Second American Civil War - 1993

Status
Not open for further replies.

Susano

Banned
Heh, I guess it depends how clever the canadian government at this point is (please, no political flamewars following this comment :p). What you say is basicalyl true, but I think in everdaypolitics one can lose oversight of those things...
Of course, even if Canada properly defends its borders, the western independance movement will be strenghtened, by MALL and US incursions, repelled or not. This could lead to a very interesting three-way struggle, with the allied independancemovemnts, the USA and Canada, while Quebec provides an additional element of unstability.
 
Susano said:
Heh, I guess it depends how clever the canadian government at this point is (please, no political flamewars following this comment :p). What you say is basicalyl true, but I think in everdaypolitics one can lose oversight of those things...
Of course, even if Canada properly defends its borders, the western independance movement will be strenghtened, by MALL and US incursions, repelled or not. This could lead to a very interesting three-way struggle, with the allied independancemovemnts, the USA and Canada, while Quebec provides an additional element of unstability.

I'm not sure if I would see it as an independence movement, so much as a States' rights movement. Of course I am only speculating, but the MALL isn't neccesarily about seceeding, so much as fighting off Federal incursion.
 

Susano

Banned
I think as soon as the USA deploys military, or at the very last as soon as the shooting begins, that this becomes a mere technicality...
 
david3565 said:
I'm not sure if I would see it as an independence movement, so much as a States' rights movement. Of course I am only speculating, but the MALL isn't neccesarily about seceeding, so much as fighting off Federal incursion.

Maybe not initially. But I feel that after a large scale battle or two, we're going to see the MALL shift its policies towards a more pro-independence movement. However, until the situation is relatively stable, I don't see them actually seceding, as that would be an act of treason (or something similar, I'm not exactly sure how that law works) under the current constitution. I can see them eventually renouncing their allegiance to the US, especially after the perceived aggressiveness of the US.

BTW, I've been turning over in mind, but not really getting anywhere. A major problem that the MALL is going to have is going to be a lack of defense-related industry. Were the MALL to eventually declare independence, which I feel is relative assured after some large-scale combat, they are going to sorely lack in defense-related industry. Yes, they will have the Boeing Corporation in Washington, if Washington goes along whole-heartedly (which I think will require some political adjustments between the late 60s and the early 90s) and they will have, obviously the captured weapons and NG weapons. They will also gain a Naval force, as I think it unlikely that the federal government will think to scuttle the "mothball fleet" in Puget Sound. But there will be only a small amount of ground-force manufacturing in the MALL.

I think we're going to need a foreign ally. But who? It has to be someone who: A) would somehow want to hurt the United States in some way, B) someone who would feel relatively invulnerable acting in the face of the US, and C) someone who the MALL would feel relatively comfortable accepting support from (don't forget that they too are Americans). Right now, were Canada to react the way I predicted earlier, I'm leaning toward France as being the best choice, especially if the three rebel groups (MALL, WCC (Western Canadian Coalition), and Quebec) were to ally in anyway. Anyways, I'm still the first one to admit that this is rather implausible (the part about France, anyway) but if anyone can think of another solution, I'm all ears.
 
Walter,

Your scenario is sounding very interesting. How is MALL going to get a coastline, though? Eastern Washington and Oregon might go for MALL secessionism, but the coastal people probably would not.
 
"I expect groups like the Michigan Militia to play a role only if Rhodes is smart. I'd expect him to use the group to his advantage while staying distant from them. That said, I think the best way to employ the so-called "Michigan Militia" is to use them to, oh, take potshots at federal convoys heading west. Other than that, I don't see them playing a part, as all three of the leaders are ex-Spec Ops soldiers, they will have a distinct disdain for the slovenly militias."

Judging from the stuff I've seen about the Michigan outfit, they're much better than the average fat-guys-with-guns "weekend warrior" militia groups. They might be able to do more useful work. Most of the militia movement, however, could probably be nothing more than a distraction and/or cannon fodder, as you suggest.
 

NapoleonXIV

Banned
Going rather well, I see.

However, there is one group you are leaving out and I think must be dealt with. The Native Americans here are not, I think, a small minority and certainly not a quiet one. The tribes here have little reason to love the locals and every reason to see Uncle in Washington as the main protector of their rights given the long string of court cases which the Feds have settled mainly in their favor, often against local and even state opposition. A very liberal government would almost certainly lean more their way than even OTL. They are cohesive, organized, well-armed, possess a long and proud warrior tradition, are very militant as a minority and posses the only history of successful guerrilla activity in the area.

