Apocalypse Not: Report of Defense Department Disaster Plan Overblown
Predictions of doom and apocalypse always make good press, and the combination of an election year’s hyperbole and a very real economic crisis in September and October just made predictions of doom seem all the more plausible.
So, when it was reported recently that the Department of Defense was preparing plans to suppress civil unrest following an economic collapse, it all seemed sort of plausible. Fitting, even. After all, the economic news had been running pretty much even between the idea that we were merely entering another Great Depression and that things were about to get really bad.
It certainly sounds scary. Think how much more scary it would be if it were actually true.
If we follow the links to the actual paper, “Known Unknowns: Unconventional ‘Strategic Shocks’ in Defense Strategy Development,” by Norman Freier (LTC, Ret.), though, we find out something else. First of all, there’s the paragraph that starts the paper:
The views expressed in this report are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, the Department of Defense, or the U.S. government.
Right away, we see one little hint that this might have been a bit overstated — this isn’t actually a DoD plan at all. It’s what is known, technically, as a “War College white paper.”
Here’s how it works: Someone has an idea and writes it up. They get a publication and with luck they get their names known in the community; this leads to more assignments to write papers, grants, conference attendance, and so on. It’s the way you make a living and a reputation as an academic after a military career.
It’s actually a good and useful thing — and in fact, Freier’s paper is a good one, with good ideas — but the problem comes when someone with not much experience, or on deadline, or trying to make a reputation as an investigative journalist, picks one up. Like this time.
Our irresponsible media hypes and sensationalizes everything.
Lyme disease
Ozone Hole
Avian Flu
Ebola virus
Shark attack
Global warming
West Nile Virus
Hurricane ‘x’
and on
and on
and on
Listening to them, I should have been dead a long, long time ago. I’ve come to the conclusion that most journalists are essentially subject matter morons and not worthy of attention. They can no longer be taken seriously.
But there may be something to a renewed and growing interest in Jeffersonian values in this era of government incompetence and failure.
We need a panic bailout so we can panic more! There must be a grant somewhere….probably from the department of education….
There is, and has been for many years, such a plan. It’s called CONPLAN 2502 (Garden Plot) and you can read about it here: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/garden_plot.htm
The military is paid to think, in practical ways, about things that most of us would rather pretend couldn’t happen.
I’m sure that the Defense Department makes plans all the time just so that they can feel like they’re anticipating all the possible scenarios. For example, they probably have a plan that will be executed in case Biden ever walks into a 7-11 or Dunkin Donuts and starts talking with a slight Indian accent.
Thanks, for clearing that up, Charlie. As usual, you clear up the fog surrounding ignorance of subjective ideas.
As a reporter and editor for 35 years, I can sort of see both sides here, sort-of because I didn’t talk to the reporter or hear what Frier said about the coverage. But it’s pretty obvious this is just another example of the decline in the quality of reporting and editing.
Maybe the reporter wrote it accurately and an editor spiced it up to attract readers; I don’t know. But that’s the point: time should have been taken to read the paper thoroughly and the author interviewed before the story was written. It appears none of that happened and news consumers are, once again, worse off for it.
Oops. That’s Freier, not Frier. Old fingers, tooo little time and all that.
Reminds of why I stopped reading Time, Newsweek, etc. Reporters, editors, etc. calling the AC-130 a “helicopter gunship”, mislabeling pictures of weapons, etc. things that anyone with a little military knowledge or access to “Jane’s” would have known. I knew right then if these so called “war correspondents” or “journalists/editors” couldn’t even get that right, then how could I trust anything they wrote, esp. in regards to the politics of the conflict.
It is my understanding that a war college professor may assign a student the task of devising an attack on someplace like Montreal, Canada! Obviously, anyone with half a brain knows that this is not to be taken seriously. It is merely an exercise in military preparation. This particular paper by Norman Freier should therefore be taken with a huge grain of salt. He is only writing hypothetically. The chance of it being adopted as official policy is next to zilch. I suspect that we would also burst out laughing if we ever saw a list of titles of other papers.
Nothing special here. Students at all the war colleges are normally required to write a formal paper as part of the graduation requirement. Usually, the students go through the motions and write a fully supported paper that doesn’t really tackle anything. This student may have picked a topic of interest to the SSI, who then thought enough of the result to publish it as a monograph. Happens all the time.
Gary from Jersey (and everyone else, for that matter): Keep in mind that the idea of the Army being employed to suppress social chaos happens to fit the Left’s longstanding narrative of Bush and the Right in general looking to establish a military dictatorship in the U.S. So, it’s entirely possible that this wasn’t just an innocent case of oversight by the journalist and/or editor in question.
We always have contingency plans in case things go awry.
TO: myth buster, et al.
RE: Indeed….
….we do….
….if we’re doing thinks in a rational manner.
