Paris Attacks

Bismark,
My apologies, I am certainly not trying to hijack your thread. We are discussing a active shooter/Paris style attack on the Combat Forum. Since this thread is discussing the attack and all its political nuances, I thought all should take a short break and consider the real possibly of an attack in your area. I just left an intelligence briefing about possible targets. PWI has a much larger audience than the Combat Forum, hopefully some of the suggestions will at least trigger a more thoughtful awareness. May each of you, and your families, have a safe and happy holiday season.

Active Shooter - Combat - Forums - T Nation

Situational Awareness - Combat - Forums - T Nation

Disclaimer: Some of these suggestions will probably be read as paranoid, well, I am a little paranoid and twitchy, but, I came by it honestly.

Note: I am going to use the word “spouse” to incorporate all relationships. “Families” can mean any group of individuals you are responsible for.

1.Know who you are with:

It is one thing to attend a social gathering, go to a ballgame, or peruse the malls with individuals who are trained for violence (military, LEO, PSD, corporate security) and quite another to be with people who only have experienced violence through video games. Realize they will have no situational awareness, nor, the training to help you survive an attack.

Realize that developing even a simple tactical plan will be met with skepticism and any attempt to make them understand will probably be futile. Do the best you can, but, have your own plan for survival, do not let well-meaning civilians comprise your strategy.

On the other spectrum, being with someone who is trained and especially armed is a real bonus and simple plans can be made driving to the venue. Just establish who will do what, who is the driver, who is the primary shooter, who is responsible for hunting exit locations, while the other or others provide protection, etc.

2.Yourself:

Being alone during an attack and your response will basically come down to the fight or flight reflex. IMHO, what you will do, will be based on your psychological mindset, your training, your experience with violence, your profession. Be honest with yourself and your abilities to combat violence, experience has taught me that men have a tendency to overestimate their combat abilities and usually just die on the scene. I don’t know what yours are, but, decide what you are going to do, before you arrive at the venue. In the middle of the attack is no time to be making the decision.

  1. Family:

Unless you are trapped and facing death, this decision is already made for you. You must get your family off the “X” and out of the primary attack zone. There should be no attempt at heroics when the ones you love are counting on you to provide leadership. As Mapwrap already discussed, know what you are going to do, where to take the family, running to the nearest store in a mall and finding the back door is excellent advice.

Often, terrorists on a major attack will place shooters at the main exits and kill as many as they can as they run out. Know where all the exits are, take the time to drive or walk around your venue, learn where the exit doors are, where the service entrances are, where the security kiosks or police substations are, where the exit roads are, where are the bottlenecks that a VBIED could be parked.

Spouse and Children:

As much as I would like to assume your spouse is highly trained (man or woman) the odds are they are not, so, it is up to you to develop a basic plan. Have a quiet, serious talk and go over some basic strategy, Outline the need to be situationally aware, inform them what can happen and stress that they are also responsible for helping survive an attack. I know it’s common for families to go shopping and split up, each going to their own preferred venue, but, during the holidays, that is a major tactical mistake. You don’t want to have some family member on one end of the mall and you on the other. Stay together, stay close.

If you have children with you, one of you must be the primary protector, it is simply too distracting to watch the kids and watch for an attack at the same time. Having small children is a dynamic all its own, I know. I once was part of a team that was providing security for a Coca-Cola executive and his family below the border and trying to run with a screaming 4 year old under your arm and returning fire with one hand is for the movies.

Decide who carries the child and who looks for exits, who will take point and who will not. Your spouse must recognize the threat and be able to function in a terrifying situation. Teach basic commands in a loud voice: Get the kids, get Tommy, grab my belt, run to the back of the store, etc. Simple commands, they work, because they are simple.

Have a shopping schedule and stick to it. Know the stores you want to visit, go there, do what you need to do and then leave. Try to arrange for visits during non-peak times. When the mall first opens at 1000 is much safer than 1900, remember terrorists use the maxim amount of destruction for the maximum amount of media coverage. I occasionally have to go to the Afghan government palace and I don’t go there after 1400, which is prime hit time here.

  1. Attack Dynamics:

Talk to your spouse about a possible attack and the ramifications of being caught up in the situation. The noise will be horrible, especially if they detonate a suicide vest first to soften up the guards/resistance or create mass panic which leads to easy targets. Try to make your spouse understand that people will be screaming and dying, and, if they have never experienced this type of violence, will probably go catatonic. This is a natural reaction that you must stop immediately, either by verbal commands or simply slapping the shit out of them.

