Happening Tactics

This thread is for the discussion of tactics should a WROL scenario take place - and how one might bring about such a scenario. This is for entertainment purposes only; everything being discussed is purely hypothetical. Only a fool would take anything poster here as fact or intended action.

I will begin

The biggest problem that we have in Europe is that these events, while enraging, don't effect that many people. We have more diversions now than at anypoint in history.

We have pizza and netflix, and for most that is enough.

That needs to end before people will take to the streets. Did you know that a single man with a hunting rifle can significantly disrupt the power grid? Indeed a single well placed shot can knock the power offline for thousands - if not millions.

npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/02/05/272015606/sniper-attack-on-calif-power-station-raises-terrorism-fears

A small team working in unison would be able to knock the power offline for an entire city.

Imagine that this takes place during a particularly hot summer. There will be riots, there will be food shortages, there will be plenty of blame to go around. Tensions will rise and the ensuing chaos may well spark off the 8th crusade and/or the Race War

Despite the great potential effect of such a strike, security for the mission would be low as substations are only guarded against intrusion (and even that there is only a camera, a motion sensor and a chainlink fence) but there is no feasible way to guard them against ranged attack without great cost for every site (and there are thousands)

You would stalk out a vantage for the attack, work out your escape route, get into position pop off rounds as quick as you can and GTFO

If you were larping, that is

This doesn't require ex soldiers or trained killers because you aren't shooting anyone so there is little psychological barrier to this being accomplished by anyone with a bit of skill with a rifle and some gumption

Deus Vult Brothers

...

/k/alling all Strelo/k/s!

bamf

Okay and what purpose would that action have for your overall strategy?

Surely you have heard the parable of the frog placed into a pot of lukewarm water?

The water is at first comfortable and the frog is happy to be inside, then by the imperceptible degree the temperatre rises - so slowly that thte frog does not notice

Slowly slowly, the frog is boiled alive, entirely unware.

This is what is happening to Europe and such a hypothetical approach as I have laid out would serve to crank the dial on the oven so much that the frog became aware of the heat and escaped the danger

IT'S TIME FOR A CRUSADE, FAGGOTS

That is not strategy, that is a wish.
In your scenario you would have limited space, time and resources and you would use it on something that has no significant effect in the long run.
In this case we're anti-government, right? Doing random sabotage attacks would very likely stir up emotions against your cause and pioneers would quickly repair that damage, thus weakening your moral front twice in a row.
People are not passive because of netflix, media, newspapers, books or whatever but because of the general conservative mindset of them. They follow the path of least resistance and getting them to fight on your behalf against government troops would take more than poorly-disguised false flags.

How do you find random people, who, after reading a post on the internet, popped off rounds at a substation and then disappeared back into the woodwork?

You have much more faith in the authorities than is warranted.

It is amazing how vulnerable all of our countries are to this kind of attack. Why target innocent civilians, how is that an effective strategy? It's only good for whipping up support for war in the Middle East. No wonder Israel is probably behind most of the terrorist attacks.

People would care more about removing the ones already on their soil than waging a foreign war

And as for innocent civilians. It is mathematical certainty that more and more civilians will die in terror attacks and the longer this situation continues the more people will die; however if we can make the public aware of the problem by a massive short term increase in tension (which doesn't necessarily manifest in killings but rather riots) than we will have saved many lives and the future of Europe

...

You don't get what I'm saying. I don't question the possibility of such an attack, I question its purpose. In the case of the Metcalf incident that you speak of, nothing has been achieved. Random people openly showed their hand and lead to authorities noticing this, thus increasing defense of power plants. Your actions must always follow a grand strategy or else you are nothing but a mere bandit.

That just seems like a not particularly effective demoralization attempt

No, I was saying from the perspective of a terrorist organization, why would they target civilians? What purpose does that achieve, either politically or militarily? It is detrimental to their cause. It is highly beneficial for the (((warmongers and war profiteers and people who want to erode civil liberties))) though, perhaps this explains a lot.

If you are trying to take out the grid/communications it better be a good false flag, because if it became public that 'far-right' groups are destroying infrastructure in order to incite a race war, it would not be good publicity to say the least.

In a normal state of affairs, a single substation being taken offline is easily dealt with, but the situation changes dramatically when significant portions for the populace are radicalized - whether it be through islam or opposition to the current state order

The reason that this sort of attack has the potential for great affect is in its conjunction with an extremely unstable political climate.

On it's own I'm in full agreement with you, it would accomplish nothing, but Europe is not at all in a normal state of affairs at present

There is no organization for them to swear allegiance to or to claim responsibility on the right and little likelihood of getting caught

But of course one must always take calculated risks

bamp

The goal of this would then be that the general population takes up in arms and fights on your behalf. And such a thing has never worked in history. You need own manpower with a recognized cause to be the spearhead. Let's take Prussia in the Napoleonic Wars as an example. During that time, we had so called Freikorps, para-militaries composed of ordinary people with guns. These groups easily out-numbered Napoleon by 5:1 if not even more. Still, nothing happened and he steamrolled through the continent. They hated him, had weapons and backing from the Prussian crown, yet nothing happened. Do you think that they would then be up in arms if Prussian generals did false flags and started shooting their own people while yelling "viva la france!"? No, it first took men like Clausewitz to come back with troops after the negotiations in Russia to lead the population into victory. Then at Leipzig in 1813 the people showed their power and demolished French troops. This is why this mindset cannot work, you need your own direct strategy to win, you cannot out-source a revolution to "the people". Likewise, the French revolution wouldn't also be a thing with powerful men like Robbespierre and his Jacobins leading the cause.

Incorrect.

The goal of this is to make the public realize that there is a problem, fighting comes later when there is more of a substantial base for the the creation of a true counter force. As long as they aren't affected by it, most will do nothing

But you're not thinking this through. Do you honestly believe that you can blow up power plants and vanish while people then take up arms and do what? Kill all muslims and while they're at it, also destroy their governments and all of their international allies? All this while believing these sabotage acts across the nation of your choice were genuinely done by jihadists, because you're not up against the world's best counter-intelligence services?

But the gravest mistake in all of this is that you begin with the final condition of your plan. You cannot say that you begin operations once you have x ingredient ready for you. Every campaign begins with what you have. Until you have what you need, you're better off building this power base first before starting a revolution out of thin air.

Did you know that hidemyass WILL turn over all billing info to the right government agency, and they do keep logs for all posts made with their proxies?

He didn't think it through. This is literal 17 year old underage b& tier strategizing. He got ran out of /k/ and came here.

This is the sort of twat who fancies himself the next Rommel.

I'm not saying anyone should do anything, I just find it interesting to talk about.

It's like Dungeons and Dragons

You wouldn't blow up power plants, those are well guaded. Not that you would blow up anything at all, but if you were red team planning for such a scenario, people would be targeting the smaller and more numerous substations which are scattered everywhere, vulnerable to ranged attack from small arms and not actively guarded

I've aid it multiple times now, this alone would not spark a revolution

You seem to be far too triggered to have a discussion

Indeed, they completely fail to see dimensions of strategy that are not explosions and guns.

For the last time: your idea is in a bubble. Even if perfectly executed, it has no merits in the grand scheme.

So your criticism seems to be that I've not laid out an entire grand strategy along with different component tactics for retaking all of Europe and the holy land?

I think you just want to shut down a conversation

what does satis mentis obivia mean?

There isn't an argeement

It's "Enough to meet their minds" or "against closed minds" and I think there's a third interpretation

...