The Efficacy of Insurgency in Modern America – Part 1, by Just A Dad

Editor’s Introductory Note: Because of its length, the following essay will be presented in three parts. The footnotes can be found at the end of Part 3. – JWR

“Insurgency” as a word is relatively new in application. Where there is rule of law an insurgency is simply an act of rebellion against the current lawful authority. For the purposes of this essay, we will be looking at many different conflicts, some fall within this definition and others do not.

While this essay will not address every recorded rebellion, we will establish a timeline using significant rebellions or insurgent activity until current times. Additionally, we will address the efficacy of insurgency in the United States of America, specifically modern insurgency.

One of the first recorded rebellions occurred around 2700 B.C., it is known as The Seth rebellion of the 2nd Dynasty, in Ancient Egypt. (Newberry, 1922) At this time there is not much known about it, though there were major famines at the time which may have helped increase the potential for rebellion. From that time to the present-day, thousands of rebellions, insurgencies, and revolutions have taken place in every corner of the world against every form of government that has existed.

Since the focus of this essay is the United States of America as a nation and the efficacy of insurgency against it, we will focus instead on the various incidents that have occurred after the Revolutionary War that birthed this nation. Historically rebellions of any type include belligerents or insurgents fighting against a more powerful foe. The United States, as of 2018, has a standing combined military force numbering 1,119,003 individuals. This includes 471,990 U.S. Army personnel, 325,395 U.S. Navy personnel, and 321,618 U.S. Air Force personnel.

Within the U.S. military exists the largest most advanced air force, naval forces, and ground-based technical options. Though Russia and China both have significantly more tanks than the United States, superiority is maintained by virtue of the manned and unmanned air ability held by the United States military. Air superiority has in many instances been the deciding factor when it comes to conflicts since the advent of aircraft as a military asset. It should be noted that even with no air ability current insurgencies and “terrorist actions” in the Middle East as well as Eastern and Northern Africa we have seen insurgencies continue to grow.

What Constitutes Winning an Insurgency?

The use of guerrilla tactics and localized nature of the fighters have made it difficult to truly “win” any of these conflicts. The continued fluid nature of these conflicts as well as the lack of understanding by many in the United States has led our forces to be mired in endless and mostly fruitless attempts to police a population that is tired of war and of us. Philip Gordon writes, “Victory will come only when Washington succeeds in discrediting the terrorists’ ideology and undermining their support. These achievements, in turn, will require accepting that the terrorist threat can never be eradicated completely and that acting as though it can [be] will only make it worse.” (Gordon, 2007)

In a more recent article Hal Brands states, “Getting deeply involved in the Middle East ran the risk of making America the target of that radicalism and anger; it also ran the risk of distracting the United States from other areas where the prospects for constructive change seemed more promising.” (Brands, 2019) The understanding is that because of the glaring disparity in wealth, income, and social ability there is a large easily-guided grouping of persons that can be and are used regularly as cannon fodder by those desiring change for their own benefit. Certainly, there can be seen some benefits as a whole to increasing the educational opportunities, social and economic abilities of all individuals residing around the globe today. However, due in no small part to the highly radical behavior of religion applied in several key areas within the Middle East, these ideals championed in other places around the globe are decades from fruition in the Middle East.

Perception is Key

Why does this matter in the United States? And more to the point, why does what happens in the Middle East matter here, when discussing insurgency? It matters because of the perception of reduced equality as a value or the perception of loss of rights can be as much a driving factor for radicalism as religion can be. The term perception is used specifically due to the difficulty in measuring these values using currently available metrics. For instance, prior to 1968 one could walk into any hardware store in the United States and purchase a firearm. The only thing preventing it was whether the person purchasing had money or the person selling had a firearm. Most firearms types were readily available. Not only could one purchase firearms, but a plethora of destructive devices were readily available. Dynamite, blasting caps, and more were all readily available. [JWR Adds: In fact, up until 1934, machineguns could be bought without any restrictions.]