You must get off the kill zone, you must survive or the kids will die. Try to convey how bad the panic will be and stress how important it is to follow your pre discussed plan and how you need to hyper focus on leaving by a safe exit, even to the point of running by people crying for help. You and the spouse have a family and nothing else matters. Harsh, I know, but there is a reason we leave a wounded member in a door way, it’s because we have to kill the threat, or, others will die. There is a reason you are leaving, so your family will live.

5.Vehicle borne improvised explosive devices (VBIED):

Almost all major attacks start with some type of VBIED, especially if the goal is major venue. I have been around them for the past 9 years and I am totally paranoid about vehicles. I have certain rules about parking lots around large retail outlets and malls. I always park as far away from the main entrance as I can, yes, your family will bitch about the extra walking, but, car bombs are not placed where they do the least damage. Would you rather have your family walk a little or park close to an entrance and die from an explosion?

Remember, terrorists don’t park anywhere but out front, so, even if they are not using a car bomb, when they exit the vehicle they are already shooting. I would think you would rather see that from a distance.

If it can be avoided, I never walk between parked vehicles, especially in front of large venues. In fact, I will often circle a parking lot just to avoid being between parking lanes. Humans are creatures of habits and terrorists know this, they know you will walk to shortest distance to the market or entrance to a venue. One terrorist with a pair of binoculars and a cell phone can detonate a car bomb at any time. Don’t be stupid and lazy, take the long way around, if possible.

  1. Vehicles:

Thou any vehicle can be used as a VBIED, I am paranoid about certain vehicles: Toyota Camrys, brown or gray in color and made in the 1990’s (the all-time favorite), small white pickup trucks, like the Hillux and especially avoid large garbage and cement mixer trucks, which can carry enough explosives to level a small mountain. I was in the wrong place when they blew the t-walls surrounding the old Baghdad hotel using a cement mixer truck, outside static security died instantly and then the ground forces moved in. You see any of these vehicles parked near an entrance to a venue or driving toward one, stay the hell away until they prove what they are.

  1. Motorcycles:

A quick word about motorcycles. In both Baghdad and Islamabad, I have had experiences with terrorists using motorcycles to drive up to a vehicle and detonate a bomb carried in a backpack or pull up in front to some cafe, Embassy entrance, military checkpoint, etc. and either detonate or open fire with an AK. It makes me extremely twitchy to have some biker in the US pull up in the lane next to me, and never trust someone who drives a motorcycle up to a venue entrance wearing a backpack or a large coat, never know if they are there to detonate. Vacate the area until their intentions are known.

  1. Weapons and Equipment:

I agree with Mapwrap about not engaging the attackers, even, if you are armed, unless you are simply trapped and going to die anyway. You will probably be armed with a handgun and they simply don’t match up against AK’s or M-4’s. A major assault will not be made with .22’s, so, you will be severely out gunned. And for those of you carrying, carry at least two extra magazines. Don’t bitch about your comfort, just remember, AK’S have 30 round magazines, you don’t.

Use your weapon to fight for an exit or fight to allow your family time to escape, not for offense. What you chose to carry is of course your decision and based on what laws your state has on the books. I don’t know if ASP batons are legal in your state, but, they make a good striking weapon and are easily concealable. Walking around a mall, like Mapwrap said, look for improvised weapons, even, tennis rackets make a good club. IMHO, always carry a small powerful belt flashlight, knife (legal length) and a cigarette lighter. Trying to find a way out for your family during a power outage, smoke, or garage tunnels is hell without a light. The knife has many uses and the lighter has abilities to create all sorts of problems.

  1. Harsh Reality:

You need to discuss with your spouse the reality that your family may be close to a suicide bomber when they detonate. You will either live or die. If you live, you will have severe disorientation for several minutes and your hearing will be completely screwed. If possible, do not make any moves until your hearing clears (if it does) and wait until the dizziness fades enough for you to try to make a rational decision on which way to flee. Stumbling around dazed and confused will just get you shot, better to lie still and play dead, than make a stupid decision.

Where there is one bomber, there are usually two. Talk to your spouse, acknowledge that one of you will probably die and the other one has the responsibilities to get the kids or themselves out. If they cannot handle this truth, then you have a real problem.

