|
Intel&Sebastian posted:I disagree with the premise here. And if that's the rub, then sorry. No, seriously, you think that a dozen deaths and the resulting fallout would have been preferable to the town being uneasy for 3 weeks? (and it's really obvious that deaths of that sort would have caused multiple towns to have severe or worse situations to Burns) You're correct that I can't PROVE that that's stupid. It does, however, give me complete confidence in not treating any other thing you say as being worthwhile.
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 21:22 |
|
|
theflyingorc posted:There was no significant threat to anyone on the reserve UNLESS the FBI went in. What would have happened, the kids were no more threatened than I was when I went to scout camp. So its a high risk of 12 bodies but only if the fortified compound of armed men who constantly complain that the feds are minutes away from raiding them suspect the feds of raiding them? Other than that its a scouts camp?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
I don't think its a big stretch to say that it kind of took too long for the FBI to do something, but when it finally did something it went well. You can still criticize the FBI for: 1. Not cutting off power right away 2. Allowing supplies to move freely in and out I realize that 2 may have helped eventually, with the belief by the Bundy crew they would get away with going wherever they pleased, but it could have been done sooner. edit: while the point was made that the false sense of security the Bundy crew had that they could go wherever helped the FBI to capture them all at once, certainly the FBI could have had the resources available to capture them separately. Though, this may be somewhat of a fuzzy memory on my part because my impression was that when they were captured, it was the first time they were all together, but not necessarily the first time they were all away from the compound at once. Doctor Butts fucked around with this message at 21:16 on Feb 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
Intel&Sebastian posted:So its a high risk of 12 bodies but only if the fortified compound of armed men who constantly complain that the feds are minutes away from raiding them suspect the feds of raiding them? Other than that its a scouts camp? can you read
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:No, seriously, you think that a dozen deaths and the resulting fallout would have been preferable to the town being uneasy for 3 weeks? (and it's really obvious that deaths of that sort would have caused multiple towns to have severe or worse situations to Burns) I disagree that your pile of bodies is such a sure thing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
lmao this is my neighborhood. I'm probably going to get murdered by militants this weekend. Be free tarp ghost.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:17
|
|
|
Intel&Sebastian posted:I disagree that your pile of bodies is such a sure thing. ....why. what do you think would have happened
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:can you read Yes. I read you, in two posts, describe malheur as a likely bloodbath if the FBI looked aggressive to the occupiers or moved in. Then describe the situation without feds as safe as a scouts camp. I'm asking how you square the two with the fact that the occupiers would not shut up about the feds being right around the corner. The guy in charge of security was quoted by willamette week saying he expected commandos to HALO jump on them at any time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:No, seriously, you think that a dozen deaths and the resulting fallout would have been preferable to the town being uneasy for 3 weeks? (and it's really obvious that deaths of that sort would have caused multiple towns to have severe or worse situations to Burns) Oh my god this is so loving dumb. Please just stop and save yourself further embarrassment.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:20
|
|
|
.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:22
|
|
|
Intel&Sebastian posted:Yes. I read you, in two posts, describe malheur as a likely bloodbath if the FBI looked aggressive to the occupiers or moved in. Then describe the situation without feds as safe as a scouts camp. The freedom of movement was necessary to make the snatch on the leadership. The bloodbath is if they went in during a raid. That's two different things. Either one is a worse result than what happened.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:23
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:....why. what do you think would have happened In the event of what? A raid? Roadblocks? Communcations cut off? Sending in undercovers? Some kind of swat raid? Probably bad, but there would be a lot more surrender than bodies Roadblocks? I've always doubted that this would have caused some horrorshow, said as much before Comms - would have at least slowed the propaganda flowing out of the place, not a big fan of the idea that its better to let them do that and rack up charges, but won't say definitely that it was wrong. Undercover agents - idk, they might have done this and it may have helped.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:25
|
|
|
