Indigenous blockade in BC & related protests

[Dougie93]

Military operational analysis; Fifth Generation Asymmetrical Warfare; hyper powered individuals/small groups leveraging fundamental weak points to achieve strategic effects against vastly larger opponents.

[scribblet]

As I understand it, 20 democratically elected Chiefs and  Councils along the Eagle Spirit LNG pipeline  along with roughly 125 of 130 hereditary Chiefs, have all said yes to the pipeline and related $600 million in benefits that flow to aboriginals   Should these 5 hereditary Chiefs should have VETO over our economy and the lives of people who need this pipeline. 

[Dougie93]

I find the hereditary chiefs other than the war chiefs of the Mohawks to be tangential, since it is the Mohawk paramilitary wing which is holding a asymmetrical veto over our vital Windsor to Quebec strategic line of communication, as, even if some other hereditary chiefs submit to Canada's terms, the veto is not lifted until the Mohawks say it is lifted.

[Dougie93]

Which is what the Mohawks just pointed out to Gerry Butts up in Ottawa.    As bear in mind, the Canadian economy cannot afford for this vital strategic line of communication to even be slowed never mind ground to a halt, ground to a halt degenerates into a national economic crisis quite rapidly.

[Argus]

1 hour ago, Dougie93 said:

So, just FYI, as soon as the RCMP got permission from the band council in BC to step on to native land, the Iroquois Six Nations Confederacy, led by their Hegemon,  the Mohawks, have invoked that band council has simply been leveraged by intimidation into doing this, and so it is an illegitimate transgression unto all First Nations by its nature, and they have launched an asymmetrical operation in retaliation in kind,  by transgressing on the Windsor to Quebec corridor, by rolling vehicular blockade, in progress right now, see; CBC News.

The more the cowardly politicians refuse to enforce the law, the more groups like this will push things.

What they're doing is no more legal than if I did it, them being natives notwithstanding. The police should halt their little convoy, arrest everyone involved, and tow the cars and trucks away. Problem solved.

[Argus]

26 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Historical perspective; of all the First Nations of North America, two stand out as the most militant and fierce, to the South in the Black Hills, the Lakota, and along the banks of the Saint Lawrence, the Mohawks.

They were militarized Hegemons in their day, and they remain so to this day.

To wit, not all Indians are created equal, it is not a monolith, they have their leading military powers too.

Shoot them in the face and they die just as easily as some punk on the street robbing a pharmacy.

[Dougie93]

Just now, Argus said:

The more the cowardly politicians refuse to enforce the law, the more groups like this will push things.

What they're doing is no more legal than if I did it, them being natives notwithstanding. The police should halt their little convoy, arrest everyone involved, and tow the cars and trucks away. Problem solved.

The only law which can imposed on the Mohawks by force, is the law of armed conflict, but the Mohawks are a match for CANSOFCOM, the police can't handle the Mohawks, the Mohawks could and would run circles around civilians, to include peace officers.

[Argus]

Just now, Dougie93 said:

The only law which can imposed on the Mohawks by force, is the law of armed conflict, but the Mohawks are a match for CANSOFCOM, the police can't handle the Mohawks, the Mohawks could and would run circles around civilians, to include peace officers.

The Mohawks warriors are an unorganized, largely untrained group of civilians with mostly civilian weapons. To suggest they're a match for Canadian special forces is absurd.

[Dougie93]

Just now, Argus said:

Shoot them in the face and they die just as easily as some punk on the street robbing a pharmacy.

Would require CANSOFCOM, and would involve significant attrition, as the Mohawks are entrenched and dug in on the Res, it's actually a de facto battle position, and they dominate the approaches to as well.

[Argus]

2 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Would require CANSOFCOM, and would involve significant attrition, as the Mohawks are entrenched and dug in on the Res, it's actually a de facto battle position, and they dominate the approaches to as well.

There are about 24,000 Mohawks, of which the vast majority are women, children and old men. Most of the men aren't going to pick up a rifle to shoot at the government either. The warriors are a small group of criminals. The significant attrition would be theirs.

