> The choke points thing is a real issue. The chokepoints being real is immaterial to whether the variables and the mechanics generate scenarios and outcomes that accurately reflect the same scenarios unfolding in real life given the same variables. > As are resources, as are who owns the guns, who owns the land etc. etc. etc. Thats what I'm saying though. They have some of the variables, undoubtedly correct, but don't understand how they actually operate. > And further than "own" is who KNOWS the land. That's exceedingly important. Your rural "redneck hick" knows perfectly the geography of the 150 acre forest near his town. An underrated comment. Did they factor in stealth, camo, drone IR detection, counter-IR camo, vehicle IR and noise emission? Disguising vehicles IR signatures and moving at night? At what point did some tactic or strategy that was left out, cause their scenario to go sideways in the event of said scenario unfolding in the real world? At best it tells them what they *should* do, what policies and training they *should implement, based on what they expected beforehand--and nothing of what to do when the *unanticipated* occurs. Applying that same sort of thinking on our side, would be fatal. > See above. That's a problem in all areas of the Federal Government. People are primed to abandon, subvert, sabotage the federal government. They're only in the positions they're in for the paycheck. Same with following policies. I actually didn't consider this, because the problem of enemy morale is almost out of sight when no opposition is organized to resist them to begin with. thanks. It does raise the question of whether enemy morale matters when public morale itself is so low to start with. A bad system can go on a lot longer than people think, simply on the inertia of no significant organized opposition or alternative. > The game doesn't have a scenario where the Moon hits the Earth for instance: that's a non zero but... it's 0 with regard to context. I'm not talking about probabilities so insignificant that they can't happen in practice. I'm highlighting the problem of how tabletop exercises don't really say anything meaningful about real-world scenarios, as compared to just looking at the past and raw numbers. > Sigh. The other cap I recall goes over how some number for desertion, sabotage, etc. are handled. Fuck my life though of course I can't find it. Sigh. The other cap I recall goes over how some number for desertion, sabotage, etc. are handled. Fuck my life though of course I can't find it. I've seen it, and know what you're referring to. Won't ask you to dig it out. I agree with the idea, though can't agree or disagree with the numbers because I don't recall them off the top of my head. It's why I'm of the opinion that if there must be some sort of conflict, the regime would want a "*controlled burn*" so-to-speak, one where they remain in power afterward. Thats co-opted leaders on either-side of the conflict, indirect control of command-and-control, full insight to each sides respective internal communications and operations, etc. This isn't an original thought of course. But I don't have a lot of faith in humanity to anticipate this sort of subversion. The guys out there who would be first to jump ship, to get in early, are therefore likely to be the enemy in disguise. They're their to make sure you, and by extension all the veterans who turn rebel, lose in the long term. In the same way that a few bad apples make working with the police against the federal regime, impossible long term. Trust placed in the wrong people, in the recruit that shows up out of the blue, in the random hanger-on and the sudden go getter that appears in an organizations very hour of need--gets people captured, tortured, disappeared, and killed. So then who do you trust if you trust at all? And how do you operate without trust, if at all? Are questions that would be asked by any scrupulous individuals in some sort of hypothetical civil war. They can't operate on the basis of credentials, because informants are everywhere. They can't operate on shit-tests because the government authorizes itself, and itself alone, it and its informants, to *actively commit crimes against the state*, which might otherwise be used to weed out moles and spies. They can't operate on recruiting people they've known a long time because the state sometimes spends months or *years* getting to know people through informants, or threatens the lives of people's families if they don't cooperate. And that on top of splitting public opinion by 24/7 indoctrination through organs of the DHS and secret police's propaganda, turning ordinary people into informants in the event anyone becomes 'too extreme' or radical. > This is why there is a purging of these types in the military. It was started by neutering the IQ and fitness standards. Who does that leave filling in? Mentally Ill NPC troons who will join the 40% sooner than they would exist without their internet to go to. Mostly there to demoralize those who are capable, and once the numbers are low enough, fill the ranks with cartel, south americans, somalians, and other illegals. No attachment to america, means no hesitation for them to brutalize americans. It's why they're dragging out the civil war narrative, until they can get the correct military demographics to perform that 'controlled burn' I already mentioned. > I know for myself and many others the line is drawn in the sand VERY CLEARLY at any point where anyone comes and tells me no to something that's a right. Very few people actually adhere to their red lines. It's part of the demoralization. Even fewer actually have a red line. > I recall very familiarly a few threads on fullpol (8ch) that went over these in detail. ZERO NEWS stories I doubt everything I read, even from reliable sources, and thats not even counting the unreliable ones. Simply because of the amount of outright propaganda masquerading as 'alternative media' and 'discussion' by dudes wearing khakis in air conditioned well-lit mobile trailers paid for by the secret police. Of course I have zero doubt that there have been standoffs and other incidents (such as train derailments) for which the state either offered zero coverage, or claimed the events were accidents. It goes to the importance of having non-mainstream covert networks that are capable of putting out effective and frequent news bulletins about how any war is going in this scenario. Where the regime might rampantly deny it is fighting rebels, so as to deny and discourage the very existence of said opposition, it is *not* sufficient for an action-net to be engaged in a struggle against the regime, but it must *also* in the given scenario, assert both its *right* and *necessity* to exist *on top* of asserting that it in fact *does exist* to begin with. A thing can not *recruit* or be considered *legitimate* by the public when the public does not consider it to actually exist, or thinks its a larp. In this analysis, rebel supported news networks, covert broadcast and journalist crews, are not secondary or auxiliary concerns, but are in fact *core* to any movement, not just military movements. > But the surprising thing is that the general population, while still far from being me; are moving closer toward me on poal than they are away from me on poal. Noticed this too. > FOR EXAMPLE: the number of times I say to people's face something derogatory about jews, say "nigger" etc. is effectively daily. The number of times I get concerted pushback is actually 0. This is further evidenced by the hilarious reactions I got for the last 2.5 years having NEVER WORN a mask. Don't do this. Don't confuse the mask issue with race issues. Not because of optics, or 'appeal to muh moderates' but because its exactly what I would expect of an informant or a glowfag. It comes off as well-poisoning because the regime loves to associate its every issue with 'muh racism'. And it causes others with radars tuned to be overly cautious, to see it as the same, well-poisoning. Thanks for the long-reply. I love those.