The repercussions and motifs of war, whether by one nation against another or by a government against the people, seldom change. Nevertheless, the tactics of war have developed significantly in modern times. Wars by elites against populations are often so slight that many people might not even understand that they are under attack until it is too late. Anytime I look at the ideas of “potential war” between individuals and oligarchy, almost always some hard-headed individual whines: “What do you mean ‘when?’ We are at war right now!” In this instance, I am not communicating about the simple brand of war. I am not communicating about the information war, the propaganda war, the economic war, the psychological war or the biological war. I am communicating about downright discord, and anyone who believes we have already gotten to that point has no idea what actual war looks like.

The current coverage of the nationwide Jade Helm 15 exercise has made many people skeptical, and with good cause. Federal crisis exercises have a peculiar historical propensity to abruptly correlate with very real crisis events. We may know very little about Jade Helm outside of government admissions, statements and misdirection. But at the very minimum, we know what “JADE” is an acronym for: Joint Assistance for Deployment and Execution, a program created to generate action and deployment plans utilizing computer models intended to speed up reaction times for military organizers during a “crisis scenario.” It is connected with another plan called ACOA (Adaptive Course of Action), the foundation of which is basically the use of past mission results and computer models to strategize future missions. Both are supplements of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).

So far as I understand, no one has offered any realistic proof as to what “HELM” actually stands for, but the JADE portion of the exercise clearly concentrates on rapid force deployment planning in crisis scenarios, according to the government white paper attached above. This truth alone brings into question claims by the Department of Defense that Jade Helm is nothing more than a training program to put together military units for “foreign deployment.” This is clearly a deception if Jade Helm centers around crisis events (which denotes domestic threats), rather than foreign operations.

Not surprisingly, if you additionally think about the fact that special operations forces ALWAYS train like they fight and train in environments comparable to where they will fight, the entire belief of Jade Helm as a preparation for foreign theaters sounds ludicrous. If special operations forces are going to fight in Iraq, Iran or Syria, they head out to training grounds in locations like Kuwait. If they are training in locations like Fort Lauderdale, Florida (like “infiltration training”), then there is not a chance around the truth that they are practicing to fight somewhere precisely like Fort Lauderdale with an identical culture and population.

I would additionally take note that Jade Helm exercises are also combined exercises with domestic bureaus like the FBI and the DEA. Once again, why incorporate domestic law enforcement bureaus in a military exercise simply designed to prepare troops for foreign operations? I often listen to the debate that the military would never associate with such a plan, but people who take this relatively presumptive position do not comprehend crisis psychology. In the event of a national catastrophe many military personnel and government employees might decide that they will do what is “best for them and their families”. And if following orders ensures the security of their families (food security, shelter, etc), then they might very well follow any order, no matter how questionable. Also, a large-scale crisis could be applied as a rationale for martial law; often well-meaning military men and women could be persuaded that the loss of constitutional freedoms may be for the “greater good of the greater number”. I think some military will certainly and without a doubt, avoid such initiatives, but of course, Jade Helm may also be a technique for vetting such uncooperative individuals before any live operation happens.

So if Jade is really a crisis-planning system for the military and the military is training for domestic operations, what is the crisis it is training to respond to? It’s difficult to state. I think it will come down to an economic disaster, but our economic and social structures are so fragile that almost any significant occurrence could trigger collapse. Terror attacks, cyberattacks, pandemic, a stiff wind, you call it. The point is the government needs a crisis to occur. And with the advancement of this crisis, the unmistakable war on the American people will commence.

Why hold out for a crisis situation? With the cover of a crisis event, resistance to power is more quickly targeted. For my beginning issue on the elite war strategy, I would enjoy utilizing the following demonstration on guerrilla warfare by Max Boot, Council on Foreign Relations senior fellow and military adviser, at the elitist World Affairs Council.

I would like to first factor in that Boot says his work is simply a historical character research of intriguing characters from the sphere of insurgency and counterinsurgency and is not “polemical.” I’m afeared that I will have call BS on that. Boot is immediate information medium to the Department of Defense. His work and this demonstration were clearly a study of guerrilla tactics from the viewpoint of counterinsurgency and an effort to examine strategic techniques for controlling and eradicating guerrillas and “terrorists.”

Any protection the American people may possibly gather in opposition to elitist dismantling of constitutional liberties would certainly turn to “insurgency”. So using CFR member Boot’s perspectives on counterinsurgency as a suggestion, here is how the elites will almost certainly wage open war on those people throughout the American population who have the courage to fight back.