In addition to this, there existed what is now known as the Segregation Era in history books. This was an era when in many regions Black Americans were kept from mingling with White Americans. The severe nature of this ridiculous approach by some created antipathy in many. In fact, we are still to this day seeing the results of this despicable era of history in our nation. One could argue that these events are completely unrelated and there is no reason to include them in an essay about insurgency. It is, however, important to understand as much as possible when looking at driving motivations and factors in a nation that currently numbers 331,883,000 people and growing 0.71% per year there is a distinct need to understand the history of the country, regardless of the nature of it.

Popular Culture-Driven

Modern-day perception of everything in the United States and indeed much of the world is driven by whatever we see on whichever social media app we choose to absorb information from. Specifically, trends drive our current culture, which has resulted in some interesting results for society. For instance, October 2017 saw the advent of a “hashtag” titled MeToo. It was meant to shed light on what some believed to be a major issue of sexual harassment/ assault by men against women. This “movement” has spawned many minor movements as well. In the end, the result has been, an increase of false reports, a decrease in factual reports and the overwhelming idea that any woman who makes a report should be automatically believed, before facts or evidence is seen. Additionally, it has given rise to the idea that men are predators and women prey, cementing the false social understanding that women are victims by design, even though this is exactly the opposite of the initial reason for starting it. This movement has ensured that many men are now distrustful of women in the workplace as well as in private settings.

As an example of the ease with which people can be swayed from values and rights we have, this movement has excelled in this respect. The movement’s strongest supporters and initial advocates have themselves dismissed the calls for “evidence and proof” in some situations demanding the firing of alleged misogynists and rapists. In fact, when several women stepped forward casting aspersions against an incoming Supreme Court candidate, some of their testimonies and claims were deemed false, while others were seen to be inflated or in some cases came without any evidence. The reasons for their claims were later exposed to be an attempt to prevent his appointment to the highest court in the land. Unfortunately for the women involved the mess caused by the outright false accusations cast doubt on the others’ testimonies as well as the complete lack of any evidence relating to the possible crimes committed.

This is a perfect example of the current political climate and reality of the nature of contemporary American society. Extreme amounts of hype, massive emotional backlash, and no real change. Some would say that this alone is reason to believe that any attempted insurgency within the United States today would end almost as soon as it began. However, it is essential to understand other aspects of the possibility on insurgency. Who would be involved in an insurgency in the United States today? It would be better to look at who has the motive, means, and ability to engage in an active armed rebellion against what is arguably the most powerful and sophisticated military and armed police forces in the world today.

Not Always Violent

An insurgency requires combatants, but does not always take a violent form in every action, though some violence is necessary to call it an insurgency. “Insurgent warfare is characterized by a lack of front lines, sequenced battles, or campaigns; a protracted strategy, often lasting more than a decade; and unconventional military tactics, including guerrilla warfare, terrorism, or ethnic cleansing.” (“Guide to the Analysis of Insurgency”, 2012) United States doctrine prior to the attacks on 9/11 was as stated, “following the Vietnam War and through the remainder of the Cold War, the U.S. military establishment turned its back on insurgency, refusing to consider operations against insurgents as anything other than a “lesser-included case” for forces structured for and prepared to fight two major theater wars.” (Paul, et al., 2013) Post 9/11 there has been a resurgence in training as well as tactics specifically designed to negate insurgencies. The efficacy of these tactics and approaches is the source of much hand-wringing among many academics and individuals in the field to this day.

Within the current conflicts in the Middle East we have seen that some approaches have worked in some areas, and others, have had negative results. For instance: the drawdown of troops from 2008 to 2010 resulted in a resurgence in terrorist activity and ISIS/ISIL quickly grew in prominence taking back great swaths of Iraq and other bordering nations. Rules of Engagement (ROE) that coalition troops are held to have changed many times and in many cases have had a negative effect on the ability of these troops to continue an effective approach to reducing the insurgency. Where results have been seen is in the adopted approaches taken on the battlefield. Tactics have changed from set-piece warfare to a small unit approach utilizing overwhelming firepower. While this continues to be somewhat effective the core issue has been ignored leading to prolonged occupation by foreign troops in a foreign land. Historically, this rarely ends well for the occupier.