  1. I am no means and expert on family relations or mall survival, just things I have experienced.

Thanks Idaho. Unfortunately my wife has an inexplicable attraction to wrong places times actions and words. Smart in many ways but a full blown idiot when it comes to violence.

Idaho,

There is no need to apologize. I greatly appreciate you bringing the matter to our attention and the effort you put forth writing it. It’s great to have someone with your character and skill set and contribute to the forum.

[quote]pat wrote:

Quite frankly I trust none of the little armies or militias that have setup camp in Syria. To me they are all just varying degrees of the same thing. ISIS is the extreme terrorists and the Free Syrian Army are more mild terrorists. [/quote]

It’s sunnis vs shiites. They have no concept anything outside their midevil world view.

It’s blatantly obvious that none of these people are fighting for freedom (except the Kurds [who the turks are killing], and possible the Jordanians)

[quote]Aggv wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Quite frankly I trust none of the little armies or militias that have setup camp in Syria. To me they are all just varying degrees of the same thing. ISIS is the extreme terrorists and the Free Syrian Army are more mild terrorists. [/quote]

It’s sunnis vs shiites. They have no concept anything outside their midevil world view.

It’s blatantly obvious that none of these people are fighting for freedom (except the Kurds [who the turks are killing], and possible the Jordanians)[/quote]

Wait, slow down. Is midevil anything like medieval?

[quote]Aggv wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Quite frankly I trust none of the little armies or militias that have setup camp in Syria. To me they are all just varying degrees of the same thing. ISIS is the extreme terrorists and the Free Syrian Army are more mild terrorists. [/quote]

It’s sunnis vs shiites. They have no concept anything outside their midevil world view.

It’s blatantly obvious that none of these people are fighting for freedom (except the Kurds [who the turks are killing], and possible the Jordanians)[/quote]

“Fighting for freedom”? Each militia is fighting for their coreligionists and their interests attempting to come out on top. Look up what the Quran has to say about “freedom” - it is an entirely negative concept, a legacy of the Romans (Rum) against whom the faithful are supposed to be fighting.

Jordan is sunni, and as long as King Abdullah manages to keep control over the Bedouins (who are the most ruthless and efficient part of the Jordanian security apparatus) they’ll be pro US.

As for the Kurds…well, Gary Brecher summed it up nicely:

[quote]
Oh, and by the way, donâ??t expect most Western leftists to shed any tears over those dead Socialist fighters. Youâ??d think Western lefties would be happy that a radical-feminist, non-sectarian, aggressively pro-LGBT, egalitarian/socialist militia is taking back ground from the most reactionary, sectarian killers on earth. Nah. The most you can hope for is guarded silence. Kurds make them nervous for reasons Iâ??d rather not think about. [/quote]

http://ronsnews.blogspot.hr/2015/07/the-war-nerd-dont-be-fooled-turkey-is.html

[quote]loppar wrote:

[quote]Aggv wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Quite frankly I trust none of the little armies or militias that have setup camp in Syria. To me they are all just varying degrees of the same thing. ISIS is the extreme terrorists and the Free Syrian Army are more mild terrorists. [/quote]

It’s sunnis vs shiites. They have no concept anything outside their midevil world view.

It’s blatantly obvious that none of these people are fighting for freedom (except the Kurds [who the turks are killing], and possible the Jordanians)[/quote]

“Fighting for freedom”? Each militia is fighting for their coreligionists and their interests attempting to come out on top. Look up what the Quran has to say about “freedom” - it is an entirely negative concept, a legacy of the Romans (Rum) against whom the faithful are supposed to be fighting.

Jordan is sunni, and as long as King Abdullah manages to keep control over the Bedouins (who are the most ruthless and efficient part of the Jordanian security apparatus) they’ll be pro US.

As for the Kurds…well, Gary Brecher summed it up nicely:

This. American interests in the region are not freedom or democracy; they are security and stable and accessible energy markets.

[quote]Bismark wrote:

This. American interests in the region are not freedom or democracy; they are security and stable and accessible energy markets. [/quote]

Well, that worked so well with the House of Saud and the 1973 OPEC oil embargo and their subsequent sponsoring of a plethora of terrorist organizations, not to mention 9/11.

So you’ve got neither security nor stable energy markets. Nor that elusive concept freedom, which you couldn’t have in the first place.

