doubt the solution involves soldiers…

Despite the impression one might get from the Internet, British people generally rather like America.

Don't get me wrong Cedric, I agree with that. And I'm pretty sure most in the US[that know who and where the Brits are!] like the UK as well. Yeah that whole AWI and War of 1812 was a long time ago. 😉 But in reality we have fought side by side in many conflicts since then.

Problem is, this works both ways.

Foreign terrorists kill Americans in America. How angry does that make you? How much do you want revenge? That's a normal human reaction, right? So put yourself in the place of a goat-herder in Afghanistan who is not interested in politics, or extremism, but just wants a quiet life. Then some military from the other side of the world bombs his village and kills his granny. How is he going to feel? Angry? Vengeful? Of course he will.

Yes I know and understand this. It unfortunately is a sad side product of war where a weaker adversary attacks a stronger one. E.g. islamo-fascist/jihadi/terrorist attacking the US, i.e. 9/11, etc. I think as long as these groups with much internal support threaten the US and it's allies, this standard may in place for a while.

However, if you know note. The jihadi terrorist attacks in the US have ceased, and much of it the UK, France and Germany, etc., is tiny. But none the less upsetting with civilians being murdered in the street. With the cause being radicalized corrupted religious beliefs.

The US would rather fight those type out of our own land. And have been very effective with killing off their leadership and much of their followers and supporters. Starting with UBL, his son, Baghdadi, Al Masri and many more being remove from the battlefield "with extreme prejudice".

We all know in an insurgency of any type with the enemy moving among and at times being supported by the locals which is classic Mao and Che', etc. CD is bound to happen. For better or worse it is a by product.

And I know from many sources the USA does attempt to avoid CD. Even denying troop commanders on the ground the FA and CAS to support their troops actions in combat operations. As a former Rifle PL and then Mech Co. Cdr, back in the '80s. I know I would understand this as to get the mission done, now without the support. It may cost some of my troops' lives.

But. As an American you have a powerful military you can send out to exact revenge. Your Afghan goat herder? Not so much. So what can he do? Well, he could become radicalised and attempt further terrorist attacks.

Yes we found the similar in SE Asia. That rice paddy farmer could be VC ? Just like the goat herder, is he Taliban, AQ, now, ISIS ?

The VC vs the Taliban/AQ/ISIS have different motivations. The US never has had a terrorist attack in the US from the VC. Radical islam that is another case.

So do we not answer the terrorist attacks, and let them believe we are weak and vulnerable ? Or do we attempt to destroy at least some of those and their supporters who are responsible for those attack ? I think the answer is simple.

IMO if they didn't attack us, they wouldn't have to reap the whirlwind so to speak. They have to know you attack us you and your supporters will pay, many times over. These religious inspired attackers have to know they and yes those around them will suffer.

This has been the unintended consequences of the West's dabbling in the Middle East. And it's not just America, Britain and other Western countries have been involved as well.

Yes that is the nature of this type of religious inspired terrorism. So yes what is the answer ?

The real question now is how do we fix this mess now? I've no idea but I doubt the solution involves soldiers…

At this point with all the losses suffered by the terrorists and others in those regions/areas. I think the point is made.

I have even heard that the estimates since the US and it's allies went to war in the Iraq, Syria, A'stan, Pakistan, etc., in moslem dominated countries. Since e.g. '90, has cost them 4 million losses troops, jihadi and non-combatant. And that number still is growing in the those places today. At a much smaller rate. But also remember many of those losses were inflicted by rival religious, ethnic, tribal, warlord/mullah affiliated "groups" going back many, many decades and more.

With the US and its remaining allies leaving those areas in large numbers shortly. We have to use all our intel assets, etc., to keep close watch. So as the radicals don't try to plan to attack the West again. With our assets, e.g. drones, missiles, etc., we may be able to breakup these planned attacks. If they don't want to be targets. Just keep killing each other off as they have been. And don't bring your terror over here.

Sounds like a simple solution IMO.

This has been the unintended consequences of the West's dabbling in the Middle East. And it's not just America, Britain and other Western countries have been involved as well.

