|
Perfectly Safe posted:We don't need to labour the point here. The feds have take this position for reasons which I think you understand. yeah, they're gutless wonders that don't enforce the law unless their target is unarmed quote:Given their original numbers, almost completely insignificant. insignificant numbers, and yet too dangerous to do anything about them. ok then quote:You're wearing me out here. That's a siege. If you blockade to prevent passage of supplies and people with the intent of forcing the people inside to surrender due to the various discomforts and dangers related to not being able to get supplies or move around, primarily thirst, starvation and lack of medical treatment. ...that's a siege. technically a blockade is different than a siege in that it deals with a region instead of a fortress or city. since you want to play pedantic word games. and yes i think if this place had been blockaded instead of left alone this would've been over already
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 11:18 |
|
|
Perfectly Safe posted:Ok, we just have different goals in mind. There's no need for anyone to die here, I would prefer that nobody did, and blockading is estimated to cost upwards of a million dollars per day, so it would have to be a short siege if you specifically wanted to save money. It seems likely to me that other militia groups would turn up were blockades put in place. I do not give one single, solitary poo poo about monetary costs. It could cost a quarter billion per day and I still wouldn't care. Nor does keeping these people from receding supplies and support necessitate violence, but if it does, that's entirely on the terrorist's hands. Look up the page to see an example of where sieging a group similar to this didn't end to death if you don't believe me. And if you're so concerned about saving lives, what are you going to do when these assholes kill somebody for the attention they want? Just pretend that nothing could have been done to prevent it? Well little Timmy got a few rounds in the head by the occupiers but it would have been prohibitively expensive to have stopped it so I guess that's just the trade-off for not having to spend a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a percent of the nation's budget.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:06
|
|
|
Cantorsdust posted:you look weak Uh I've said multiple times in here that my beef isn't that these guys aren't being rolled on, or blockaded or that I'm not being updated on the FBI's tactics. I understand the value of not giving them the response they want and that the govt would want their plans to be a bit inscrutable to the militants. But that doesn't mean I'm going to make up excuses for them on the very valid question of: why aren't they doing even the bare minimum to discourage them from being there? Or curb their broadcasts asking for backup and supplies? I'm open to the idea that there is an answer, no one here has given me a compelling one yet. The risk of "starting another waco" should not be a magic spell that forces law enforcement to retreat. Frankly, if it was me in charge, I'd be more concerned about the millions of young angry people who spent a summer protesting about issues of life and death looking at this thing entering week two and thinking "yeah ok but if I'm 12 and dumb at a park official policy now says I get .4 seconds before being justifiably executed". Rightly or wrongly that's just as valid of a PR battle as not letting ammon bundy say "see, they turned off the power, they're out to get us". And not only that, its one you can win. Right now Ammon Bundy and crew aren't being touched and they're still telling reporters they expect black helicopters, tanks and HALO jumping commandos (not kidding, see the Willamette story). They're going to cry no matter what. At least turn the loving power off and see if anyone is too lazy to run a generator. They forgot to pack food to a years long occupation, its not a bad bet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:09
|
|
|
Intel&Sebastian posted:I'm sure the las vegas shooting victims, town of Burns and the next town to host shootypalooza are thrilled. They took over an empty building at gunpoint? Pointed at who, there's nothing to point them at. Well, maybe the walls, and I'm sure those walls quaked with fear. Might as well say they stormed an empty field in buttfuck nowhere.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:12
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Good. It's better for them to come out and publicly associate with this stuff now, rather than sitting at home watching it on TV and keeping their radical views secret until their violent attack is ready to be launched. I agree that it's good as long as they capture everyone who has congregated there at the end of this. As it stands I don't have any faith that the feds are even keeping track of who is there.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:14
|
|
|
Intel&Sebastian posted:I'm sure the las vegas shooting victims, town of Burns and the next town to host shootypalooza are thrilled. I'm not talking about the Bundy ranch standoff, friend
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:20
|
|
|
Intel&Sebastian posted:I've said multiple times in here that my beef isn't that these guys aren't being rolled on, or blockaded or that I'm not being updated on the FBI's tactics. I understand the value of not giving them the response they want and that the govt would want their plans to be a bit inscrutable to the militants. Michael Brown isn't a valid comparator, and to the extent that others make the comparison anyways there's not anything the feds can do. The feds aren't local or state police, and their ability to directly regulate state/local law enforcement action is actually more limited than you might think. The feds can't shut off the power without cutting it to neighboring farms, which gives the Bundys more rapport with the local community. Curbing broadcasts would be very difficult to do without also physically besieging the building.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