Fear As A Tool

In many cases, terrorism has been used by insurgents to gain beneficial arrangements from local populations. By using fear as a tool they have been able to retain control over localities. This is not the tool one would want to use in the United States. Rather, it would benefit the individuals looking to usurp federal control to look at simply engaging only federal troops/enforcers in a way that avoids local civilian casualties. Additionally, it would be necessary to provide goods and services that replace the ones offered by the government. An example would be gaining employment in local sheriff departments, public works, and other government agencies and build trust over time with the local population so that when an insurgency begins, they would already hold the trust of the locals. In contrast, any coming from the outside would need to gain that trust or require their use of quislings.

(To be continued tomorrow, in Part 2.)


  1. “In the end, the result has been, an increase of false reports, a decrease in factual reports and the overwhelming idea that any woman who makes a report should be automatically believed, before facts or evidence is seen.”

    Absolutely, unless they’re the “wrong sort” of woman accusing Those Who Can Do No Wrong. Just ask Tara Reid……

    “Additionally, it has given rise to the idea that men are predators and women prey, cementing the false social understanding that women are victims by design, even though this is exactly the opposite of the initial reason for starting it.”

    Yes, and this also leads to a decrease in factual reports. As does the disgusting perpetuation of “revenge porn” reports from women who are seemingly morning-after-regretful or have simply been scorned, which nonetheless can lead to the destruction of lives or careers based not on fact and conviction but on mere accusation. (And back to “many men are now distrustful of women in the workplace as well as in private settings” as you said.) Both factors make some survivors who had been previously considering telling their experiences, for the sole purpose of wanting to find their voices and find healing, now want to take it to the grave. Or so I’m told. From a friend, and etc and so forth.

    Great article so far — looking forward to the rest!

  2. Sounds like a liberal quote. “ Getting deeply involved in the Middle East ran the risk of making America the target of that radicalism and anger;”. We were totally engaged in WWI and WWII and enemies were eradicated. We were not totally engaged in North Korea nor Vietnam and they still stand as our enemy in communism.

      1. Agreed Muddykid. It’s not a right/left statement, just a statement of common-sense fact. If you get in people’s faces, they’re going to react. The US gets in people’s faces more than any other country in the world today and it ain’t about Freedom!

    1. Agreed.

      So far, I think the authors use ‘United States’ and ‘America’ interchangeably, inferring the goofballs in District Of Columbia are those definitions, and infer Americans (aka us ‘deplorables’) are part of that… and connected to that.

      I see similar mistakes by just about every frustrated individual globally, frustrated with the goofballs in District Of Columbia.
      Based on my experience, their frustration has nothing to do with us ‘deplorables’ in ‘fly-over country’ and outside the urban dis-reality.

      I am willing to bet the overseas enemies of the goofballs in District Of Columbia have a lot in common with us ‘deplorables’.
      In fact and in action, the goofballs in District Of Columbia consistently and continually prove they are the enemies of everything good and decent and just.

      Accordingly, I believe most of the global population is in active insurgency against the few dozen goofballs in District Of Columbia and their thousands of pencil-pushing minions.
      I see no way for District Of Columbia to survive this insurgency.

      I see no reason for District Of Columbia to exist.

      I think one thing and one thing only gives the goofballs in District Of Columbia the illusion of power — their control of TheMainStreamMedia.

      1. Marge,

        First, I appreciate all the feedback so far, some of it will be answered with the next 2 sections of the article. Yours, is very solid, and I wanted to respond.

        Yes- this is a solid understanding for certain. It is my belief and a very strongly held one, that cities regardless location are nothing more then giant live rat traps, for humans.

        While I have lived in cities, I am country born and bred.

        As for media, I would suggest it is a matter of whom the media supports, not that the media is controlled by politicians. If you track back investors in major media, China controls many monetarily- and China may be a trade partner, but they are no friend. Russia controls others, and Qatar and Saudi Arabia control/fund even more with a very few being controlled monetarily by 3 separate billionaire families in the USA.

