Oath Keepers was/is an attempt to get AD military and LEOs to swear an oath not to act against the Constitution and citizens when TSHTF. I quit recently when I found out they had lots of members, but that most were vets and retirees - very few AD military and LEOs.
Why? The OK founder came out with a screed recently, saying that members needed to keep talk of militias to a minimum: seems that AD folks, fearing loss of security clearance, career and eventual government pensions, didn’t want to associate with sites or organizations that might jeopardize their personal career security. To hell with the security of our Constitutional republic, to which they originally swore their oath.
So there you have it. Birds in gilded cages, neutered and emasculated through a half century of public education and media indoctrination orchestrated by our would-be global masters, coupled with the primacy of their own self-interests. Everything has always been for sale in America, no?
If these patriots will not consider joining an organization where patriotic talk might jeopardize their careers, how much more so would they ignore their Oath Keepers oath when the time comes, refusing to resist orders to suppress and corral the citizenry, orders which, if ignored or resisted, would certainly lead to the end of their careers, if not their lives.
I doubt we could count on the majority, or even a decent percentage, of the AD military or LEOs. I hope I’m reading these tea leaves wrong, but I doubt it. I believe the US citizenry is perceived as the biggest obstacle to the plans of the global elite, and that those who we might consider to be on our side will either prove to be bought off or intimidated into compliance when the time comes to move against us.
Hope I’m wrong.
Bump!
There is also the problem of phalangism. In Latin American countries, the idea of the military as "guardians of the Constitution/State/Society" is commonly accepted. But it is also the mover in most military golpes de estado that lead to juntas, and then an El Supremo emerging from the junta as a "first among equals".
So the idea of Army conservatorship of society => coup => caudillism.
That's been the cycle these last 160 years or so, anyway. It's a fixed feature of L.A. history. Along with "Why isn't their society more dynamic? Where are their inventors, industrial founders, their Nobel laureates and great industrialists?" That one is "the $64,000 question of South American political history". (My answer: They're a closet matriarchy.)