User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 11:54:38 AM EDT
[#1]
Quoted: thanks MCCallan. [b]"That's [u]Lonnegan[/u]", Doyle Lonnegan!"[/b] (from The Sting, funny scene where Paul Newman intentionally flubs Doyle Lonnegan's name at the poker game) [:D] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 11:56:28 AM EDT
[#2]
actually natez it was 63 degrees here yesterday, some golf courses opened and the carwashes were full.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 12:00:49 PM EDT
[#3]
Quoted: actually natez it was 63 degrees here yesterday, some golf courses opened and the carwashes were full. Haven't lived there in 20 years (thank God), but I'll take your word for it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 12:13:48 PM EDT
[#4]
Quoted: Yes, and part of that custodial care is security. Now, rehearsing for security around a reservoir makes sense. \ It has been well documented that a reservoir CANNOT be polluted with a 40 mL vial of contaminant. It was take more like a 10,000 gallon diesel fuel tank truck of contaminant. WHich the terrorist would simply crash thru the gate with (Bypassing the security ID checkpoint) , and ignite a small bomb to rupture the tank and pollute the reservoir. So, ONCE AGAIN, these Nat Guard guys are getting the WRONG training. Training to check ID's violating the unreasonable search and seizure clause of the BOR is NOT the training they need. besides, MOST ID's don't have a "Terrorist" checkbox on them anyway. Checking ID's does NOTHING. They checked Mohammed Attas AND Richard Reids ID - and look how well THAT worked out [rolleyes] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 12:33:11 PM EDT
[#5]
No, you probably couldn't stop someone with a big herkin' truck full of diesel on a suicide mission. But you could protect against someone who doesn't want to die or get caught.
Now, I don't know much about the water supply, and I ain't no Elwood Einstein, but I'm guessing that the water goes from the reservoir to the purification plant via some sort of pipe. There might even be some sort of pumping station or other equipment there that if it were blown up, might cause a disruption in the water supply. Also, terror isn't necessarily about inflicting casualties. It's about affecting the morale of the population. So suppose someone dumped a 55 gallon drum of something nasty in your reservoir. You might believe that that's not enough to do any harm, but what are you going to think about from then on, every time you turn on the faucet to get a glass of water? Are you going to have the same confidence in the water supply that you have right now? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 12:58:35 PM EDT
[#6]
Quoted: If gov't does "own" anything, its only becasue nancy's like y'all FORGET to remind them of who, according to the Constitution is ultimately sovereign. That, and as I stated above, we the governed have CONSENTED to give them custodial hold of OUR property. Who paid for the land?? NOT the gov't. WHo paid for the construction of the building? NOT the gov't. Who pays for the security that keeps the civilians out?? NOT the gov't. Who pays for the electricity, the paper clips, the repairs, the salaries of the employees who work their?? NOT the gov't. Who owns it?? NOT the gov't. Gov't is NOT a producer or owner of anything. It merely is a necessary parasite that we have consented to run a few things for us, due to expediency. Thru the consent of the governed they have custodial care or whatever we ultimately ALLOW them to have. Ya'll mindset is what created Commiefornia. And you can make your little hyperboles (gov't thug - well named [:D] )and disregard what the Constitution intended, and then COUNT THE DAYS until gov't RELLY DOES take everything you have de facto given them. Not me. Not here. I proudly salute you Sir. You know and understand what is at stake. Excellent work in this thread. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 1:13:28 PM EDT
[#7]
Which amendment is it that guarantees me unfettered access to the public water supply at Maffet Reservoir?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 1:20:57 PM EDT
[#8]
Quoted: Also, terror isn't necessarily about inflicting casualties. It's about affecting the morale of the population. So suppose someone dumped a 55 gallon drum of something nasty in your reservoir. You might believe that that's not enough to do any harm, but what are you going to think about from then on, every time you turn on the faucet to get a glass of water? Are you going to have the same confidence in the water supply that you have right now? Now that's funny! Lake Tawakoni, just east of Dallas and one of its primary drinking water sources was polluted by over 100,000-200,000+ gallons of contaminants last summer. Locals got upset, then quickly forgot about it. 100,000-200,000+ gallons of pollutants and people still drank the water, ate the fish from the lake and recreationally used the water for skiing etc. Granted the local media did not hype the event like they will if a terrorsit attacks a water supply.... TheRedGoat |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 1:24:51 PM EDT
[#9]
B!tch if we must, but it ain't amount'n to a hill of beanie babies.