RE: Case in Point
When I was working with the 1st MTC out of the DFC, we planned, coordinated, executed and evaluated exercises for all reserve component formations in the 13 states that make up the western third of the 48 contiguous. My team dealt with State Area Commands (STARCs), the state Adjutants General headquarters. We focused on how well prepared they were to deal with national emergencies and natural disasters.
Of all the natural disaster exercises we ran in the 10 years I was involved, I was most impressed with Oregon. No matter WHAT we threw at them, after the initial 8.3 earthquake, they were well prepared.
Mount Hood looks like it’s about to go ballistic [think Mount St Helens]? The STARC EOC Director, i.e., the state G3, after talking with the Adjutant General and Governor says, “Execute OPLAN HOOD”.
The engineers at the Trojan nuclear power plant, west of Portland, report a dangerous radiation leak? Again, after conference call, “Execute OPLAN TROJAN”.
In each instance, the evaluation team observers working the EOC said, 22 hands reached up and grabbed a three-ring binder with the OPLAN label on it and started down the check-list of units to activate and orders to be issued.
It was HIGHLY impressive, how well organized and prepared they were.
If there were a disaster in my state, I should hope the STARC is as well prepared for any reasonably possible contingency.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Chance favors the prepared mind. -- Louis Pasteur, Father of Modern Microbiology]
The seizing of guns in New Orleans after/during hurricane Katrina was begun by local authorities. If you go to TheShootist.net you should be able to find a link to the video. It was appalling to see a Sheriff/Police Officer saying, “No. We’re not gonna let anyone have any guns.” While some of it seems to have been carried out by armed National Guardsman, it originated with locals. The fantasy of massive Federale actions happens in the mind of journalists and Spielberg films.
TO: Charlie in Colorado
RE: I Don’t Mind….
….if the US Military has a plan to deal with massive civil unrest.
I do mind if officers in the US Military forget their oath of office is NOT to obey the President of the United States, but to uphold the Constitution of the United States….against all enemies, foreign and domestic. And a tyrannically aspiring president would be of the latter persuasion, in my honestly held professional opinion.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Officers are not authorized morale.]
What happens if a previously collapsed country shuts off the pipeline to a bunch of other countries in the middle of some really cold global warming?
Chuck: what are you talking about? What in the world caused you to direct that comment to me?
Oh, Gary, I sympathize; I must have corrected that typo 15 times in my copy.
Since so many people in this country are unfamiliar with Military Service it is worthwhile to take the time to read the Oath’s of Enlistment and Oath’s of Office. http://www.history.army.mil/faq/oaths.htm
The Enlistment Oath has a requirement to obey the orders of The President of The United States. The Oath of Office, the Oath taken by Officers, does not. Both Oath’s require supporting and defending The Constitution of The United States against all enemies foreign and domestic.
We aren’t the only ones that think about being attacked in multidimensional warfare ala your third bullet. The Chinese, among others, do too. Check out this translation from the Chinese:
http://www.terrorism.com/documents/TRC-Analysis/unrestricted.pdf
Having been published and translated into english, I doubt that it is the _actual_ Chinese battle plan. I have _no_ doubt that it reflects thinking by some military leaders in China, and may well have influenced the contingency planning that the Chinese conduct. We would be fools to ignore such thinking, which is what I fear that our top political leaders are doing.
TO: Charlie (Colorado)
RE: What?
Probably from the following:
[1] Commenting on the Freier monograph in another venue.
[2] Having read it not being particularly impressed with it as being anything ‘new’.
[3] However, noticing a dark undercurrent within its text.
[4] Your mentioning the monograph.
[5] Thinking of the report, from earlier this year, that someone idiot was thinking we should have 20,000 US Military personnel prepared to deal with massive civil disorder in 2011, just in time for the next election.
It’s called ‘connecting the dots’.
Hope that helps….
Regards,
Chuck(le)
P.S. Thanks for the link, Daddy. It’s pretty obvious that these people are rather ‘ignorant’…..
TO: Charlie (Colorado)
RE: ERRATA!
Item #5 should read “….Fall of LAST YEAR….”
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[There's too much blood in my caffeine system.]
Since when did “resisting U.S. influence” become tantamount to war?
TO: ‘Curious’
RE: Since ‘When’?
Probably around the date of 9/11: when a bunch of people “resisting U.S. influence” flew several airliners into various places killing about 3000 people.
Don’t you ‘think’?
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[The Truth will out.....and Islamists are not going to like it.]
@13
Chuck Pelto,
Thank you for the kind comments on Oregon’s disaster preparedness. Oregon is quite progressive in many ways. One of the few sales tax free economies left in the USA, 100% public ocean beaches, and a strong native pride.
You might also note that Oregon’s police forces refused to be federalized by the JTTF program.
OREGON. WE LOVE DREAMERS. ™
Peace.
DS