The leadership of the Davidians shifted through many different people until falling into the hands of a man named Vernon Howell. Howell quickly changed his name to David Koresh, a spiritually significant name that compared him to the spiritual heir to the biblical King David. The first conflicts between the Davidians and the US government began after Koresh wed multiple wives, some of which were underage.
Many Davidians also believed that the end times, or the end of the world, were imminent. Because of this, they stockpiled illegal weapons and ammunition, which aroused the attention of the BATF, or Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. The BATF subsequently attempted to raid the Davidians compound but were repelled by the heavily armed inhabitants. Instead of giving up, this initial conflict resulted in a 51-day siege between the BATF and the Davidians that included nonstop blasting of music to prevent the Davidians from sleeping, and a 60-hour negotiation with their leader Koresh.
Eventually, the FBI was involved, and the forces besieging the Davidian compound included twelve tanks and 900 military personnel. The FBI's assault resulted in a massive fire that killed 76 out of the 85 Davidians involved. This event is surrounded by controversy. Many saw this as an overextension of the government's power and believed that President Clinton had no right to kill the Davidians. Clinton, however, responded by saying that the "cult members" had burned themselves to death and that the US government should not be held liable.
The turmoil surrounding this event eventually also lead to the Oklahoma City bombing, which was orchestrated by a radical right-wing member who saw the federal government as a threat.
https://www.history.com/topics/waco-siege
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Branch-Davidian
https://www.vox.com/2018/4/19/17246732/waco-tragedy-explained-david-koresh-mount-carmel-branch-davidian-cult-25-year-anniversary
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/9-things-you-should-know-about-david-koresh-and-the-branch-davidians/
Alan, thanks for writing this informative post on an important historical event. What I found to be interesting was that certain people thought this was a case of government overextension. The Davidians clearly broke a number of laws, so I think the government was justified in attempting to intervene. Because of the armed resistance presented by the Davidians, military use was justified. However, it is worth noting that the FBI should have tried to find a better way to end the siege which would have resulted in fewer deaths.
ReplyDeleteAlan, I found this extremely interesting and was surprised that I had never heard about this even though it happened fairly recently. Laying siege to a compound is not something you would think happens domestically, and its strange to only hear about this now. Quickly looking into it, I found that it's odd to find that armed resistance against federal troops is more common than I would have thought. Other incidents include, Ruby Ridge, Bundy Standoff, Standoff with Montana Freemen, and more.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/01/04/a-look-at-10-other-government-stand-offs-like-the-one-in-oregon-most-of-which-ended-peacefully/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.ffc7a4fbfb71
Alan, this is a great post that sheds some light on an otherwise lesser known historical event. I agree with Ari on this one, as I am surprised that such an event could happen relatively recently and we had not heard of it. What I think could be an interesting discussion is whether or not this kind of act would be tolerated today. In today's climate, 76 killed would be a national outrage, no matter what the reason, and the government being involved could make the reaction worse. But, the government was still justified to some extent by the fact that the Davidians had broken the law. So where exactly does the correct response fall? And would today's society tolerate such action from the government? Just some questions to think about, to try to understand the shifting attitudes of American society.
ReplyDelete