To a degree.

But we are also seeing a great Islamic awakening, a literal Islamic reformation.

With failure of Muslim secularists in Turkey, Egypt, Malaysia, Iraq, Iran etc, Islam started to be reembraced as a form of socio-political ideology.

This was always bubbling along but gets headwinds in the 1970s. Islamists scored some big wins in the 1970s-1980s – Iranian revolution and winning the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan.

After 1991 and fall of communism and destruction of Iraq, secular nationalism is dead in the muslim world. Democracy was a non-starter.

So what you have left is strong oil rich theocracies pushing a hardline Islamist/conservative movmement.

Terrorism is just one of its facets.

Islamification of society and secular government institutions as has happened in Malaysia, Turkey elsewhere is another.

In this instance Islamic terrorism occurs in west regardless of what the west is doing. As secular and non-Islamic, the west is automatically an enemy of the Islamic conservative.

Note Germany is not really that heavily involved in intervening in middle east yet it has been the target of numerous islamist attacks.

Some good points. IMO the less those countries become secular, which are a minority, and more they get fundamentalist religion, the bigger threat they may become. Along with their expanding birth rate, worldwide …

If only because of geography, the USA is never going to face a conventional invasion by air, land or sea.

Far more likely is the ‘One Second After' scenario of an EMP strike by terrorist proxies funded by another state, ensuing that all those weapons are then turned against each other rather than some foreign invader.

Yes, unless an attack goes thru Canada or Mexico … both fairly low probabilities. But even with an EMP strike, almost small arms, in the military, LEOs and gun owners will still function.

Only way I think foreign forces would get involved in the USA is if the USA fractures and collapses into a host of new smaller states.

And to be honest I suspect the USA fragmenting scenario is a plausible outcome over the next 50-100 years or even less. When California or New York is so culturally different to the hinterland then at some point it's plausible to see states wanting to peel off at some stage in the future especially as demographics really kick in and white Americans became a minority especially on the coasts where hispanics could well become majorities in some key states.

And then I can see Chinese or Russians taking over or turning Alaska into a vassal state, Chinese gaining influence in Hawaii (third island chain objective) etc. You could also see smaller new US states inviting foreign powers in to protect them from larger neighbours (try being tiny by population and economy New Mexico v economic giant Texas!).

I suspect California, Texas and and some sort of conglomeration of the east coast would emerge as powerful states. The rest who knows.

Ah, the what-if America comes under attack scenario. Remember this?

Or this?

Legion 4, that's my point – with all those guns in civilian hands, after an EMP strike, the bad guys just need to sit back for a year while US society disintegrates in a desperate struggle for survival, then send in ‘relief/reconstruction' missions to pick up the pieces they want once the few survivors are starving, disease-ridden, out of ammo and desperate.

All that could happen arealdeadone and Basha … Albeit highly improbable we all must admit. But I think some "patriots" will still be around. And will have to combat groups like Antifa, radical members of BLM, etc., etc. Even possibly some jihadis, socialists, communists, etc.

The list of enemies could be long, including outside invaders. E.g. Russians, PRC/CCP, Mexico, Central and South Americans, etc. But we will have home court advantage. It's our backyard this time … Never underestimate "them country boys" !

EMP will not stop us from growing crops, hunting, etc. My friends and I talked about hooking up with the Amish. There are many nearby where we live. They survive just fine with their low tech lives. We'd help provide security, etc. As some are like me well trained soldiers and many are hunters and outdoorsmen too.

The Amish fish as well as hunt with rifles, bows, and cross bows. So we may be able to survive with minimal difficultly.

But I'm not going to wear one of those straw hats like they do …

Legion, have you read "One Second After" by William Forstchen (and its two sequels)? I found them compelling and very plausible accounts of how a terrorist EMP attack would affect the Continental USA but I'd be interested on your (and others') take on how realistic the scenario is, as it's set in the USA and I'm a Brit.

Bottom line is, the ‘patriots' would be overwhelmed fighting to survive against hordes of fellow Americans, facing a complete breakdown of society, starvation, no medical infrastructure, cholera, typhoid etc.