Edited January 11, 2019 by Argus

[Dougie93]

We trained for this back in the 90's when Chretien was considering going in to disrupt the Mohawk untaxed tobacco conglomerate, we war gamed it six ways from Sunday, never came out well for Canada, so Chretien cancelled the operation and decided to lower tobacco taxes instead to try to compete with the Mohawks.

[Dougie93]

The final straw for Chretien was when the operation was in the mounting process, secret level classification, and the duty center got a phone call from the Mohawks saying "yeah, we know you're coming, come on down, we're ready for you", which of course indicated they were infiltrated into our lines of communication and so the operation was compromised before it even rolled out the gates.

Edited January 11, 2019 by Dougie93

[Argus]

3 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

The final straw for Chretien was when the operation was in the mounting process, secret level classification, and the duty center got a phone call from the Mohawks saying "yeah, we know you're coming, come on down, we're ready for you", which of course indicated they were infiltrated into our lines of communication and so the operation was compromised before it even rolled out the gates.

Doesn't really matter if you know a steam roller is coming if you can't do anything to stop it.

Politicians panic at a few casualties, that's all. You push in, and go free-fire on anyone carrying a weapon. End of story. Either you have sovereignty or you don't. Surrendering sovereignty might be cheaper in the short term but the cost is always greater in the long term. Pretty sure Mohawk casualties would be ten times that of the military.

[Dougie93]

9 minutes ago, Argus said:

There are about 24,000 Mohawks, of which the vast majority are women, children and old men. Most of the men aren't going to pick up a rifle to shoot at the government either. The warriors are a small group of criminals. The significant attrition would be theirs.

The Mohawks are actually a Military Hegenomy under a Matriarchy, so the women are ones in charge, but they are none the less warriors too, they do shoot move and communicate as necessary, to include close quarters combat, they will fight you and they know how to fight too. In terms of the elderly, they're tough too, and the kids will fight as well.

It's a warrior culture, and everybody there in is a warfighter as necessary.

Never mind if you try to crush them, things are going to kick off with the natives are we will a full on insurgency on our hands from coast to coast, how bad it would be based on how hard we hit the Mohawks.

[Dougie93]

4 minutes ago, Argus said:

Doesn't really matter if you know a steam roller is coming if you can't do anything to stop it.

Politicians panic at a few casualties, that's all. You push in, and go free-fire on anyone carrying a weapon. End of story. Either you have sovereignty or you don't. Surrendering sovereignty might be cheaper in the short term but the cost is always greater in the long term. Pretty sure Mohawk casualties would be ten times that of the military.

Pretty sure it would blowback into a widespread native apprehended insurrection against the Crown nationwide imperiling Confederation itself, because Canada doesn't have the troops to deal with that and is crippled in terms of mobilization, by government corruption and associated incompetence imposed shambolic military dysfunction. /shrugs

[Argus]

1 minute ago, Dougie93 said:

The Mohawks are actually a Military Hegenomy under a Matriarchy, so the women are ones in charge, but they are none the less warriors too, they do shoot move and communicate as necessary, to include close quarters combat, they will fight you and they know how to fight too. In terms of the elderly, they're tough too, and the kids will fight as well.

It's a warrior culture, and everybody there in is a warfighter as necessary.

Never mind if you try to crush them, things are going to kick off with the natives are we will a full on insurgency on our hands from coast to coast, how bad it would be based on how hard we hit the Mohawks.

I really don't care. Sovereignty must be enforced. If that means killing every native who picks up a gun then that's fine.

[Argus]

1 minute ago, Dougie93 said:

Pretty sure it would blowback into a widespread native apprehended insurrection against the Crown nationwide imperiling Confederation itself, because Canada doesn't have the troops to deal with that and is crippled in terms of mobilization, by government corruption and associated incompetence imposed shambolic military dysfunction. /shrugs

It's funny how at the start of every war it turns out we have to replace all the politicians and top military brass almost immediately, as they turn out to be incompetent and inept. I'm quite sure the same would happen here. Instead of a Trudeau type you'd get a Mike Harris type in charge of the government. There might well be blowback from isolated groups of unorganized, untrained young men with hunting rifles, but they can be killed relatively easily.

Edited January 11, 2019 by Argus

[Dougie93]

3 minutes ago, Argus said:

I really don't care. Sovereignty must be enforced. If that means killing every native who picks up a gun then that's fine.