If they support it or can be convinced to neutrality, you may or may not succeed (the white on that map is still pretty much over the green). If they don't, you have no chance.

Can you convert them? If you cannot, the irony of having the American Indians save the United States Federal Government may be a consolation.
 

Susano

Banned
France soudns like a good idea. You could look at the "Qubebecois vote oui" (or so) thread for ideas about a different result in the quebcian independance vote. However, France will more or less ONLY have an interest in Qubec - which happens to be on the other side of the continent. Oh, sure, tehy will now and then try to smuggle some weapons to MALL and WCC, but if they go through the atlantic and then north america, or through the pacific - teh wepons would have to go through half the world, and as said I dont thinkfrance would deliever too many.

Hm. Is there a chance of an "Atztlan" movement rising at the same time in the southwest? Mexico might deliver weapons then, if the government feels daring. Or hell, even China could, in a fit of "lets renew cold war"...
 
Susano,

The "La Raza Unida" types in the SW could make trouble; however, I don't think they have the "demographic mass" @ this point.

Did Kennedy condemn Chinese suppression of the Tianemen Square demonstrations? Would he oppose open trade between the US and China?

If so, I imagine the Chinese could sponsor the MALL secessionists in retaliation. However, would the MALL types be willing to take arms from a Communist state? There is the "comfort zone" factor?
 
Matt Quinn said:
Your scenario is sounding very interesting. How is MALL going to get a coastline, though? Eastern Washington and Oregon might go for MALL secessionism, but the coastal people probably would not.

I'm viewing it as a series of small changes which can ultimately lead to a larger one. In this case, the pro-MALL stance of eastern Oregon and Washington infecting that of the western halves of the state. Again, it's going to be difficult and I've been mulling it over for a time. I'm thinking that, when they see fellow Washingtonians (what do you call someone from Washington?) siding with the MALL, and eventually some being killed, there will be the first of a small series of shift in the Pacific Coast's political scene.

So, let's do it like this, say, in the beginning 50% of the east and 10% of the west side with the MALL. That means there'll be about 1.5 MALL supporters for every 3.5 US supporters. Now, the first stages of combat will see another small shift. So, say the eastern support rises rather rapidly (since it is from there that most of the Washingtonians getting killed are from) while western support rises, albeit slowly. Now, 70% in the east and 15-20% in the west support the MALL. Now you have about 2 to 3 supporters. Now, for a neat trick. Following an increasingly belligerent tone of many state politicians, the federal government orders a round-up of all pro-MALL state reps for questioning. Influences both eastern (now at 75%) and western (now at 25%) opinion, especially after the first arrests are made. Now, for the whole state, it's about 50-50 on support for the MALL. Elections for Governor see a pro-MALL Governor squeak by. The US government orders his arrest. He goes into hiding following a brief shootout between pro-MALL people and FBI. Several innocents are killed. MALL support rises slightly. An aging member of the Boeing Board of Directors makes a belligerent comment. The US government overreacts, and orders an investigation of Boeing to make sure no arms from Boeing are going to rebels. The company is temporarily shut down for the investigation, which hits the people of western Washington particularly hard. Support rises again. Support for the entire state is now near 65-35 pro-MALL. Boeing workers riot, and are harshly put in place by federal agents. Seattle police can't take it anymore, after the federal agents accidentaly kill one rioter with a rubber bullet. The chief of police orders the federal agents placed under arrest. He invites the Governor, who had recently emerged from hiding in Spokane, back to Seattle/Olympia. The Governor's first decision is to order the NG to stand against the federalization orders and disarm and extradite all federal agents in the state. With nearly 70% of the population supporting the MALL, Washington (and perhaps Oregon, which now is at a 50% pro-MALL stance) stands together with Governor Rhodes of Idaho. As Washington gets more and more involved in the fighting, and Washingtonians die, support continues to grow.

Now, again, I'm not sure how realistic this is, but it's possible, if not plausible.
 
Matt Quinn said:
If so, I imagine the Chinese could sponsor the MALL secessionists in retaliation. However, would the MALL types be willing to take arms from a Communist state? There is the "comfort zone" factor?

