PART ONE: Force for Liberty or for Oppression?

Author’s note: As a retired combat veteran I am a supporter of our Armed Forces and the men and women who are serving the nation with distinction. It is not my intention to denigrate or cast doubts upon our military. I do wish to bring clarity to some historical events as they impact current public opinion among United States citizens. America is at a crossroads between our Constitutional Republic and a new socialist paradigm pursued by the Progressives. Consider my views as a contribution to the contingency planning that is surely taking place within US Northern Command and elsewhere. A failure to grasp the political implications of US military operations within our borders could contribute to an immediate breakdown of the peoples’ trust in our military. The risk is to be perceived as the “standing army” our Founding Fathers warned us against. Fundamental to each military planner is the oath we swore at our commissioning and at promotion ceremonies thereafter. Do not permit our military to become our “occupiers”.


The sole end of government is protection and security of the people. Whenever, therefore, that power which was originally instituted to effect these important and valuable purposes is employed to harass, distress, or enslave the people, in this case it becomes a curse rather than a blessing.
Provincial Congress of Massachusetts, 1774

This retrospective is prompted by actions taken by the White House and Congress since 9/11. Aside from our fortunes spent and the burden of our national debt upon future generations, we have other pressing issues to consider as well. These issues impact our civil liberties, jeopardize our Constitution, and endanger the Republic. Because we the people do not trust Congress and many of us believe the current Administration clearly has a Progressive agenda, serious doubt is cast upon ALL government plans and activities. The Founders and I do not trust human nature to be consistently moral, virtuous, or selfless. In fact, what we see in Congress today is unbridled greed and self-centeredness. The catch-phrase “trust me” does not apply.

Since 9/11 we have seen the Patriot Act which permits a large array of clandestine actions by those in law enforcement and government against foreigners and US citizens. While it has purportedly helped to protect the nation, there have been too many documented government abuses linked to it. We have a right to be concerned about those in government that might act improperly or with impunity while veiled in secrecy. Protectors could become oppressors.

Since 9/11 the Department of Homeland Security was established. With it the size and budget of the Federal government increased yet again. Its cumbersome bureaucracy could not anticipate our “Christmas Bomber”, exemplifying an information processing and analysis failure. This failure may be systemically linked to amateurish and politically charged assessments like: (U/FOUO) Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment. The average Texan or any veteran could be made to fit this Homeland Security extremist profile. Eventually it could misguidedly serve as a profile for political dissidents. Check it out for yourself at http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/rightwing.pdf.

The “Christmas Bomber” intelligence blunder was a poignant result of a failure to effectively communicate a developing situation. Our embassy in Africa had been approached repeatedly and the CIA had opened a case file. Information was provided to an intelligence fusion center in Washington DC but nothing was done. Factor in the bureaucratic resistance to sounding an alarm for fear it won’t play out and we have inaction and a bomb that nearly exploded.

Since 9/11 the abuses by law enforcement and the National Guard in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina were unconscionable. Under the guise of an emergency our Bill of Rights was seemingly thrown out the window. On February 1, 2008 US Northern Command responded to the Commission on National Guard and Reserves Final Report. Posted on its official website: “PETERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Colo. -- U.S. Northern Command’s primary mission is Homeland Defense, and the command stands ready to respond to any homeland defense or civil support mission requirement….Established in 2002 as a result of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, USNORTHCOM has dramatically expanded DoD’s focus on all aspects of Homeland Defense, including planning and exercising, as well as organizing new headquarters and units that are specifically tailored for domestic response….USNORTHCOM has prepared detailed plans for responding to situations that range from pandemic influenza to Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear events, and the command has redefined its readiness capabilities since Hurricane Katrina.”

So long as our military and law enforcement planners are not unwittingly drawn into a scenario that identifies those who protest the current Progressive agenda as terrorists or insurrectionists, I am satisfied. Americans who protest and resist efforts to make our Constitution irrelevant and transform our Republic into a National Democracy are patriots and, like our forefathers, the true revolutionaries. Those who ignore our Constitution and its Republic for a National Democracy are domestic enemies and must be defined as such.

Finally, consider the McCain-Lieberman “Enemy Belligerent, Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010” bill. It clearly suggests that the US military would be able to detain US citizens indefinitely without a trial based upon suspected activity inside the United States. It, too, could be construed to apply to a US citizen resisting the “transformation of America” by the Progressives currently in power. If our intelligence analysts who focus on Communist regimes were to run a comparative analysis on the steps being taken by the current Administration they would see the developing groundwork needed to justify the use of our military forces against US civilians. Unlike Fidel Castro’s regime, Obama and his fellow Progressives are modeling that of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela. Control of the economy, control of education, control of healthcare, control of energy, control of the private sector, control of law enforcement, and control of the military adds up to….

For starters, military planners need to acknowledge that the tax-base in the United States is dwindling and foreign countries, including strategic competitors/enemies, will soon stop funding our deficit spending. Communist China’s military are urging an offensive against the US Dollar. China and Russia have been courting Saudi Arabia and others to adopt a “basket of currencies” that would not include the US Dollar. In the face of a looming economic meltdown, it is time to start thinking about the political ramifications and negative consequences of a military option (e.g., martial law) within our own borders. Local communities can take care of themselves; the State must retain all of its authority.

In Part Two, I will briefly trace the evolution of wars of liberation and the political implications of the US response. We will find that reality is not clear-cut and our perceptions greatly affect the outcomes of our decisions. Since World War II, the US military has shown a propensity, with few exceptions, to focus on mission regardless of its political implications.

The Vietnam conflict remains the best illustration of the dangers associated with projecting our own cultural values on those of another. It demonstrates the irreparable harm done by professional military leaders who blindly submit to their civilian leaders. I know of no General Officer who resigned in protest as a result of the Vietnam conflict.

The Army seeks to end the war as quickly as possible, in order to minimize its losses; the insurgent seeks to prolong it, since he has everything to gain by it.
Taber, 1970

We must face the fact that the United States is neither omnipotent nor omniscient, that we cannot always impose our will on the other 94 percent of mankind, that we cannot right every wrong or reverse each adversity, and that therefore there cannot be an American solution for every world problem.
John F. Kennedy, as quoted by Richard J. Barnet, 1965

The 15th to the 20th centuries can be called the colonial era. Dominant European nations, as a rule, took control of geographic areas, delineated borders, and established colonies for the purpose of extracting resources for export and trade. Consider that many of the modern national borders were delineated by former colonial powers without regard for local history or traditional tribal or ethnic areas. Thirteen such colonies were established in America.

The Revolutionary War for Independence in America can serve to define the start of a worldwide movement for independence and the liberation of colonies. Independence was mostly achieved in Latin America in the 19th century and those elsewhere after each of the two world wars. It is now time to consider the 21st century.

The American Revolution stands apart in acknowledging the inalienable rights granted to us individually by God. It was unique in that government would be small and with only sufficient authority to carry out its responsibilities. The Republic’s structure was purposely designed to thwart the aspirations of tyrants and bullies. Much is owed to the traditions in Great Britain and the political philosophy of the Enlightenment. John Locke was particularly influential to our Founders. Other areas, with other cultures and traditions sought their freedom differently.

In my next post I’ll start with some little known facts about the lead-up to the Vietnam conflict.