I think the biggest problem with the argument that this was the only safe / best option is that it assumes there would have been reprisals had they either raided the refuge, or arrested some but not all of the leaders and put the refuge on lockdown, or just set up a perimeter from the get-go. That hardly seems like something that can be stated with certainty. It's a counter factual, of course there is uncertainty involved. These people actually believe their cowboy heroes were ambushed / assassinated by a lying deceitful government. It seems a little questionable that the people in Burns would have engaged in retaliatory attacks over an earlier move to arrest / blockade, but won't over what actually happened. The non-reaction to tarpman's death at least suggests there would have been a similar non-reaction to an earlier operation. As Prester Jane has repeatedly argued, the reprisals would not likely have come at Ammon's direct order. They were / are likely to come from people acting on their own initiative. If that was true in week one, I'm not sure why that is not true today. That is, while headshotting the occupation leadership very likely lowered the intensity of the standoff at the refuge, it really should not have had much impact on the lone-wolf problem. At minimum, one of the most prominent rationales against early intervention has been exposed. It was pretty popular early on to argue a blockade was impossible because there are too many routes in. It appears that isn't true - the blockade has been very successful since it was established. Again, maybe that's an issue of inertia and resources. But it at least appears to be quite feasible to lock down the refuge. That doesn't mean they were automatically wrong to wait. It may come out that there were specific threats, or that there were not enough resources for a few weeks, or whatever. Or maybe this was in fact the master plan from the very beginning and it worked brilliantly. That's something we won't know for months. But it's hardly ridiculous to suggest there were substantial risks involved in allowing all comers to congregate and resupply for three weeks. It's entirely possible those risks were in fact greater than the risk of engaging earlier. It's possible the government got lucky. This is an iterative process. Just as this incident wound up being managed differently than Bunkerville, I'm guessing the next time these people try to put a stop to federal land management the law enforcement response will not take three weeks to manifest itself. Staking out positions is fun but we really don't have enough information to reach conclusions with certainty right now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:26
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:whoops, looks like I didn't say anything about the FBI "looking aggressive"! And where exactly did you get the idea that I had been saying RAID RAID RAID this whole time? Even before the arrests, at most I was bitching about comms and the power. And even those I softened on as people talked about why they weren't as feasible.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:27
|
|
|
Why is it so easy to accept a hypothetical situation where malheur turns into Dresden when the fbi looks at them funny, but too hard to imagine the one where the showy 3 week standoff with media all over it, inspired by a previous stand off, is going to inspire worse ones? Like someone said earlier, its all FBI fan fiction and futurecasting. Why bust a nut just because you think mine sucks? Intel&Sebastian fucked around with this message at 21:34 on Feb 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
Intel&Sebastian posted:And where exactly did you get the idea that I had been saying RAID RAID RAID this whole time? Even before the arrests, at most I was bitching about comms and the power. And even those I softened on as people talked about why they weren't as feasible. Because you were continually talking about the safety of the people in town, and none of those things would have had a significant impact on the townspeople, because their town would have had almost the exact same number of SovCit militias nutjobs either way. You can draw A to B to C that the hands off approach made them complacent and got them nabbed. Kazak_Hstan posted:I think the biggest problem with the argument that this was the only safe / best option is that it assumes there would have been reprisals had they either raided the refuge, or arrested some but not all of the leaders and put the refuge on lockdown, or just set up a perimeter from the get-go.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
Well then the problem is you're staking out other peoples positions for them and confirmation biasing the fuuuuuuuck out of the very successful arrests at the end of the occupation. If you wanna argue about a raid on day one, find someone who actually thinks that was preferable. Personally I don't characterize the collateral damage here as some whiny assholes being annoyed, and if you get to futurecast the what ifs on a raid, I get to futurecast the what ifs on supplying the militia movement a template for taking over a fed building for 3 weeks without crossing whatever line they have in their brain for still being the good guys.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:43
|
|
|