Fear the gov't. that fears YOU. And your gun. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 1:25:52 PM EDT
[#10]
TheRedGoat,
Actually, the media plays a large role in terrorism. Let someone dump a 55 gallon drum of something containing PCBs into the water supply. The media hype would be just what the terrorists need. Much of the population would overreact. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 1:27:13 PM EDT
[#11]
I really don't think the Iowaians have to worry about terrorism. I think people in L.A., N.Y., Vegas, Boston, D.C, and so on should be on guard, what the hell would an attack in Iowa prove, that you could kill 2 people and a few cows? [:D]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 1:37:07 PM EDT
[#12]
You haven't been Packed, 'till you've been Wolf Packed!!!!
Sorry, just a little Wolf Pack hurmor. Anyone who has been part of the Wolf Pack knows. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 1:39:03 PM EDT
[#13]
Quoted: I really don't think the Iowaians have to worry about terrorism. I think people in L.A., N.Y., Vegas, Boston, D.C, and so on should be on guard, what the hell would an attack in Iowa prove, that you could kill 2 people and a few cows? [:D] Hey! Don't make light of the situation! They could really screw up the nation's supply of Niblets! [img]www.ar15.com/members/albums/GovtThug%2Fcorn%2Egif[/img] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 3:03:37 PM EDT
[#14]
Quoted: what the hell would an attack in Iowa prove, that you could kill 2 people and a few cows? [:D] Hey, more than a [b]few[/b] cows! Quickly edited to correct the board code, so the Board Code Nazi doesn't kick me in the 'nads. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 4:05:16 PM EDT
[#15]
Quoted: If gov't does "own" anything, its only becasue nancy's like y'all FORGET to remind them of who, according to the Constitution is ultimately sovereign. And who is that? When have you reminded a cop that you own his gun and his squad car Nancy? By the way…who is BecaSue? That, and as I stated above, we the governed have CONSENTED to give them custodial hold of OUR property. You are SURE about that? Who paid for the land?? NOT the gov't. Some land the Gov’t DOES pay for. Other it owns from deals granted when territories became states. Other land I am sure has been forfeited to the Government or donated. Unlike your small-minded belief the Government CAN own things. WHo paid for the construction of the building? NOT the gov't. Well then who did? The check said US Government… Who pays for the security that keeps the civilians out?? NOT the gov't. Out of where? The Government can pay for security. There are several Federal Police forces that can help with security as well. Who pays for the electricity, the paper clips, the repairs, the salaries of the employees who work their?? NOT the gov't. It is THERE grammar man (LMFAO, I know it is not your only misspelling and I usually would not comment but you are the self professed grammar guru) and where is there? The Government can pay employees… Who owns it?? NOT the gov't. What? Land? The Government can own land, property, animals… Gov't is NOT a producer or owner of anything. It merely is a necessary parasite that we have consented to run a few things for us, due to expediency. Thru the consent of the governed they have custodial care or whatever we ultimately ALLOW them to have. That is untrue. The Government (According to the Supreme Court) CAN and does own Money. The Government CAN and does own land. The holdings of the Government go beyond custodial care. The Government does produce things. The Government mints money as an example. Ya'll mindset is what created Commiefornia. What YOU are talking about is Communism. And you can make your little hyperboles (gov't thug - well named [:D] )and disregard what the Constitution intended, and then COUNT THE DAYS until gov't RELLY DOES take everything you have de facto given them. But you still do not have any REAL (or is that RELL?) answers garandman. Deal with what Gov’t Thug said, not what you want to deal with. Not me. Not here. "I'm not abrasive - I'm just PoliticalCorrectness-challenged." Ahhh, I see you took my advice and do have some intelligence and changed that stupid quote from yourself. -Velveeta |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 4:21:02 PM EDT
[#16]
Quoted: Seemingly the teeny tiny problem that the military cannot act as a police unit due to the Posse Commatus (sp?) Act that would seem to make this plan illegal. I wouldn't last two seconds when one of these yahoos asked me for "zee papers". I'd probably show them my CCW first................ OT, but watching "World's Most Exciting Police Videos" on FX today, a state trooper pulled over a guy and told him that because I95 is a major drug trafficking artery, he wanted to search for drugs. They found 10 pounds of pot, but where was the probable cause? A lot of the same folks who scream about us losing our rights lately sure seem to support the "war on drugs" which has cost more rights over the years than any "war on terrorism" and it has been happening without much uproar. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 4:26:44 PM EDT
[#17]
LARRYG,
That guy that got searched, did he give consent? Because if he did, then it's on his stupid ass for doing so. If he had said no, the cop could not have done anything. A cop can ask if he can search at any time, and if consent is given, he doesn't need PC. But that's a topic for a different thread. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 4:27:24 PM EDT
[#18]
REMINDER:!