Just to confirm, the person who has literally led a successful siege to take down radical militants says that this strategy is not required to handle the current situation, and you disagree with him, and are using his example as an argument in favor of your point of view.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:I'm not talking about the Bundy ranch standoff, friend The two events really can't be separated, friend. This is an escalation from the same group of people.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
McDowell posted:The two events really can't be separated, friend. This is an escalation from the same group of people. Hi, you're not following the conversation at all. The radical religious sect that Coulson previously handled, and is a huge point in his favor for credibility, was not the Bundy standoff, as the previous poster believed it was. That one ended in what everyone considers to be a good result. SedanChair posted:I agree that it's good as long as they capture everyone who has congregated there at the end of this. As it stands I don't have any faith that the feds are even keeping track of who is there.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:27
|
|
|
Condiv posted:yeah, they're gutless wonders that don't enforce the law unless their target is unarmed Condiv posted:insignificant numbers, and yet too dangerous to do anything about them. ok then No, insignificant in terms of inspiring others. If they have inspired a handful of people then that's really insignificant given their original goals. I mean, that was your point, right? Do you even remember, or are you just locked into "lol, yeah, right" in response to everything? Condiv posted:technically a blockade is different than a siege in that it deals with a region instead of a fortress or city. since you want to play pedantic word games. Who What Now posted:I do not give one single, solitary poo poo about monetary costs. It could cost a quarter billion per day and I still wouldn't care. Nor does keeping these people from receding supplies and support necessitate violence, but if it does, that's entirely on the terrorist's hands. Look up the page to see an example of where sieging a group similar to this didn't end to death if you don't believe me. Who What Now posted:And if you're so concerned about saving lives, what are you going to do when these assholes kill somebody for the attention they want? Just pretend that nothing could have been done to prevent it? Well little Timmy got a few rounds in the head by the occupiers but it would have been prohibitively expensive to have stopped it so I guess that's just the trade-off for not having to spend a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a percent of the nation's budget. What's to stop any of militias in the US from shooting someone to get the attention that they want? As far as I understand it, the FBI and local law enforcement are pursuing the courses of action that they are in order to reduce the chance of someone getting killed. I pretty much agree with what I think their strategy is. Throwing "what if the militia does this?" out there when there's no indication that they're going to do anything of the kind isn't very useful.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:28
|
|
|
So serious question, why haven't things like LRAD been used against them? Just roll up a vehicle with one of those and watch them disperse, and it would be hard to frame it as "oppression by big government" since it's like 1-2 vehicles tops.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:29
|
|
|
A Winner is Jew posted:So serious question, why haven't things like LRAD been used against them? Because that's literally what was done at Waco. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_siege#Siege quote:As the siege wore on, two factions developed within the FBI,[22] one believing negotiation to be the answer, the other, force. Increasingly aggressive techniques were used to try to force the Branch Davidians out (for instance, sleep deprivation of the inhabitants by means of all-night broadcasts of recordings of jet planes, pop music, chanting, and the screams of rabbits being slaughtered).
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:32
|
|
|
A Winner is Jew posted:Just roll up a vehicle with one of those and watch them disperse, and it would be hard to frame it as "oppression by big government" since it's like 1-2 vehicles tops. yes, if we only use 1 pain ray truck to light their skin on fire that is small government and people will be cool with it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:32
|
|
|
Perfectly Safe posted:You just presented an argument based on cost. All I said was that doing something that was more expensive and counterproductive doesn't make any sense. I never presented an argument about costs. You, in fact, brought it up and then I mocked, and continue to mock, that position for being complete bullshit that no one actually cares about. It's not an argument brought about in good faith because you don't care about the costs in any other situation. quote:What's to stop any of militias in the US from shooting someone to get the attention that they want? The threat of there being consequences for doing so. And right now the occupiers would be absolutely justified in thinking there would be none.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:35
|
|
|