What invariably happens after civilization breaks down and government institutions cease to function is that the Darwinian laws of the jungle will impose itself. Every man, woman and child will have to fend for themselves. Social groupings will form in order to defend against roving gangs of predatory marauders.

Doesn't matter if the cause is an EMP attack, a nuclear strike or your run-of-the-mill zombie apocalypse.

It's been suggested that we're just 9 meals away from the break down of civilisation – no apocalyptic event required, potentially just 'a series of unfortunate events'. I believe the idea originates from how modern supply chains work and are interconnected. Though in theory a competent state should have sufficient resilience and disaster planning infrastructure to apply the break before civilisation goes over the cliff edge. However, when I say competent state, I'm not entirely certain I'd be comfortable with the current setup where I live being able to apply the break if push came to shove!

how realistic the scenario is, as it's set in the USA and I'm a Brit.

I have not read those books, but you asked … so in a scenario(s) like that. IMO is not very realistic. As a number of things would have to come about for anything like it to happen. Would it be different in the UK or Europe ?

Bottom line is, the ‘patriots' would be overwhelmed fighting to survive against hordes of fellow Americans, facing a complete breakdown of society, starvation, no medical infrastructure, cholera, typhoid etc.

If so … then we'll go down fighting … What choice would we have? Regardless Survival is a very strong motivator.

Social groupings will form in order to defend against roving gangs of predatory marauders.

That is why we'd get with the Amish, etc. And see how long we'd last …

potentially just 'a series of unfortunate events'.

Again I think a number of "events" would have to happen for anything like this to occur. So again, it has a low probability of it happening, again IMO.

I know I plan on surviving with my "clan", etc., for as long as we could. We are not the kind to rollover and commit suicide.

Seems to me there is a lot Euros and some others here thinking the USA will throw in the towel and just die. If things get too tough. If you do think that dare I say you don't know the type of "Americans" I know.

It seems I wouldn't want many of you with my unit or clan. And vis versa as well I'd think … But in any case don't take it personally … I don't.

A unit is only as strong as it's weakest link(s), yes … ?

Also note the USA's survival has nothing to do with the original topic. As usual we've gone waaaay OT …

Legion4, no offence taken whatsoever, it's an interesting discussion, and I suspect we have more in common than differences. I've served (a very long time ago) and both my lads have continued the tradition. While we wouldn't readily ‘roll over' under the circumstances I'm pragmatic about our chances in such a scenario – the diabetes would probably get me as soon as the insulin ran out, and I don't see them prioritising 60-somethings!

Sure we've gone way off the original post but that's what makes threads like this the best – it's just like a group of mates in a bar who start talking about one thing and the conversation ends up going in a completely different direction.

Those books are worth reading – above all, they accurately portray how a small community in North Carolina comes together to survive in the face of unimaginable hardship and challenges, but it's also a sobering read and makes you realise just how fragile modern society is.

In the books, Mainland Europe also gets hit, by the way, and its only those countries on the fringes, like the UK, that get through relatively unscathed. And, of course, US forces overseas are instrumental in the early relief operations.

All such fictional scenarios are, by their nature, low probability and need a whole series of unlikely events to happen but, with the benefit of hindsight, we now know that a Soviet invasion of Western Europe or a nuclear exchange during the Cold War era would have required an equal number of unlikely events to come together but it didn't seem that way at the time, did it, and we planned for it accordingly.

Forstchen wrote his books as a warning of a threat he believes is being ignored by the powers that be (in the same way there was a lot of ‘war fiction' written in 1890's Britain to highlight the threat from Russia, France and Germany).

Social groupings will form in order to defend against roving gangs of predatory marauders.

That is why we'd get with the Amish, etc. And see how long we'd last …

I'd say good call on the Amish, in fact any agricultural community – though with agro-industrial monoculture, I'd possibly be a bit choosy. Also steer clear of anywhere with a particularly high dependence on groundwater.
On the development of societal groupings that will happen over time, but I'd suggest at least in the short term it ain't 'marauders' you'd have to worry about but basically large columns of increasingly desperate refugees (and probably masking groups of societies less principled members) – anywhere within a few days walk of a major metropolitan area will be in trouble. And frankly there are probably no good outcomes.