/\/\ Good post. Pretty much sums up my thoughts. It's all fairly baseless speculation until we get all the details anyway.Doctor Butts posted:I don't think its a big stretch to say that it kind of took too long for the FBI to do something, but when it finally did something it went well. So their goal was to not end the standoff and kill someone? I don't think you can say it went well but it certainly didn't go as badly as it could've been. theflyingorc posted:Because you were continually talking about the safety of the people in town, and none of those things would have had a significant impact on the townspeople, because their town would have had almost the exact same number of SovCit militias nutjobs either way. You can draw A to B to C that the hands off approach made them complacent and got them nabbed. The court documents show that they planned to infiltrate the town to threaten anyone who spoke out against the occupation, so I would say that legitimately put the townspeople in danger and that this argument is hardly just handwringing. Fuckt Tupp fucked around with this message at 21:51 on Feb 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:47
|
|
|
Internet Webguy posted:So their goal was to not end the standoff and kill someone? I think I see what you're getting at. I agree to a point. They cut off the heads of the beast but I'm not happy that the occupation is still ongoing. I think it was a good move to be able to get the big guys all at once, I still think it took too long and I still think things aren't totally resolved.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:52
|
|
|
Intel&Sebastian posted:This is right, but they did still walk children in. The singing group for example, one of whom (who wasn't a child, but 18) ended up in danger during the arrests.  Wait, is this the girl who was in Finnacum's car when he tried running the roadblock? Why was she there? Which one would-be warlords in the car did her family sell her off to?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:53
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:
Right. And that might be because this was in fact the best plan, or there might be a lot of luck involved. We don't know that yet. The objection to the delay may partially be because people just wanted to see them get hammered. But it is also because letting them go that long included a lot of risks: they could have barricaded themselves more effectively, used the refuge as a base for attacks on the community, attracted more violent members, the kids could have been held there instead of being sent out, the original leaders could have been supplanted by a more charismatic hothead, etc. a lot could have gone wrong and it could have led to violence. The problem with "it worked what's the big deal" is that outcome-based analysis potentially ignores procedural flaws. If I drive drunk and get home safe it's not cool because it worked out. I just got lucky.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:54
|
|
|
Doctor Butts posted:I think I see what you're getting at. I agree to a point. They cut off the heads of the beast but I'm not happy that the occupation is still ongoing. Right. They basically did what they could with what they had at that point and it's hard to think that the governor practically yelling at the FBI to loving do something about this already had nothing to do with what went down. Seems to me like the FBI was enjoying their camping and militant-watching paid excursion and was finally spurred into action by gov. Brown's comments. Again, this is all fairly baseless speculation. And this also doesn't mean I think a day one raid, or any raid at all, would've been the best course of action Fuckt Tupp fucked around with this message at 21:57 on Feb 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:54
|
|
|
bango skank posted:
Yeah, she was the girl in the car who's now a celeb for saying he was murdered. Family drove in from Kansas and had children from 6 to 20 sleeping in the refuge.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
Yeah, I've kind of been wondering what the hell she was doing in that van myself. Like, everyone else was a major leader in the protest or a bodyguard. Why was an 18 year old kid there?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
Perfectly Safe posted:Sorry man, I don't know what to tell you. If you just go and take a look at news reports about the occupation (literally do a google news search now) then you will see the Bundys and Finnacum all the drat time. Cooper? No. From a bit ago but, the press wasn't talking about Cooper at the start because Bundy was holding press conferences and Cooper isn't a front man. But Cooper was THERE from the start playing an organizational role; http://www.mycotropic.com/img/sa/blain cooper there at the start.mp4 Note the fuckface in cammo right behind Bundy? That's our boy! First pressie of the occupation (I think, might be the second). The reason he was there from the start is because he and Ritzheimer had both been at the Oregon miner's "standoff" a couple of months before. All of these insurrectionist assholes had been looking around for a BLM event to try to use for quite a while. I friended a bunch of III% folks as soon as the Bundy ranch thing happened way back when and when they started closing membership in their groups I friended all the rest included the Patriot Railroad people. These clowns have a FB page that tried to coordinate people and supplies moving to the area where the miner thing was going to happen. I've always liked logistics and this group felt like a good place to be in order to watch how these guys organized their supply lines. That's before they had "boots on the ground" and Cooper and Ritzheimer were both there at the start of that action. This one is simply a spin-off of that one with an extra few Bundy's thrown in for flavor. Cooper has always been fairly quiet when he's on site cos-playing a military guy but then he goes home and does poo poo like this with his "media company" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIhNJNzBfkk The Oregon III%ers put out "calls" every time a greedy rear end rancher wants to do the Bundy thing and sometimes, when they aren't too busy masturbating over cammo patterns and open carrying people actually show up. Cooper and Ritzheimer are both a part of that loose affiliation. ChlamydiaJones fucked around with this message at 22:08 on Feb 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:04