My thoughts exactly. Remember, these men consider themselves to be ultra-Patriots, I doubt they'd accept more than token help from the Chinese and even implied, oral support would make them feel uncomfortable, IMHO.
 
NapoleonXIV said:
Can you convert them? If you cannot, the irony of having the American Indians save the United States Federal Government may be a consolation.

I think it's definitely do-able. The Indians have not been treated so well by the federal government, as we all know, and with a few choice promises, I believe a smart politician could easily work out some sort of arrangement to, at least, keep the Indians neutral during the war. I think the place to start would be to improve living conditions on the reservations, maybe starting with education and a more intensive anti-crime program.
 
Timeline?

Wow, I think I need to condense all the ideas I've thrown out into a timeline of some sort or I'll never be able to keep it all straight. But, before I do, does anyone have any large suggestions or changes that I need to make to my overall idea??
 
Last edited:
Some biographies...

Here are some biographies*** up until 1993: (thanks to david3565 for some ideas)

The American Handbook: “Kennedy, Edward”

…Edward Kennedy, brother to the former President, almost ended his political career in a car accident in 1969. Luckily, however, although Kennedy was driving drunk and did hit a tree, his female passenger survived the accident in good shape. Mary Jo Kopechne not only survives the incident but emerges from the hospital a week later.

Charged with Driving Under the Influence and ordered to undergo alcohol treatment, Kennedy was temporarily ruined as a Democratic Presidential candidate. His entire career, however, was not even close to being ruined by the incident. In the end, he emerges relatively unscathed.

Returned to the Senate again in 1976, he campaigned hard for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1980 but lost to incumbent President Jimmy Carter. During the 1980s, he was a leading liberal critic of the Reagan administration.

In 1992, Kennedy, the leading critic of the conservative Republican Party and the leading proponent for the expansion of the federal government and its powers, was nominated as the Democratic candidate. Like Rhodes in Idaho, Kennedy squeaked by in the election. The main reason for his victory was that Texas billionaire H. Ross Perot split the Republican vote…


The American Handbook: “Latham, Douglas”

…Douglas Latham began his military career as a Private in the jungles of Vietnam. Working his way through the American military hierarchy, Latham came to know the associates of his later life, Nathan Rhodes and James Roberts, while serving in the Fifth Special Operations Group. Latham finished the Vietnam War as a Sergeant Major in the Green Berets.

Unlike his colleagues, Latham spent the post-war years attempting to make a career out of the military. However, Latham soon found that he grew easily weary of the constant political aspects of the Special Forces, and, thus, transferred out of the Special Forces in 1975. Latham soon found himself active within the 101st Airborne Division, becoming a Lt. Colonel in 1981.

Forced by a lingering respiratory problem, Lt. Col. Latham was forced out of the United States Army in 1983, something that left Latham embittered with the federal government. Upon returning to his home state in the spring of 1984, Latham was offered a command in the Idaho National Guard.

Commissioned a Colonel in 1984, Latham excelled in his Guard duties, proving time and time again what his former commanders already knew: that Latham was an intelligent, innovative military commander and would be more than just a formidable adversary on the battlefield. When the State Adjutant General retired in 1989, Latham was offered command of the Idaho National Guard. Jumping at the chance, the fifty year old was promoted to the rank of Major General in the fall of 1989.

A non-political officer who collected a following of loyal soldiers wherever he served, Latham soon found his most powerful patron in Nathan Rhodes, his former commander and current Representative to the Idaho State Legislature. The two soon rekindled their friendship and found that they had much in common in terms of political motivations…


The American Handbook: “Rhodes, Nathan”

…Nathan Rhodes served as a Captain in the Fifth Special Operations Squadron during the Vietnam War. Towards the end of the conflict, death was narrowly averted when one of his own soldiers tried to “frag” him. The soldier was stopped by a Corporal by the name of James Roberts, a man to who Rhodes’ constantly felt in debt.

At the end of the war, Rhodes ended his military career, returning home to Idaho. The son of a banker, Rhodes was already quite wealthy. He used his first money to buy a gun store in Pocatello, which he expanded over the next twenty years to include twenty-one stores in Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming. These gun stores provided arms and ammunition to the Northwest Defense Front, the civil defense organization run by James Roberts.