National Guard IS NOT under the Posse Commitatus Act. They are activated by the Governor and not by the US President. They are a State unit and NOT a Federal unit...remember Kent State University? Also not under the Posse Commitatus Act are the Marines since they are the Navy and NOT a land force. The only ones under the Posse Commitatus Act are the USArmy.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 5:01:46 PM EDT
[#19]
Quoted: LARRYG, That guy that got searched, did he give consent? Because if he did, then it's on his stupid ass for doing so. If he had said no, the cop could not have done anything. A cop can ask if he can search at any time, and if consent is given, he doesn't need PC. But that's a topic for a different thread. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 5:11:19 PM EDT
[#20]
LARRYG,
Rather than get into some long explanation, I would suggest you pick up a copy of "Tactics for Criminal Patrol" by Charles Remsberg. It has some VERY good information on what cops are looking for and what they do during traffic stops. Most retail book stores will only sell it to cops (what's up with THAT?), but it pops up on ebay now and then. That's where I got mine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 5:29:45 PM EDT
[#21]
Guys, Posse Comitatus went out the window months ago, forget about it.
National IDs are on their way. Whether or not they actually accomplish anything is irrelevant. I do see Aviator's point--it doesn't matter how things are supposed to be, it's how they are. I have to deal with mandatory seatbelt laws, increased fees and taxes, etc. I can do nothing but comply or up the ante and become a real hoodlum. At some point we'll all be pushed too far. Did anyone notice that our buddies in Kali (or Caliban, ha, I like that one!) have busted yet another gun collector. This fellow is alleged to have communicated threats to a nuclear power plant from which he was canned. Fox News called it an arsenal and the cops say "he was capable of carrying out his threats," ostensibly because of his large gun collection, I guess. Plus, Gray "Red" Davis wants more wiretap authority and other expanded powers for the police. Police state isn't coming, it's here. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 5:38:28 PM EDT
[#22]
Quoted: Guys, Posse Comitatus went out the window months ago, forget about it. This is not a Posse Comatatus issue. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 6:02:42 PM EDT
[#23]
Quoted: At some point we'll all be pushed too far. I hate to disagree but I don't see that happening. With the glacially slow incrementalism that has been eroding our rights for over forty years, nearly all of us are just sheeple who keep redrawing our lines in the sand as they continue to creep across them ever so slowly. We are being pushed so slowly, we'll never notice how far we been taken until there's nothing left but the fading call to "reclaim" the way it used to be. But by then very few will remember how free we once were (thanks to dumbing-down apathy). [:(] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 9:52:02 PM EDT
[#24]
Being a member of the Iowa Air National Guard I'll be taking part in this exercise when it kicks off next week. I'm only at the Air Base and know what they have in store for us there and nothing about what is going to happen off base. Just learned about this exercise recently and have to admit that the part of the exercise that pertains to the base is a good idea as it will be a learning experience for us as there will be scenarios to respond to and learn from. Anyone in the National Guard knows that very little direct/personal interaction goes on between the Army and the Air Guard when it comes to training. What this base exercise is intended to do makes a lot of sense and will last only a few days. The Army National Guard unit that will be exercising here is very limited on where they can train at and from what I've heard has not had any realistic training in this type of enveroment in a long time. This exercise is intended for this type of unit and could be used by other similar units as a great training enviroment at other locations as well. Everything I know and commented on pertains to the exercise that will be going on at the base and support of the base, and not what they may do outside the base at Water Works Park, etc... I personally am looking forward to working along side the Army Guard as it will be a great learning experience for both Guards and that's what an exercise is supposed to be all about. Due to Op Sec/Comm Sec I was very vague on what the base exercise will entail, but that is mostly due to me not knowing all the information either and not wanting to start any kind of rumors. I will be following what happens with much interest off base on how the person/vehicle searches go as well. A comment was made earlier on why would any terrorists bother with striking Iowa. If a terrorist struck in the heart of the USA wouldn't that show that the nation is vulnerable and be very demoralizing? Would the nation feel that no one was safe then? How about the food production? Major intersection of interstate travel? Waterways such as the Mississippi? Just a few reasons why even Iowa has to train/exercise for terrorists as well as being world wide deployable to assist in whatever is needed. Hope this clears up a few things and doesn't create any BOOGEY MAN type theories on the base exercise. I don't have broad band and wasn't able to play the video provided by IAJack and don't know if it was the tape that TV 8 made out at the base. If it showed a white vehicle being searched by the military inside and outside (with a mirror) then that was their vehicle and that's the type of search every oncoming vehicle gets that comes on the base without a base sticker or a military ID. This does not necessarily mean the type of searches they may perform off the base as I don't know their equipment or extent of which they may search a vehicle whether voluntary or not. Rant mode off! Great thread IAJack!! And yes SKSBoy...I too was Wolf Packed back in '93-'94! I still can't go in to a bar without thinking that some girl is going to come up to me and say "Buy me juicee"!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 1:33:37 AM EDT