        Disney for instance has large portions of their investments found in China. Disney controls Fox.

        1. To ad to this thought on the media,

          We typically think of resources as something we can hold and or consume. When we talk about a resource, that discussion also includes the supply-lines of those resources.

          Information is also a resource. The supply-line of information is interesting in several ways and includes all sorts of political aspects that are rarely discussed. Food for thought, and looking forward to the next two installments.

        2. Disney bought a significant amount of Fox (film studios, etc) but did not buy Fox news. Fox news was retained by Rupert Murdoch and remains independent of Disney.

    2. You did neither eradicate your enemies in WWI nor WWII, you neither eradicated the german, habsburgian, turkish, italian, japanese or russian people.
      Also you didn´t eradicate fascism or Imperialism and honestly at least in WWI you weren´t able to do anything of those things.
      Your most important military accomplishment in WWI was most likely triggering the Hindenburg Offensive.

      Trying to totally annihilate your enemies in Korea would´d most likely ended in WWIII especially after your assault on sowjet airfields

      1. ThoDan,

        Agreed that nothing has been eradicated in the context of WW1 or WW2.

        IMO, the most important accomplishment of WW1 was human’s beginning to use the air, rather than land and water.

          1. Too simple. Sending things through the air has a relationship with time. Furthermore, remote sensing, and the use of the cameras becomes much more prominent and interesting as an extension of human senses (line sight) during WW1.

  3. You did however nail the #me2 movement. My wife, who is Asian, said the real sexual harassment is from American women liberating themselves from the marriage bed. She’s correct- you just don’t see this many single men from all age categories walking around China.

    HR departments are overrun by females and female-biased policies to harm the family provider. Statistics demonstrate women do not support stay at home spouses with their equality.

      1. Agreed.

        However women are not allowed in Ground Combat and the special forces few females of today are only there after multiple attempts and then the military lowing the standards. Sad but true.

        I asked my father about sexual harassment policies when he was in the workplace from the 1950s – 1980s and he said “there were any sexual harassment or gender discrimination lawsuits, nor men be terminated at will (other than for gross incompetency) as today because there weren’t any women in the workforce when I was there.” Dad’s own words.

        We have about 85% male military today when it shifts to a majority of females as the white collar workforce of today, you’ll have lost families, patriarch fired, abortion, lawsuits, commanders relieved to allow less “toxic” gender (you know baby killing divorce mongers male hating lawsuit hungry less “toxic” gender – yeah that gender) to manage, and Of course lost wars forevermore. Our country will be over when women get a hold of our military men in uniform.

    1. Hello T of A. I hope you and your family are well. I watched that video with Lin wood this morning before I saw your post. Hes a good man and is fighting for us with all his might. Sadly I feel hes losing the fight. And President Trump is getting backstabbed by seemingly every new person he hires to replace the last backstabber. So sad and frustrating. Im praying with Mr Wood but like so many of us Im looking for someone to fight and wish I had the enemy in front of me to fight.

      1. Take Heart, WV Joe! All hope is not lost, although I understand exactly what you’ve said and see too that President Trump has been betrayed at nearly every turn… As Christian Believers, we understand the depth of what betrayal means through Jesus Our Lord, and must stand to protect others from it in every way we can.

        We should consider as well the great battles of history, including our own American Revolution, and what would have happened if the warriors of those times had been so disheartened that they had given up. We must all breathe deeply, and steel ourselves. We are much closer to victory than we might know, but we have not yet escaped the potential clutches of defeat.

        Please also take action. For anyone who needs a contact list, here you go.

        Each of the links below leads to a list of email addresses for the people who should hear from all of us now, not only the residents of these states, but from ALL of America. When illegal practices affect the election results in one state, EVERY AMERICAN who legally voted suffers disenfranchisement.

        AZ House eMails:
        AZ Senate eMails:
        GA House eMails:
        GA Senate eMails:
        MI House eMails:
        MI Senate eMails:
        NV House eMails:
        NV Senate eMails:
        PA House eMails:
        PA Senate eMails:
        WI House eMails:
        WI Senate eMails:

        Every person among us has a few minutes to give to the cause — the very cause for which many have given their lives. Let’s get to it!