Successful in his own right, Rhodes entered the political scene in 1986, winning a seat in the Idaho House of Representatives. While in the House, Rhodes soon became a crusader for Individual Rights. Within the decade, most Americans knew of the fiery Representative from Idaho who viewed Washington, DC, as too corrupt for him to even enter the national government.

Instead, Rhodes clawed his way up the ladder in Idaho, working like an animal and riding a crest of public support over his opposition to the expansion of the federal government. Nominated by the Republican Party in 1992, Rhodes managed to scratch out a victory over the Democratic candidate, becoming the Governor of Idaho and main adversary to both the federal government and the new President…


The American Handbook: “Roberts, James”

...While serving with the Fifth Special Operations Group in Vietnam, Corporal James Roberts caught another soldier attempting to “frag” their officer (Nathan Rhodes). Corporal Roberts beat the young soldier to within an inch of his life and was subsequently court-martialed for his unnecessary violence.

Dishonorably discharged from the United States military in 1971, the Vietnam War left Roberts disillusioned with the United States government, to say the least. Denied the rights guaranteed to him by the “GI Bill” of 1944 despite three years of dedicated service in the jungles of Southeast Asia, the poor son of a farmer returns to Idaho.

After bouncing around the United States for six months, Roberts became disgusted with the attitudes of the American populace and especially that which he heard coming out of California. Heading overseas, Roberts found himself in Hong Kong in the summer of 1973, when he was first contacted by the Blackwater Securities and Training Company (BSTC).

BSTC was composed of Vietnam veterans like himself, including former British SAS-Airmen, former Royal Marines, and former American Special Forces soldiers. Roberts signed on with the group, spending the next ten years training Special Forces Units from South Africa to Argentina to Venezuela. Growing weary of the life, Roberts finished his decade-long stint with the BSTC in 1984 and returned to Idaho.

Joining the local chapter of the American Legion, Roberts soon begins arranging for informal classes on the arts of Special Forces. Meeting disillusioned veterans in their mid-thirties like himself, Roberts forms a militia devoted to defending and advancing individual rights known as the Northwest Defense Front (NDF).

The NDF soon develops into a tight-knit group of ultra-Patriots and into a well-organized, well-trained, well-equipped (thanks to Rhodes’s Northwest Arms Corporation) fighting force, led by a relatively large cadre of three hundred former veterans. Unlike other groups, Roberts’s NDF is composed of normal, upstanding citizens of the Northwest. They are not survivalist groups like other so-called “militias.” By 1992, the NDF had swelled to include nearly nine hundred members…

*** There will likely be changes to this. I'm thinking of moving the biggest changes back to the 1988 Presidential election, but I'm still tossing that around in my head.
 
The Beginning

Okay. Now, I think I'm leaning away from the Kennedy aspect of the Second Civil War. The timeline now has a POD (besides Latham, Rhodes, and Roberts living through the Vietnam War) of Vice President Bush having a heart attack in late October of 1988. The way I figure it, even that weasel Dukakis has a better chance than Quayle. Anyways, I still have to work out the details of Dukakis's Presidency, such as larger gun control laws, but here are the events of 1992 which precede the Civil War.

June 21, 1992:
President Michael Dukakis is assassinated when his helicopter is shot down by a shoulder-launched missile while taking off from the White House lawn. The assassin, surprisingly, is not caught.

June 27, 1992:
President Lloyd Bentsen appoints a commission to investigate the assassination of President Dukakis. The Commission’s findings are due by the end of July.

July 30, 1992:
The Congressional Commission’s finds that they cannot accurately determine what group (or who) committed the assassination. The militia groups of the Northwest, however, are at the top of the list and the Commission suggests that a Task Force be sent into Idaho to conduct further investigation.

August 10, 1992:
The Federal Task Force, composed mainly of FBI Agents, descends upon Idaho. They soon find that the area is extremely hostile to the federal government and most of the citizens are well armed. Too well armed, in fact. Many possess weapons which violate the Gun Control Acts of the past four years. The Task Force finds that the state governments of Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming have allocated almost nothing to the enforcement of federal gun laws.

August 16, 1992:
The Task Force receives permission from President Bentsen to enforce those gun laws, since the local law enforcement seems unwilling to do so. In Idaho, the head of the Task Force, Richard Hamilton, begins preparing for a series of searches and seizures, even before they’ve obtained warrants.