That's the scenario exactly, Rou – I live in a small town in a rural area which could, theoretically, make itself self-sufficient food-wise even in a low-tech way given time (but it would be a pretty miserable existence – remember the closing scenes in ‘Threads'?)

But I doubt we'd be given that time – within days we'd be overwhelmed by starving refugees from Sheffield, Leeds, Doncaster and all the other major conurbations within 10-20 miles – allow a week for the inhabitants to realise no organised help is coming, empty their larders, loot the local stores, then another 2-3 days (at 10-15 miles per day) for the refugees (and some organised gangs) to start their exodus.

Legion4, no offence taken whatsoever, it's an interesting discussion, and I suspect we have more in common than differences. I've served (a very long time ago) and both my lads have continued the tradition. While we wouldn't readily ‘roll over' under the circumstances I'm pragmatic about our chances in such a scenario – the diabetes would probably get me as soon as the insulin ran out, and I don't see them prioritising 60-somethings!

Yes, I agree … we are more alike than otherwise ! 👍 👍 And Thank You and your Sons for your service ! Truth be told at 63 and shortly turning 64 years plus on a number of meds from the VA docs. I'd do all I could to support my "clan". And with a replaced hip, I won't be going on any long marches. I'm sure I'd reach my expiration date sooner than later. ☠

Those books are worth reading

Will consider that a good recommendation. Thank you !

Sure we've gone way off the original post but that's what makes threads like this the best –

Certainly can be an informative discussion. With many POVs, experiences, etc. And most importantly no vitriol, derision, etc. Just an adult conversation … which a few years back was not always possible here.

I'd say good call on the Amish, in fact any agricultural community – though with agro-industrial monoculture,

Yes, my buddies know some Amish and do business with them. We thought that they would be a good bunch to link up with. As I said many of my friends are hunters, go fishing, outdoorsman, etc. So I think we'd be a good fit to link up with the Amish. As I said, their are only 15-20 minutes up the road. My skills, training and experience at an Infantryman would certainly be of some use in protecting the "clan".

I'd suggest at least in the short term it ain't 'marauders' you'd have to worry about but basically large columns of increasingly desperate refugees (and probably masking groups of societies less principled members)

Oh yes, that would be one of many of our first concerns. And in a crisis it always brings out some of the worst in society. E.g. look at all the riots over the Summer and Fall in the USA. Looting, burning, even some deaths, etc., really had nothing to do with what they were supposed to be protesting about AFAIK. Along with some anarchists would were up to no good. Another good reason my friends & I are well armed. You never know. And may times by the LEOs get there it will probably be too late. We don't want to take that chance … Would anybody ?

I live in a small town in a rural area which could, theoretically, make itself self-sufficient food-wise even in a low-tech way given time (but it would be a pretty miserable existence

Most likely it probably would not be anything most would be used to, no doubt. Better to thrive … but in this case it would be much closer to just surviving.

IMO having the ability to protect oneself and your "tribe" would certainly be a priority. That comes down to being well armed and know how to operate in tough situations.

The twist in the refugees-issue is that farming without mechanisation is pretty labour intensive – and some forms of farming remain so, but rely on migrant workers. Basically agricultural communities would need an injection of additional labour if mechanisation broke down and would have to come to some kind of accommodation on that – there would need to be a new cottar / farmhand class basically. A hard life for those utterly unused to it, but far from the ending Threads.

Probably the biggest discriminator in terms of survival will be those people who understand basic hygiene and those who get cholera! And who have the interpersonal skills to fit into a close knit agricultural community i.e. FIFO.

BBC did some interesting documentary series on historic farming Green Valley and the Victorian farm probably being the most relevant.
link

"As I said, their are only 15-20 minutes up the road."