Regulate Public Opinion

Boot challenges the total necessity for the control of public opinion in beating an insurgency. Most of his research is really very precise in my view in terms of successes compared to failures of guerrilla activities. Nevertheless, his passion with public opinion is, in part, ill-conceived. Boot utilizes the American Revolution as a supposed perfect illustration of public opinion working in opposition to the ruling powers, saying that it was British public opinion that pressured parliament and King George III to pull back from additional operations in the colonies.

At this point, it is crucial to identify that elitists have a persistent tendency to marginalize the achievements of the American Revolution particularly as being a “fluke” in the historical record. Boot, needless to say, totally ignores the fact that the war had advanced far longer than anyone had forecasted and that the British leadership struggled under the weight of substantial financial obligations. He also ignored the fact that pro-independence colonials were far outnumbered by Tories loyal to the crown up to the very end of the war. The revolution was NEVER in a majority position, and public opinion was not on the revolutionaries’ side.

The very concept of the American Revolution is a tad of a bruise on the collective ego of the elites, and their prejudice leads them to make wrong analyses of the occurrence. The fact is that most revolutions, even successful ones, stay in a minority for most, if not all, of their life spans. The bulk of individuals do not take part in history. Instead, they have a propensity to float helplessly in the tides, holding out to latch onto whatever fractional movement appearing to be succeeding at the time.

Boot recommends that had the Founding Fathers confronted the Roman Empire instead of the British Empire, they would have been crucified and the rebellion would have instantly failed because the Romans had no consternation for public opinion. This is where we get into the real thought process of the elitist.

For the moment, the establishment prefers to sway public opinion with meticulously designed disinformation. But what is the ideal way to cope with public opinion when fighting a present day revolution? Eliminate public opinion as a component completely so that the power elite are free to behave as brutally as they want. Manufactured crisis, and economic crisis for example, make a wash of other possible threats, such as high crime, looting, riots, starvation, international conflict, etc. In such an environment, public opinion matters very little, if people even take notice at all to anything further than their own desperation. Once this is accomplished, the oligarchy has free rule to take morally suspicious actions without fear of potential blowback.

Regulate The Public

Another primary presumption Boot talks about as important in conquering insurgency is the control of the general population in order to avoid a revolution from recruiting new members and to stop them from utilizing the crowd as cover. He makes it crystal clear that control of the public is not to mean winning the “hearts and minds” in a diplomatic sense, but dominating through tactical and psychological means.

He first offers the example of the French counterinsurgency in Algeria, saying that the French strategy of widespread torture, while “morally reprehensible,” was certainly successful in seeking out and ruining the insurgent leadership. Where the French went wrong, nevertheless, was their failure to keep the torture campaign silent. Boot just as before utilizes the public opinion debate as the reason for the inevitable loss of Algeria by the French.

What Boot appears to be indicating is that systematic torture is worthwhile, at least as a hypothetical technique, as long as it stays hidden by the general public. He also reiterates this in a roundabout way in his final list of articles for insurgency and counterinsurgency when he says that “few counterinsurgencies (governments) have been successful by imposing mass terror, at least in foreign lands,” meaning that mass terror might be an option towards a domestic rebellion.

Boot then goes on to illustrate a more efficient situation, the British achievements against insurgents in Malaya. He ascribes the British win against the rebellion to 3 variables:

1) The British separated large portions of the population, entire villages, into concentration camps, surrounded by fences and armed guards. This kept the insurgents from recruiting from the more downtrodden or dissatisfied classes. And it isolated them into areas where they could be more easily engaged.

2) The British used special operations forces to target specific rebel groups and leadership rather than attempting to maneuver through vast areas in a pointless Vietnam-style surge.

3) The British made promises that appealed to the general public, including the promise of independence. This made the public more pliable and more willing to cooperate.

At this time, I have no hope at all that the elites would give the American public “independence” for their assistance in battling a patriot insurgency, but I do believe they would give something maybe more appealing: safety.

I think the British/Malayan case provided by Boot would be the primary methodology for the elites and the federal government in the case that a rebellion occurs in the U.S. in opposition to planned shifts away from constitutional republic or martial law implemented in the aftermath of a national emergency.