August 21, 1992:

The federal siege of Ruby Ridge begins with death of Sammy Weaver and his dog. The federal forces encircle the Weaver family compound, and begin what is to become a five day siege.

August 22, 1992:
Governor Nathan Rhodes calls up A Company, 2nd of the 116th Armored Cavalry Regiment as a show of support for the federal agents. The commander of the Company, however, is secretly under strict orders to not intervene, no matter what occurs.

August 24, 1992:
A Company, 2nd of the 116th, arrives with the federal agents besieging the Weaver family compound. The commander sets up camp less than half a mile away from the federal lines.

August 25, 1992:
An NDF unit hears of what is going on at Ruby Ridge, in nearby northern Idaho. Less than three hours later, twelve men, heavily armed with machine guns, assault and sniper rifles, are on their way to the isolated location in northern Idaho.

August 26, 1992:
In the early morning hours the twelve NDF Patriots break the siege of Ruby Ridge long enough to rescue Randall Weaver, Kevin Harris, and two of Weaver’s children. Federal forces take heavy losses, with almost twenty-five men killed. The U.S. Marshals, however, manage to capture four of the NDF Patriots driving away from the location of Ruby Ridge. The Idaho National Guardsmen, as per orders, do not react.

August 29, 1992:
The Task Force receives nearly one hundred warrants for suspected militia leaders from the Federal District Court in San Francisco. Governor Rhodes announces that these warrants are illegal. The Federal Task Force went around the local court system when local judges refused to issue warrants.

August 31, 1992:
The U.S. Justice Department announces that they plan on requesting a change in venue for the Idaho Four. Governor Rhodes announces that he will fight tooth and nail against the change in venue, stating that the four men would not be able to receive a fair trial in San Francisco. They also announce their plans to prosecute the Captain in command of A Company for negligence during the Ruby Ridge siege.

September 8, 1992:
A four-week process of seizing illegal weapons from militia leaders begins. The Task Force finds several huge weapons caches of assault rifles and machine guns.

October 2, 1992:
The change in venue for the Idaho Four is granted. Governor Rhodes is livid. With complaints coming in from citizens concerned over the Federal seizures of weapons and now the movement of four Idaho citizens to a court where they will not have a jury of their peers, Rhodes and his new Attorney General, James Roberts, decide that it has become time to act.

October 13, 1992:
Like the Idaho Four, the National Guardsman in charge of A Company on August 26 is to go to trial – in California. This is the final straw for Governor Rhodes.

November 1, 1992:
The Federal Task Force, while searching a ranch, is surrounded and ordered to halt by Idaho State Police. The nearly sixty agents of the Task Force are escorted to the Federal Court in Boise, where they are detained indefinitely.

November 4, 1992:
Elections in Oregon and Washington see two members of the Constitutional Republican Party (Rhodes's third party which is extremely popular in the Northwest) elected Governor. Since the seizure of weapons in Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming, public support for the three states in Oregon and Washington has skyrocketed, even in the previously liberal western halves of the states. Both states pledge to back the three besieged states.

November 8, 1992:
With the round up of federal agents in Idaho, President Bentsen orders Governor Rhodes arrested. FBI Agents start massing in Salt Lake City for the drive to Boise.

November 12, 1992:
The federal convoy leaves Salt Lake City for Boise. Idaho State Police spot the convoy of federal vehicles on Interstate 84, just east of Malta, Idaho. They follow the convoy but do not pull it over. Governor Rhodes gives orders to ignore the convoy. The State Policemen, puzzled by the Governor’s orders, are forced to drop back and allow the convoy to proceed, uninhibited by Idaho law enforcement.

At the urging of Attorney General Roberts, Governor Rhodes leaves the Governor’s Mansion in Boise, heading to the National Guard Base at Gowen Field on the outskirts of town. Arriving at the National Guard Base, Rhodes issues the appropriate orders to initiate a call up of National Guardsmen and State Police around Idaho and begins making phone calls to his fellow Governors in Oregon, Montana, Washington, and Wyoming.

The Governors of the four states, woken by Rhodes’s call, also initiate a call up of all National Guardsmen and an activation of all State Police. The convoy of federal agents arrives in Boise and enter the Governor’s Mansion, intent on arresting Rhodes. Little do they know, however, that Rhodes had already evacuated. The Governor’s Mansion is then surrounded by Idaho State Police, who quickly round up any and all federal agents in the vicinity.