      2. What did the war look like before the battle of Trenton?

        One of the many factors that led to that victory was unity. Many leaders, field commanders, and troops could have jumped ship. Keep working together.

        Carry on

  4. If insurgency is rebellion against a current LAWFUL AUTHORITY, wouldn’t a patriotic action against an unlawful authority actually be a counter-insurgency? In the case of a Republic, isn’t the “lawful authority” held by the people? I’m asking for a friend.

    1. That is my understanding. The groups trying to bring down a lawful government, or groups within a government taking unlawful action, would be examples of insurgencies. Groups trying to preserve or restore that lawful government would be counter insurgencies.

  5. Different societies ´ve valued and do value different things.
    What today is a very minor concern at best or worst, could or would´ve caused open rebellion – revolution and bloody battles in the streets and i don´t mean relatively tame riots, i mean battle in the military sense and things today would be considered essential by some of us were considered unworthy of notice then and now.

    Testimony needs evidence to be considered false, i´ven´t seen any evidence worth consideration of any accusation of these woman, i don´t say they´re true or without error but no proof they could be considered false.

    I´ve seen here and elsewhere men who would accuse a woman who complain over sexual assault, moobing or else the culprit and neither the male offender nor the male superior who tolerates that or protects him the culprit.

    Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

    The Moment in US “history” when men were the “sole breadwinner” honestly isn´t even a blink for a mayfly, even in most of your “history” women did participate in the breadwinning
    Historically most men would´ve been naked, without women of their family making their clothes starting from scratch.
    Weaving is a classical eyample for it, in antiquity it was a major part of a woman´s work to weave the fabric for their families clothes.

    1. “Testimony needs evidence to be considered false, i´ven´t seen any evidence worth consideration of any accusation of these woman, i don´t say they´re true or without error but no proof they could be considered false.”

      That statement is pretty much opposite of the concept of innocent until proven guilty which our legal system is based upon. Testimony typically needs corroborating evidence to be treated as true. The burden of proof is on the accuser not on the accused.

      Even since ancient times, the testimony of a single witness is considered suspect. It is recorded in the Bible that two or three witnesses were required to successfully accuse someone in court. I believe numerous other examples of this can be found concept both ancient and modern.

      I believe you are from/in Germany if memory serves me? Being a Western nation, I strongly doubt a German court would convict someone of anything on the testimony of a single person without some other corroborating evidence. If that is not the case, although I would love to visit parts of that beautiful country, I doubt I would ever step foot on that soil.

    2. I would agree with you, certainly there is a very good reason why two parent homes, specifically those with one parent at home for kids, are better than single parent homes. In criminal justice, my specific educational and experiential area of work until disability, the data supports this approach. What the data does not support is the idea that one is better or worse, regardless reasoning.

      Families need fathers and mothers first, to raise good children who produce instead of take. This is a simple, realistic and factually based reality. My children have been raised shooting, cooking, gardening, hunting, sewing etc ., I taught them most of these things myself. A well rounded education is not just whatever new version of math exists. It is a well rounded education, that helps them avoid the trap of endless fear because we choose to avoid things we are uncomfortable with and or do not understand.

      Weaving is an amazing art, and one I have barely touched but would absolutely love to learn, and help my children learn!

      1. Depends on the parents, there´re “parents” children are better of without – much better and there´re “parents” who care more for their wallets than their children.

        Both parents may´ve a greater chance of success, but i know of enough single parents nobody could accuse them of not doing a very fine Job of raising their kids(like my grandma) and some even care for their disabled spouse at the same time.

        Which is exactly the reason i warn the single breadwinner model, it wasn´t much fun for my grandma to raise my mother and aunt without a profession and so money was short.

    3. “…“Testimony needs evidence to be considered false….”