You can bet not so many times on, let’s say Mubarak in the alleged interests of stability and security.

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
Thanks Idaho. Unfortunately my wife has an inexplicable attraction to wrong places times actions and words. Smart in many ways but a full blown idiot when it comes to violence. [/quote]

Hopefully, the Burgh will stay safe. [/quote]
Safest place in the world! Like when we hosted the G8 summit, the rest of the world just goes ’ Where? Pittsburgh? Nah, we’ll save our protests for somewhere cool…’

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]loppar wrote:

[quote]Aggv wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Quite frankly I trust none of the little armies or militias that have setup camp in Syria. To me they are all just varying degrees of the same thing. ISIS is the extreme terrorists and the Free Syrian Army are more mild terrorists. [/quote]

It’s sunnis vs shiites. They have no concept anything outside their midevil world view.

It’s blatantly obvious that none of these people are fighting for freedom (except the Kurds [who the turks are killing], and possible the Jordanians)[/quote]

“Fighting for freedom”? Each militia is fighting for their coreligionists and their interests attempting to come out on top. Look up what the Quran has to say about “freedom” - it is an entirely negative concept, a legacy of the Romans (Rum) against whom the faithful are supposed to be fighting.

Jordan is sunni, and as long as King Abdullah manages to keep control over the Bedouins (who are the most ruthless and efficient part of the Jordanian security apparatus) they’ll be pro US.

As for the Kurds…well, Gary Brecher summed it up nicely:

This. American interests in the region are not freedom or democracy; they are security and stable and accessible energy markets. [/quote]

If anything has been proven over the last 20 years it’s that it ain’t about the oil.

[quote]on edge wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]loppar wrote:

[quote]Aggv wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Quite frankly I trust none of the little armies or militias that have setup camp in Syria. To me they are all just varying degrees of the same thing. ISIS is the extreme terrorists and the Free Syrian Army are more mild terrorists. [/quote]

It’s blatantly obvious that none of these people are fighting for freedom (except the Kurds [who the turks are killing], and possible the Jordanians)[/quote]

“Fighting for freedom”? Each militia is fighting for their coreligionists and their interests attempting to come out on top. Look up what the Quran has to say about “freedom” - it is an entirely negative concept, a legacy of the Romans (Rum) against whom the faithful are supposed to be fighting.

Jordan is sunni, and as long as King Abdullah manages to keep control over the Bedouins (who are the most ruthless and efficient part of the Jordanian security apparatus) they’ll be pro US.

As for the Kurds…well, Gary Brecher summed it up nicely:

This. American interests in the region are not freedom or democracy; they are security and stable and accessible energy markets. [/quote]

If anything has been proven over the last 20 years it’s that it ain’t about the oil.[/quote]

Care to explain? The Gulf War (admittedly outside your narrow 20 year timeframe) was certainly motivated at least in part by oil.

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]on edge wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]loppar wrote:

[quote]Aggv wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Quite frankly I trust none of the little armies or militias that have setup camp in Syria. To me they are all just varying degrees of the same thing. ISIS is the extreme terrorists and the Free Syrian Army are more mild terrorists. [/quote]

It’s blatantly obvious that none of these people are fighting for freedom (except the Kurds [who the turks are killing], and possible the Jordanians)[/quote]

“Fighting for freedom”? Each militia is fighting for their coreligionists and their interests attempting to come out on top. Look up what the Quran has to say about “freedom” - it is an entirely negative concept, a legacy of the Romans (Rum) against whom the faithful are supposed to be fighting.

Jordan is sunni, and as long as King Abdullah manages to keep control over the Bedouins (who are the most ruthless and efficient part of the Jordanian security apparatus) they’ll be pro US.

As for the Kurds…well, Gary Brecher summed it up nicely:

This. American interests in the region are not freedom or democracy; they are security and stable and accessible energy markets. [/quote]

If anything has been proven over the last 20 years it’s that it ain’t about the oil.[/quote]

Care to explain? The Gulf War (admittedly outside your narrow 20 year timeframe) was certainly motivated at least in part by oil.
[/quote]

Thank you, make that 25 years. I meant to include the Gulf War. If it was about the oil we would have taken control of assets. Four administrations and not one of them could come up with an excuse to control oil assets? Nothing could have been easier with all that has gone on over the last 25 years. Nothing any of these administrations have done has hinted that it’s really about the oil.