Condiv posted:i don't think they'll conquer the country, but further violence? yeah that's a very real concern. and no one's asking for them to be utterly crushed, just for them to be arrested and made to answer for their crimes. guess that's just too much to ask huh? FBI investigations of centralized, organized militia groups typically take two years or more. These yahoos are neither centralized nor organized, so it'll take longer. Rushing it is a good way to get the charges dismissed and the case thrown out by a judge, given the extremely troublesome and inconvenient precedents set by previous attempted militia prosecutions. Arresting them all on the spot only for a judge to knock it all down to minor misdemeanors is approximately a thousand times worse than letting them roam free for a while would be. Even a cursory reading of the outcome of the Hutaree case explains exactly why the FBI are being so timid about it - they want a case that goes well beyond merely "ironclad", and they're willing to wait as long as it takes to build one. Intel&Sebastian posted:But that doesn't mean I'm going to make up excuses for them on the very valid question of: why aren't they doing even the bare minimum to discourage them from being there? Or curb their broadcasts asking for backup and supplies? Because the FBI doesn't want to discourage them from being there. If they want to go out and commit crimes without actually physically harming anyone, that is in fact super convenient for the FBI - it means that these guys are out there creating plenty of criminal activities and property damage that can be used against them later, it means that the radicals are coming out in public to openly announce their beliefs and indicating through their actions exactly how far they're willing to go (which makes it a lot easier for the FBI to identify potential threats than if they're sitting at home keeping their plans secret for fear of armed government reprisal), and more. Besides, the chances of the situation here escalating drop with every passing day; better to leave this as a safe honeypot until it burns out on its own. After a judge smacked them down in Hutaree for prosecuting people based on "mere words", the FBI must be salivating at the thought of all the actual actions they're going to be able to bring to a judge this time. Before you get your hopes up, though, let me assure you that any prosecution based on this occupation won't be soon. First they'll be going through every inch of this place, cataloging every scuff or scratch on a piece of government equipment and comparing it against undercover agents' notes to determine who to blame it on. Everybody who showed up within the first three days is going to get investigated carefully and deeply (many were already on the FBI's radar) and watched for future association with anti-government groups, or possibly even targeted by stings. And if Bundy tries to parlay this together into an organized group that continues to exist after the occupation ends, then the FBI agent who responds to reporters' questions is going to have the damndest time trying to keep the gigantic grin off his face as he says "no comment" over and over and refuses to confirm or deny the existence of an investigation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:35
|
|
|
Literally anything the feds do, including nothing whatsoever, will be framed as big government oppression.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
SocketWrench posted:They took over an empty building at gunpoint? Pointed at who, there's nothing to point them at. Well, maybe the walls, and I'm sure those walls quaked with fear. Might as well say they stormed an empty field in buttfuck nowhere. Waco it ain't but don't pretend this would be the same situation if the Paiute tribe stormed the place with no guns. Also keep in mind they have children mixed in with armed men who told newspapers slavery never happened and that they honestly expect an attack at any moment, they're in danger no matter how patriotic and heroic these guys are.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
oh goody, the same hilarious stream as yesterday goes live again today at 2PM. person in the chat is talking about how this whole thing is a honeypot to get militia to go up there so the government can kill as many as possible. i hope that's the narrative that spreads edit: Should have included it www.youtube.com/watch?v=75bJlvQ7qM0 theflyingorc fucked around with this message at 18:40 on Jan 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:37
|
|
|
The problem with Waco was not necessarily the siege itself, although it didn't help. David Koresh wasn't like these guys in that he did not go around brandishing weapons in public, nor did an armed retinue follow him around. There was no reason not to just swoop him up one day when he went into town. Instead the notoriously incompetent (at everything) ATF decided to go for the glamour and conducted a moronic Keystone Kops raid. And then the final raid on the compound was just a debacle.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:37
|
|
|
So for those who want an aggressive approach to the situation, If this becomes a blood bath and innocent people end up dying what will be your responses? I'm assuming that police brutality will be a main topic point of this ends in a firefight.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:41
|
|
|
^ Good riddance to bad rubbish. There is no innocence, only degrees of guilt.theflyingorc posted:Hi, you're not following the conversation at all. You're right, I'm just trolling
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:41
|
|
|
Pope Guilty posted:Literally anything the feds do, including nothing whatsoever, will be framed as big government oppression. Yeah this. That the feds can use less than lethal force like LRAD and stuff to vacate them also means that there won't be martyrs to rally around like Waco and Ruby Ridge.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:41
|
|
|
LeoMarr posted:So for those who want an aggressive approach to the situation, If this becomes a blood bath and innocent people end up dying what will be your responses? I'm assuming that police brutality will be a main topic point of this ends in a firefight. Killing armed aggressors has never been a definition of "police brutality."