      ThoDan, I feel I must correct your egregious misunderstanding of American law. The burden of proof is ALWAYS upon the accuser. The accuser must not only testify, with that testimony being entirely dependent upon the perceived truthfulness and veracity of the alleged victim, but the accuser must also provide EVIDENCE to back up their claim. And then the prosecutor must prove BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that a crime was committed if in a criminal prosecution, or prove BY A FAIR PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE that sexual harassment occurred if a civil prosecution using the REASONABLY PRUDENT PERSON standard.

      Now sometimes that evidence may be a series of actions — a woman is raped, she goes home and tells her best friend, the friend convinces her to call the police, the police gather evidence (photograph bruises, collect clothing, witness testimony, examine the scene, etc.) and have a doctor collect a rape kit for DNA evidence. There will often be holes in the victim’s story — no other witnesses — no DNA because the assailant wore a condom — etc. But if the victim goes through the “normal” procedure and ACTS like a rape victim, they will still often prevail in court, but the defense attorney will make much of any holes.

      On the other hand, a woman who FAILS to report a sexual assault and go through that process will immediately be suspect. A woman who goes home, takes a shower, washes her clothing, and waits 3 days to report a rape has a much less chance of being believed UNLESS there are witnesses.

      The same occurs with the civil infarction of “sexual harassment” in the workplace.

      But in NO CASE, in the history of legal jurisprudence in this country, ever, can a victim come forward 30 years after the fact and, having never done a single one of the actions normally associated with a rape victim, can an accuser come forward 30 years after the fact and expect anyone to believe her.

      I work with battered and abused women. Since the Kavanaugh hearings, I absolutely CANNOT get an authority — not the police — not the district attorney — not a judge — and not a jury — to “believe women.” ALL rape victims are now, by extension, no matter HOW much evidence there is, even DNA evidence, are now labeled liars. Nothing has done more harm to women than the #MeToo movement.

  6. I have often thought how fortunate it would have been if good German citizens and especially Jewish citizens had assassinated Hitler in the 30’s. In retrospect it probably would have required his assassination and many of his devoted followers assassination. I know! Assassination is a dirty word and I agree. But WW II and 50 million people killed is a pretty dirty fact to compare it with. If I had been giving advice to the few good German citizens I would have advised no (as in zero) conspiring with even one other person. Two or more people conspiring to commit an act against their oppressors is sure to be found out. Act independently. And to act locally or nationally, many of those local leaders that supported Hitler allowed and supported his rise to power. I would also have advised them to be prepared to be caught and if arrested or confronted to then become completely passive. The tendency is to go out with a bang but that can be a mistake for the goal of taking your country back because the people you fight (in those early stages) would be the people that your fellow citizens believe are there to protect them. For example most people are outraged that Antifa and BLM attacked the police. In Germany in the 30’s it wasn’t difficult to know who the would be Nazi’s were and 10,000 individual German patriots could have acted each independently (which would make it difficult for the authorities to discover) and prevented the horror of Nazi Germany and saved millions of lives. Too bad it didn’t happen and the world was doomed to face the results of a country stolen by tyranny.

    1. Look in a few history books!

      There were assassination attempts on Hitler and plans to assassinate him or remove him from power.

      Georg Elsser is the first i recall and the most ironic is the one, were allied air bombardment destroyed the equipment for the sucidical explosive attempt, the last one was 20 Jul.
      There were many that couldn´t brought to bear because Hitler didn´t show up and the Kreisauer Circle weren´t found out before 20 of July, neither were many other attempts and plans.

  7. I hate Hollywood but good quote from Body of Lies,
    “… Our enemy has realized that they are fighting guys from the future. Now, ahem, it is brilliant as it is infuriating. If you live like it’s the past, and you behave like it’s the past, then guys from the future find it very hard to see you…..”

    1. P.S.- I have emailed the President urging him to VETO this super-porkulus bill, I urge you all to do the same, and to email or call your senators and urge them NOT to vote for this bloated dishonest bill. This bill is a slap-in-the-face to all Americans who are hurting financially.

  8. For all and again, thank you!

    This was originally penned this article in January, before the world was aware of this ChinaFlu and the like. I wrote it because, I saw what is and will happen. Regardless our desires, what we had, is no more. What we can have, is what we should push towards. *and at no point do I believe that armed insurrection is a wise choice, rather, I wrote it in response to several friends asking questions* they enjoyed, assisted with minor edits and here it is!