By car, bicycle or on foot? Don't forget that EMP strike burned out 95% of all vehicular transport – but I suspect you already have a 1970's jeep parked out back, haven't you? 🙂

Well-armed is also a relative thing, of course. While there would be far fewer firearms available to law-abiding British citizens (and disproportionately more in the hands of the bad guys, for sure), there still wouldn't be the proliferation on both sides that you'd have in the USA.

Don't get me onto the subject of dodgy knees and hips!

The twist in the refugees-issue is that farming without mechanisation is pretty labour intensive – and some forms of farming remain so, but rely on migrant workers. Basically agricultural communities would need an injection of additional labour if mechanisation broke down and would have to come to some kind of accommodation on that – there would need to be a new cottar / farmhand class basically. A hard life for those utterly unused to it,

Agreed … And everyone in the "tribe" has to pull their own weight. In one way or another.

Probably the biggest discriminator in terms of survival will be those people who understand basic hygiene and those who get cholera!

No doubt, many who don't understand this will be rapidly gone.

By car, bicycle or on foot? Don't forget that EMP strike burned out 95% of all vehicular transport –

Oh yes, I know that, and yes it would take longer to walk than ride. Anything with any electrical components would not be of much use. So I will walk slowly … 😎 There are stables nearby too. I suspect someone with a few horses with come by pulling a cart or disabled car. I may be able to hitch a ride with them … 😁

but I suspect you already have a 1970's jeep parked out back, haven't you? 🙂

Well I'll admit yesterday I was driving a 2020 Jeep Cherokee around a bit! But other than that … everything else is classified … 😉

Well-armed is also a relative thing, of course. While there would be far fewer firearms available to law-abiding British citizens (and disproportionately more in the hands of the bad guys, for sure), there still wouldn't be the proliferation on both sides that you'd have in the USA.

Very true the "bad guys" in the USA are in many cases as well armed or better than some LEOs. And the same goes for some civilian gun owners as well. But many of my crew have AR-15s, high powered hunting rifles with scopes, etc., etc. Even bows and cross bows.

So the standard saying here is "When you outlaw guns only outlaws will have guns". Our idea Gun Control is accurately hitting at the "target", one round, one kill … ☠

Don't get me onto the subject of dodgy knees and hips!

You got that right !

"We were warriors once…"

Incredible to think it's 40 years since I was first shot at in anger, and thankfully over 20 years since the last time. And while Northern Ireland was a bit ‘hairy' sometimes, our last proper civil war was over 350 years ago, so I doubt I'll be around for the next one.

Without getting too political, seeing how people have coped (badly) with the pandemic, and knowing the disruption Brexit will cause in the next few weeks (I'm stocking up on staples, whisky and MREs just in case), let's hope that series of unfortunate incidents don't take place in my lifetime – or, preferably, not in my grandkids lifetime!

Oh, and you'd better grab one of those horses quickly – lots of meat on a horse…

"We were warriors once…"

and young …

Yes, I'm sure Northern Ireland must have bit very challenging. Glad you came back and can talk about. Must respect deserved IMO ! ✊👍

Without getting too political, seeing how people have coped (badly) with the pandemic, and knowing the disruption Brexit will cause in the next few weeks (I'm stocking up on staples, whisky and MREs just in case),

Yes generally most don't cope well with major disruptions in their life style. But yes, I've got some MREs on hand plus some other things, etc., just in case. My one buddy is stocking up like an incident may happen tomorrow. He's one of my crew that has decided to go "Amish" along me, if need be !

And yes horse meat has been eaten in the past. And in some places out West, a few places serve it instead beef !

Hopefully we won't have to worry about anything more than the Great Chinese COVID War of 2020. But on the other hand I could stand to lose a little weight … OK … a lot of weight … Bad time of year for that !

This was definitely not the year to give up alcohol and comfort eating!

Amen to that ! But I did break up with my girlfriend recently. Still not sure if that was a good move. 🤔 Or not …

Talking of an increased agricultural workforce…

It's reckoned that Britain's climate and geography can support, without any modern agricultural practices and technology, a population of approximately 6 million.

The population of the UK today is about 68 million…

Sounds like there may be a short fall … but that maybe the cases in many locations?