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:43
|
|
|
kartikeya posted:This is the problem. And meanwhile, people are being literally terrorized in the US of A, white people even, and no one's standing in the terrorists' way. "Nobody is being stalked or terrorized by the militiamen in Oregon." -idiot goons Intel&Sebastian posted:Frankly, if it was me in charge, I'd be more concerned about the millions of young angry people who spent a summer protesting about issues of life and death looking at this thing entering week two and thinking "yeah ok but if I'm 12 and dumb at a park official policy now says I get .4 seconds before being justifiably executed". Just be glad those millions of angry young people were too dumb/scared to arm themselves. Though the NYPD probably furiously masturbated to the idea of OWS being armed so that they could go in guns blazing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:43
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:The problem with Waco was not necessarily the siege itself, although it didn't help. David Koresh wasn't like these guys in that he did not go around brandishing weapons in public, nor did an armed retinue follow him around. There was no reason not to just swoop him up one day when he went into town. Instead the notoriously incompetent (at everything) ATF decided to go for the glamour and conducted a moronic Keystone Kops raid. And then the final raid on the compound was just a debacle. lawyers argued afterward that the sleep deprevation added to Koresh's extremism and irrational decision making. i'm not sure it would have that kind of effect on the oregon protestors, but the FBI reeeeaaaalllly doesn't want to do things that are going to draw parallels in the media
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:43
|
|
|
LeoMarr posted:So for those who want an aggressive approach to the situation, If this becomes a blood bath and innocent people end up dying what will be your responses? I'm assuming that police brutality will be a main topic point of this ends in a firefight. Idiots are dead and I won't shed a tear for them because it would be a waste of my valuable time. Also, the only people in that compound that are innocent are the kids... so aim high?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:43
|
|
|
LeoMarr posted:So for those who want an aggressive approach to the situation, If this becomes a blood bath and innocent people end up dying what will be your responses? I'm assuming that police brutality will be a main topic point of this ends in a firefight. So for those who want the government to do nothing to impede these people, if this escalated to the occupiers shooting a half a dozen cops what will be your responses? I'm assuming that they should have been contained and arrested prior to that point will be a main topic point if this ends in murder.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:44
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:So for those who want the government to do nothing to impede these people, if this escalated to the occupiers shooting a half a dozen cops what will be your responses? I'm assuming that they should have been contained and arrested prior to that point will be a main topic point if this ends in murder. If I check your post history, will I find that you supported the invasion of Iraq? Outcomes are not certain. It appears to all authorities involved that a half dozen dead are more likely to occur from an armed response than from the current course of action.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:So for those who want the government to do nothing to impede these people, if this escalated to the occupiers shooting a half a dozen cops what will be your responses? I'm assuming that they should have been contained and arrested prior to that point will be a main topic point if this ends in murder. How would it escalate to that point if the cops are doing everything in their power to deescalate?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:46
|
|
|
Can the cops just get some artillery and shell the hell out of that place? Or if they don't want to damage the precious woodland, they could just hose it down with a few hours of M2HB fire.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:47
|
|
|
Discussions going fast so if anyone actually wants a response desperately let me know. Flyingorc, sorry I got whatever youre referring to wrong. I still don't see the value in this strategy (although i apprecitae people explainging it better) and would be more pissed if the feds were dealing with something other than idiots. As I said about michael brown and tamir rice, rightly or wrongly (as in, no this isn't a fair comparison BUT) people perceive the difference and internalize it. The US doesn't actually operate via mob rule and super sherrifs either but that didn't stop these guys from believing it and acting. The various differences and reasons don't really matter to someone who knows they receive very different treatment from their local police. It pisses me off and I do consider and acknowledge the difference. I can't even imagine being a black teen in Louisiana watching this go down.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:47
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:If I check your post history, will I find that you supported the invasion of Iraq? But people who flaunt the authority of the state deserve a brutal death! And so do cops because they're literally all inhuman monsters! Don't you see, an armed raid is win/win/win! 
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:50
|
|
|
I mean really the problem isn't the rate of people who are brutally killed, the problem is that we're not brutally killing the right people
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:51
|
|
|
^^^^^^^ Al! posted:How would it escalate to that point if the cops are doing everything in their power to deescalate? Why would a violent and unhinged group who feel emboldened by their cowing of the government do more outrageous things in an attempt to get the attention and responses that they want? Well golly loving gee that's a really doozy of a headscratcher right there.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:52
|
|
|
"Because they're crazy" isn't an answer.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:55
|
|
|
LeoMarr posted:So for those who want an aggressive approach to the situation, If this becomes a blood bath and innocent people end up dying what will be your responses? I'll go on fox news with their facebook pictures and declare them no angels.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:57
|
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:I mean really the problem isn't the rate of people who are brutally killed, the problem is that we're not brutally killing the right people I know this was suppose to be sarcasm but it's actually spot on. If lower class black men won't be treated as middle class white men by the justice system then middle class white men really should be treated as lower class black men.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:57
|
|
|
This continues to be the dumbest argument and not an inch of progress has been made on it in the past week. It doesn't help that new posters keep showing up to say the same poo poo that was posted days ago. Meanwhile Ammon Bundy has a message for the community: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_Z731ALMw8 Stay strong against those federal occupiers who are highly intimidating you, fellow patriots
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 18:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 11:18 |
|
|
theflyingorc posted:lawyers argued afterward that the sleep deprevation added to Koresh's extremism and irrational decision making. i'm not sure it would have that kind of effect on the oregon protestors, but the FBI reeeeaaaalllly doesn't want to do things that are going to draw parallels in the media LOL the media isn't going to draw meaningful comparisons with anything that happened 20 years ago, ever. If that happened we would probably have a more meaningful civic discourse in this country.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 19:00
|
|