|
|
STAC Goat posted:Yeah, I've kind of been wondering what the hell she was doing in that van myself. Like, everyone else was a major leader in the protest or a bodyguard. Why was an 18 year old kid there? Human shield.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
I think you may be underestimating the planning required to carry out an operation of this scale. There is a lot of intelligence to gather about the compound, how many militia members and their movements, local law enforcement tie ins, bringing manpower and equipment to Burns and setting up, and a whole multitude of other minor and major concerns. Minor arrests in a week in place like Burns? sure. But, bringing the beast to bear and ending the occupation was likely going to take weeks imo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:08
|
|
|
Kazak_Hstan posted:Right. And that might be because this was in fact the best plan, or there might be a lot of luck involved. We don't know that yet. Its not like the consequnces of the delay stopped when the arrests happened either. We still have Fry broadcasting his views (done now), PPN flirting with calls to rescue the last 4, a martyr who was well known to the movement thanks to 3 weeks of celebrity, uncountable rw militia types who are internalizing this as a new waco despite all efforts and facts. Maybe you avoid some of that if you take Ammon when you could, maybe you avoid it by limiting their access to the wide world. I'm willing to say maybe not and acknowledge that no one knows enough to say, but in my opinion I'd like to see more attention on that aspect than the "another waco" angle and what may or may not cause a criminal to go nuts and all the concessions we need to make to avoid that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:09
|
|
|
Goodpancakes posted:I think you may be underestimating the planning required to carry out an operation of this scale. There is a lot of intelligence to gather about the compound, how many militia members and their movements, local law enforcement tie ins, bringing manpower and equipment to Burns and setting up, and a whole multitude of other minor and major concerns. Minor arrests in a week in place like Burns? sure. But, bringing the beast to bear and ending the occupation was likely going to take weeks imo. This was the main thing making me think I'm off base, but at the same time the gov of the state should be one of the more informed parties and she had enough after 3 weeks. And there's still plenty to be said about what was happening in Burns as the set up occurs, its just more understandable.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:16
|
|
|
So, is there any actual confirmation of explosives at the building? Because that would deter me from making an raids right there. gently caress that poo poo, not putting my agents in that situation. If I were the FBI, that is.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:38
|
|
|
Kilo147 posted:So, is there any actual confirmation of explosives at the building? Because that would deter me from making an raids right there. gently caress that poo poo, not putting my agents in that situation. If I were the FBI, that is. We won't get any real "confirmation" of anything until the last four are out and we can go take a look around.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:44
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/carlibrosseau/status/695680466523820032
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:45
|
|
|
Irony is dead.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:46
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:Irony is dead. https://twitter.com/carlibrosseau/status/695708469559603200
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:46
|
|
|
Intel&Sebastian posted:Vuvuzealots Kinda want to see a counter protest where a bunch of people blow vuvuzelas, drowning out the idiots with the dulcet tones of a bee hive.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:46
|
|
|
Good to know the people attending my memorial know exactly as much about me as the uncaring nation that laughed at me looking like a dork on national news - Lavoy Finicame
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:52
|
|
|
Omg I can't even
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 23:07
|
|
|
Without any sense of irony there have been militant posters referring to that shade as "LaVoy Blue."
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 23:10
|
|
|
Skinty McEdger posted:Without any sense of irony there have been militant posters referring to that shade as "LaVoy Blue." One of the mourners. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 23:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 21:22 |
|
|
A writer at the Onion sighs as he deletes the article he was writing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 23:15
|
|