All federal agents are ordered to leave the states of Idaho, Oregon, Montana, Washington, and Wyoming, citing their unlawful searches, seizures, and arrests, as well as the infringement on individual and states’ rights. The call-up of the National Guardsmen is first broadcast on television and over the radio.

More to come, if anyone is still reading this...
 

Chris

Banned
Excellent

Questions:

What US arsanels are within those states?

How many national guardsmen and other who will fight for tham?

What is the rebelleians objective? Less federal control? Less taxes? Total independence?

What politcal route can they take? What about the senators and congresscritters? Can they impeach the president?

What about international implications? If this is after the gulf war (or perhaps because of the gulf war), how will a US civil war affect the power balance? Will the EU try to set its own course? Will the arabs see an oppotunity to hit isreal (or vice versa). Will Russia be able to reimpose control over its borders? Bin Ladin be a pain in someone elses ass?

Or, will the UN have any role to play? Perhaps the rebels will demand UN peacekeepers. Or, what if there is a poll for independence and the states want out of the US.

Chris
 
Chris said:
What US arsanels are within those states?

There are no major US Army Depots with the rebellious areas. There are however, the NG arsenals, about 100 of them, several large, air force bases, the mothball fleet in Puget Sound, and, IMHO, most importantly, Fort Lewis in Washington. The rebels are going to have to make a play for Ft. Lewis if they want any extra ammunition. However, there is a whole regular US Army division in Ft. Lewis that needs to be neutralized. I'm thinking that there's going to be a lightning attack by Washington NG who surround Ft. Lewis and disarm its soldiers before they can react. It's the only way that they stand a chance to capture Ft. Lewis.

Chris said:
How many national guardsmen and other who will fight for them?

The major groupings are the:
116th Armor Cavalry Brigade (IDANG)
1-183 AVN (Attack Helicopter) (IDANG)
1-190th Field Artillery Battalion (MTANG)
1-190th Field Artillery Battalion (MTANG)
1-112 AVN (LUH) (MTANG)
495th Transportation Battalion (MTANG)
1-82 CAV (ORANG)
3-116 CAV (M1A1) (ORANG)
641st Medical Bn (Air Amb) (ORANG)
1249th ENG Bn (ORANG)
41st Infantry Bde (Light) (Separate) (ORANG)
81st Infantry Bde (WAANG)
66th Aviation Bde (WAANG)
120th FW (MTAIRNG)
142nd FW (ORAIRNG)
Plus, assorted other fighter/bomber squadrons and the air force bases captured by rebel troops.

Altogether, about 35,000-45,000 troops. Most, if not all, I'd say about 90%, will fight with the rebels, especially after a bombing or two of one of their home cities...

Chris said:
What is the rebelleians objective? Less federal control? Less taxes? Total independence?

Initially: Less federal control.
Eventually: Total independence.

Chris said:
What politcal route can they take? What about the senators and congresscritters? Can they impeach the president?

Not many. It's too late and since both sides have broken laws in the other's opinion, neither will negotiate. They do not have nearly enough supporters within Congress to impeach Bentsen.

Chris said:
What about international implications? If this is after the gulf war (or perhaps because of the gulf war), how will a US civil war affect the power balance? Will the EU try to set its own course? Will the arabs see an oppotunity to hit isreal (or vice versa). Will Russia be able to reimpose control over its borders? Bin Ladin be a pain in someone elses ass? Or, will the UN have any role to play? Perhaps the rebels will demand UN peacekeepers. Or, what if there is a poll for independence and the states want out of the US.

I'm not sure, that's for future sections of the TL, now, isn't it...? ;)
 
The revised version works well. You've got all sorts of Federal intrusions needed to stoke militia-type anger and a good POD that doesn't cause TOO many changes (unlike the other thread TL that involved a Democratic 80s).
 
However, I'd recommend inserting some really outrageous federal actions into the TL. Perhaps the FBI agent's jeer of "Who's gonna fix your dinner now?" @ Weaver's kids after the killing of Mrs. Weaver gets more publicity and images of the Gestapo start running through people's heads. Perhaps some unnecessary violence in the execution of the search warrants too.

Of course, the (First) American Revolution only needed some gun-grabbing to get started. Egregious cruelty might not be needed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top