That would likely result in charges of Crimes Against Humanity for waging Genocidal Aggressive War, to be tried by international military tribunal, and the Canadian judiciary would be bound to issue warrants from the bench to arrest and detain all involved in the incitement of such a war, pending extradition to the Hague

Edited January 11, 2019 by Dougie93

[Argus]

1 minute ago, Dougie93 said:

That would likely result in charges of Crimes Against Humanity for waging Genocidal Aggressive War, to be tried by international military tribunal, and the Canadian judiciary would be bound to issue warrants from the bench to arrest and detain all involved in the incitement of such a war, pending extradition to the Hague

Phhhhht. It would result in no such thing. Shooting armed insurgents is not a crime of any kind in any country in the world.

[Dougie93]

3 minutes ago, Argus said:

It's funny how at the start of every war it turns out we have to replace all the politicians and top military brass almost immediately, as they turn out to be incompetent and inept. I'm quite sure the same would happen here. Instead of a Trudeau type you'd get a Mike Harris type in charge of the government. There might well be blowback from isolated groups of unorganized, untrained young men with hunting rifles, but they can be killed relatively easily.

Ah, no, the indians have AK-47's and AR15's, they've also got heavier weapons like .50 sniper rifles and the like, there is no effective gun control on native land, they are armed to the teeth, they just buy guns in America, and America has it all.

In terms of waging Genocidal Aggressive War against the First Nations, as they are subjects of the Crown as much as any other Canadian sub jurisduction, they enjoy the protection of the Crown, and as such I would join the indians and fight on their side, as I am bound to, by solemn oath to my Commander-in-Chief, HM QE II

[Dougie93]

4 minutes ago, Argus said:

Phhhhht. It would result in no such thing. Shooting armed insurgents is not a crime of any kind in any country in the world.

When those are subjects of the British Crown and so enjoy the protection of the Crown, as all the First Nations are and do, their resistance would be in the face of unlawful action taken against them,  every nation has the right to collective and individual self defense UN Article 51, which mean the resistance would have legitimacy under national and international law and the laws of armed conflict, which makes them  lawful combatants,  and since they would have a case, launching into a battle of annihilation upon them would also violate the law of proportionality under the Hague Convention.

[Argus]

6 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Ah, no, the indians have AK-47's and AR15's, they've also got heavier weapons like .50 sniper rifles and the like, there is no effective gun control on native land, they are armed to the teeth, they just buy guns in America, and America has it all.

They'll have some, but not much, and they're an untrained, unorganized group.

6 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

In terms of waging Genocidal Aggressive War against the First Nations,

Is English your second language, by any chance? You seem to have bizarre definitions of some words. Shooting people who are in rebellion against the crown and holding guns is not genocide, just for your information.

6 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

as they are subjects of the Crown as much as any other Canadian sub jurisduction, they enjoy the protection of the Crown, and as such I would join the indians and fight on their side, as I am bound to, by solemn oath to my Commander-in-Chief, HM QE II

I'm fine with you dying too if you take up arms against the crown.

And yes, rebelling against the Canadian government IS, by law, rebelling against the Crown.

[Argus]

1 minute ago, Dougie93 said:

When those are subjects of the British Crown and so enjoy the protection of the Crown, as all the First Nations are and do, their resistance would be in the face of unlawful action taken against them,

What unlawful action are you talking about?

1 minute ago, Dougie93 said:

 every nation has the right to collective and individual self defense

The only nation here is Canada. Native tribes are not nations under any legal definition.

[DogOnPorch]

2 minutes ago, Argus said:

What unlawful action are you talking about?

The only nation here is Canada. Native tribes are not nations under any legal definition.

 

If I hear Canada referred to as 'Turtle Island' one more time, I think I'm gonna hurl.

[Dougie93]

So Argus goes on internet forums and publishes to the World Wide Web in perpetuity, vociferously and bombastically advocating that Canadian Confederation in right of the British Crown should commit Crimes Against Humanity by waging Genocidal Aggressive War of annihilation upon the First Nations, who are also subjects of the British Crown by solemn treaty,  without regards whatsoever for national and international law and the laws of armed conflict, nor restraint,  nor proportionality, nor humanity.

Noted.