We freed Kuwait, then we tried to establish a democracy in Iraq and since have been fighting terrorist. The only thing there that could linked to oil is Kuwait but lets face it, if we had simply let Saddam have Kuwait we would have still been on good terms with Iraq and the oil resources of Kuwait would have been available. It’s never been about the oil.

Slightly off topic, but I had to post this:

Perfectly encapsulates my experience of Dubai. Truly horrible, like all other Gulf States.

And yet they get a free pass when it comes throwing their money around on terrorists. Talk about ignoring the elephant in the room.

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Good grief, what a mess.

Economic migrants =/= Syrian refugees.

The moral and strategic case for admitting Syrian refugees.

The hysteria and fear mongering surrounding Syrian refugees is both shameful and foolish.

[quote]on edge wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]on edge wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]loppar wrote:

[quote]Aggv wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Quite frankly I trust none of the little armies or militias that have setup camp in Syria. To me they are all just varying degrees of the same thing. ISIS is the extreme terrorists and the Free Syrian Army are more mild terrorists. [/quote]

It’s blatantly obvious that none of these people are fighting for freedom (except the Kurds [who the turks are killing], and possible the Jordanians)[/quote]

“Fighting for freedom”? Each militia is fighting for their coreligionists and their interests attempting to come out on top. Look up what the Quran has to say about “freedom” - it is an entirely negative concept, a legacy of the Romans (Rum) against whom the faithful are supposed to be fighting.

Jordan is sunni, and as long as King Abdullah manages to keep control over the Bedouins (who are the most ruthless and efficient part of the Jordanian security apparatus) they’ll be pro US.

As for the Kurds…well, Gary Brecher summed it up nicely:

This. American interests in the region are not freedom or democracy; they are security and stable and accessible energy markets. [/quote]

If anything has been proven over the last 20 years it’s that it ain’t about the oil.[/quote]

Care to explain? The Gulf War (admittedly outside your narrow 20 year timeframe) was certainly motivated at least in part by oil.
[/quote]

Thank you, make that 25 years. I meant to include the Gulf War. If it was about the oil we would have taken control of assets. Four administrations and not one of them could come up with an excuse to control oil assets? Nothing could have been easier with all that has gone on over the last 25 years. Nothing any of these administrations have done has hinted that it’s really about the oil.

We freed Kuwait, then we tried to establish a democracy in Iraq and since have been fighting terrorist. The only thing there that could linked to oil is Kuwait but lets face it, if we had simply let Saddam have Kuwait we would have still been on good terms with Iraq and the oil resources of Kuwait would have been available. It’s never been about the oil.[/quote]

“Taken control of oil assets?” There is the slight problem of seizing the natural resources of a sovereign state through the use of force, threatened or actualized. International relations does not lend itself to gut impulse or analogy.

Your position is patently ahistorical. The United States became the security patron of the Gulf states in part to ensure western access to their vast petroleum reserves. US foreign policy toward the region has been inextricably bound to oil for decades. No one who has studied US foreign policy seriously (or at all) would argue otherwise.

http://m.jah.oxfordjournals.org/content/99/1/208.full

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Good grief, what a mess.

Economic migrants =/= Syrian refugees.

The moral and strategic case for admitting Syrian refugees.

The hysteria and fear mongering surrounding Syrian refugees is both shameful and foolish.[/quote]

Maybe there is some “hysteria and fear mongering” that is “both shameful and foolish” but there is a whole lot more [uconcern[/u] that allowing vast numbers of Syrians (and others) to overwhelm Western societies is stupid and shortsighted.[/quote]

No, not some. The question of Syrian refugees has been overwhelmed by hysteria and fear mongering. Unconcern? The intensive vetting process for refugees is more stringent than for any other traveler to the United States. The process often takes two years once displaced persons are granted refugee status by the UNHCR or the potential receiving state. Let’s ignore ISIL’s stated strategy of bringing about a clash of civilizations and its pleas to refugees not to emigrate to the infidel west. It makes little strategic sense for terrorist organizations to funnel operatives through such a scrutinized and roundabout route. The moral and strategic logic of accepting Syrian refugees (10,000, which is hardly vast vis-a-vis the population of the US and its past acceptance of refugees) far outweighs the case to not accept them. Make the effort to read the articles I cite with an open mind for once.