  9. “In many cases, terrorism has been used by insurgents to gain beneficial arrangements from local populations. By using fear as a tool they have been able to retain control over localities. This is not the tool one would want to use in the United States. Rather, it would benefit the individuals looking to usurp federal control to look at simply engaging only federal troops/enforcers in a way that avoids local civilian casualties. Additionally, it would be necessary to provide goods and services that replace the ones offered by the government. ”

    This paragraph aligns with the description in War of the Flea of how to wage a successful guerrilla war. Victory is wining the hearts and minds of the people, more so than winning a shooting war. Shooting battles, carefully selected by the guerrillas, may be necessary, but even then the goal is to show the lack of efficacy of the dominating power, further building the esteem the populace has of the insurgency.

    Sadly, BLM and antifa seem to understand this and are making inroads in this way in some communities. Non-socialist insurgents really do need to take this advice to heart.

    Thanks for a great article. I’m very much looking forward to the rest of the series.

  10. The author is factually incorrect with regard to the United States standing combined military force. He leaves out the U.S. Marine Corps (~180,958), the newly formed U.S. Space Force (~16,000), and the U.S. Coast Guard – nominally assigned to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) but transferrable to the Department of Defense – U.S. Navy (~40,992). In addition, there are also Reserve forces in all the services and the Army has the National Guard as well. In the post-Vietnam era force, key capabilities are only in the reserves. In addition, when we were actively fighting two insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan (2009/10) guard and reserve units were absolutely essential to maintain “depth to dwell” ratios as the Army and Marine Corps were stretched pretty thin maintaining commitments in Iraq (and its drawdown) while simultaneously building up for the “surge” in Afghanistan. Either way the line is so blurred, that when contingencies arise outside of “steady state” deployments, most operations frequently request and get the authorization to use reserves.

  11. Wow. This is a lot to take in.

    It is interesting timing. I spent all of yesterday in the car with my son and my son in law. My son, a Marine, was granted leave for Christmas and my son in law, an Army/Nat Guard Vet and I went to pick him up.

    We spent much of the car ride home discussing the state of things in the country right now. Hmmm. Curious to get their take on all of this.

    One note… On the whole #meto subject and it’s impact on young men…

    When my son finished his mos training and was assigned a unit, my SIL, a few months back from Kuwait, had these parting words to his brother…”if there’s girls in your unit stay away from them. They’re not your friend”. And this to a 22 year old who’s willing to walk around a Marine base wearing a purity ring! His answer? “Yeah. I know”.

    How sad.

    Frankly, this all gets overwhelming to me. My plan this week is simple… I am just focusing on home, family and Christmas. I think we all know that peaceful time together as a family is not guaranteed to last and I need to soak up all that I can.

    I am cooking furiously. I have two more Marines coming that couldn’t get home for Christmas and a nurse I work with that was uninvited by her family (because of Covid fears..they didn’t want to be near her). My meal stretching is about to be tested!

    I’ll embrace reality again next week.

    Much Love and a blessed Christmas everyone.

  12. Impressive bit of research. I always find more meaning and information in a work that has been well thought out, and studied. Am very much looking forward to the following installments.
    It is painfully obvious that “public education”, has been specifically geared to undermine, and even to erase the much needed lessons of history. Ours (USA), and that of all societies preceding us. Having been educated from 1957 to 1968, I was taught a great deal (albeit “influenced” even in those days), about American history, and that of Western Civilization. What I was taught wet a fervent desire within me to search and study all I could access, which was only a dribble compared to what is available in this time. I am distressed and brokenhearted by the fruits of the “education” offered currently, and am fully convinced it is aimed at the “fundamental changing” of the America that we have fought and labored for.
    Works, such as yours herein, will… I am hopeful, offer understanding and even guidance to all who are looking for the better way.
    Masterful work, son, kudos…..and keep rockin’.

Comments are closed.