Segregate Population Centers

There is an explanation why specific American cities are being smothered in technologically sophisticated biometric surveillance networks, and I believe the Malayan case answers the question. Certain cities (not all) could be converted into enormous remote camps, or “green zones.” They would be firmly controlled, and travel would be tremendously limited. Food, shelter and safety would in all likelihood be available, after a time-frame of catastrophe has actually been encountered. A couple of months of starvation and lack of medication to the medically dependent would no doubt kill millions of individuals. Unprepared survivors would group to these locations in the hopes of getting help. Government forces would take crucial resources in rural areas whenever likely in order to force even more people to target straight into controlled locations.

I have observed the isolation technique in action in part, at the time of the G20 summit in Pittsburgh. More than 4,000 police and National Guard troops secured the city center, allowing only one road for travel. The 1st day, there were practically no protesters; most activists were so scared by the shock-and-awe show of force that they would not depart their residences. This is the best case I have personally encountered to a martial law cityscape.

Decollate Leadership

The liberty movement has always been a leaderless movement, which makes the “night of long knives” solution somewhat less efficient. I do not see any rapid gain to the elites in kidnapping or killing dominant members of the movement, though that does not mean they will not attempt it regardless. Most well-known liberty advocates are teachers, not generals or political rabble-rousers. Teachers leave all their teachings behind, and no one requires generals or politicians. The movement would not automatically be sacrificed without us.

That stated, there is a fear element included in such an occurrence. The black-bagging of common liberty voices might terrorize others into submission or inaction. This is why I frequently dispute the need for individual leadership; every person must be capable and inclined to take personal steps without direction in defense of his own freedoms, if the need comes up. Groups should stay locally guided, and national centralization of leadership should be shunned at all costs.

As outlined by the very marketers of Jade Helm exercises, training will center on quick-reaction teams striking a location with helicopter assistance, then depart within 30 minutes or less. Almost every combat veteran I have talked with regards to this style of training has stated that it is utilized for “snatch and grab” – the capture or killing of top grade targets, then departing before the enemy can build a reaction.

Fourth-Generation Warfare

The last technique for war against the American people is one Boot does not talk about: the utilization of fourth-generation warfare. Some consider this psychological warfare, but it is far more than that. Fourth-generation warfare is a technique by which one area of a population you want to control is turned in opposition to another area of the population you want to control. It is warfare devoid of the rapid utilization of armies. Instead, the elites turn the enemy population against itself and permit internal war to do most of their work for them. We can observe this strategy building currently in the U.S. in the manipulation of race problems and the militarization of law enforcement.

The use of provocateurs during unrest in places like Ferguson, Missouri, and Baltimore implies that a race war is part of the bigger approach. I think law enforcement officials have also been presented a false sense of valor. With military toys and federal funding, but inadequate tactical philosophies and low quality training, LEOs are being set up as expendable soldiers when the SHTF. Their predictable failure will be utilized as a rationalization for more domestic military participation; but meanwhile, Americans will be lured to fight and kill each other while the elites sit back and watch the fallout.

4th Gen warfare also depends on lying to the target population into aiding steps that are secretly detrimental to the people. For instance, liberty movement support for manipulated resistance such as Russia or China, or liberty support for a military upset in which the top brass are elite puppets just like the Obama Administration. Think this sounds far-fetched? It has actually taken place in our current history! Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler was employed by corporate tycoons to lead a compensated army in an upset against Franklin D. Roosevelt (also an elitist puppet) in 1933. Butler fortunately uncovered the conspiracy before it ever got off the ground. Both sides were controlled, but the upset if productive could have led in popular support for the rapid destruction of the Constitution, rather than a gradual destruction which is what took place. This is the perfect example of 4th Gen tactics – make the people believe they are winning, when they are in fact helping you to destroy them.

Recognize Thy Enemy

I have discussed the above tactics not because I really believe they will win, but because it is crucial that we understand precisely what we are dealing with in order to better protect ourselves. Such techniques can be countered with community preparedness, the deterrence of central leadership, the component of purposeful actions instead of foreseeable actions, etc. Most of all, liberty champions will have to supply a certain level of safety and security for the people around them if they want to interrupt establishment attempts to lure or force the population into controlled areas. Crisis is the best weapon the elites have at their fingertips, and exercises like Jade Helm show that they may use that weapon in the near future. The defense that beats crisis is preparation – preparation not just for yourself, but for others around you. War is coming, and while we can’t fully understand the precise moment, we can predict the worst and do our finest to be prepared for it as immediately as possible.