[#25]
Quoted: Well, I guess me being in the MN Guard, and before that, the Iowa Guard I have a differnt view. Number one. We respond to the State Gov. He (or She) is our boss. We get called out all the time for state emergencies such as tornados, floods, snowstorms, you name it. Its our job. If the man has fears about something heppening on state property, then he can call us out. Thats what those areas described are, state property. If you don't like the idea for whatever reason, then don't go there. Some of the same people who bitch about this, would be bitching about it if nothing was done, and those water sources were contaminated. Then there would be the hue and cry of "Why the hell were those water sources not protected". Damned if you do, Damned if you don't. Next, its a training thing. You complain that Guard people don't get the training they need, then bitch because they are training for something. Should the troops train for this inthe Armory gymnasium?Nothing like realistic training eh? Sheesh people, think about it a little. Aviator [img]www.milpubs.com/aviator.gif[/img] The National Guard is a joke. It trains and trains and trains, but little of it seems to sink in. As a military unit National Guard could do little more than make nice sandbags for the real soldiers. This is also the little problem they've had recently with inflated numbers. Gueardsmen who are no longer a part of the unit are being counted. Some Guard companies only have 30-40 men when they have been counting over a hundred. The Guard should be disbanded and folded into the Army and Air Force Reserves. All the civic duty crap that Guardsmen do, like sandbagging and hauling water to farmers can be done by a civic organization that doesn't carry rifles. Seeing the military and Guard train in [b]American[/b] cities is downright scary. Lets face it, American cities aren't built anything like cities in other countries (except maybe Canada) and the military by law cannot enforce law against civilians. We are seeing the future SA and Gestapo being trained before our very eyes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 3:30:40 AM EDT
[#26]
Quoted: The National Guard is a joke. It trains and trains and trains, but little of it seems to sink in. Yeah! Screw training they should shoot people! Yeah! That will make them less funny![rolleyes] As a military unit National Guard could do little more than make nice sandbags for the real soldiers. WHAT? They are not real soldiers? Now I am confused? This is also the little problem they've had recently with inflated numbers. Gueardsmen who are no longer a part of the unit are being counted. Some Guard companies only have 30-40 men when they have been counting over a hundred. The Guard should be disbanded and folded into the Army and Air Force Reserves. All the civic duty crap that Guardsmen do, like sandbagging and hauling water to farmers can be done by a civic organization that doesn't carry rifles. Seeing the military and Guard train in [b]American[/b] cities is downright scary. Yeah, we don’t have to worry about defending the US. Screw that. We should learn from Rome and China. All wars will be fought outside of our home. What is that Boy Scout motto? Never be prepared? Lets face it, American cities aren't built anything like cities in other countries (except maybe Canada) and the military by law cannot enforce law against civilians. We are seeing the future SA and Gestapo being trained before our very eyes. Well if they are such a “joke” why do you care? And you fail to mention that states have used NG troops to oppose the US Government in the past. Let’s federalize everything…. -Velveeta |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 3:36:06 AM EDT
[#27]
You can talk smack about the Guard and Reserves if you want. In my experience, with all three components of the US military and the military forces of several other nations, I think we still have one of the best organizations in the world.
The Guard ain't great, but they are better trained and equipped than the frontline forces of many other nations, and they have a kernel of military training and enough AD vets that a Guard Unit would be easier to turn into a combat-ready unit (I do not have any illusions that the Guard is ready to send into battle, as-is) than starting new units from scratch. I would venture that most Guard units are 90-180 days from from being fully deployable, and once they had completed post-mobilization train-up and augmentation, would perform roughly on par with most AD units. This is a lot better than the 1-2 years it would take to raise a unit from scratch. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 3:57:50 AM EDT
[#28]
natez,
I agree with you. Even in the regular Army there would be some units sent to fight and even possibly some [I]sacrificed[/I] to buy time (though it would not be called that) so that other Army units could be gutted to create a cadre for training purposes. The best possible scenario is to have Combat vets (recent combat vets and vets of the current war are better) to train your newly enlarged military. You get rid of the Guard, then the reserves, then why not the Marines? How about the rest of the Navy? Sh!t we are not at war, lets get rid of the regular Army, they are all brainwashed and are only waiting to become JBT’s. God, look at how Aviators icon is sizing me up for assimilation….The Jack Booted Thug! Ooops! I think there is one hiding behind that tree too! I gotta’ go people, this area is hot. The Gov’t in league with our alien overlords is trying anal probe me! *grabs for tinfoil hat* -Velveeta |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 5:22:26 AM EDT
[#29]
Quoted: Yeah! Screw training they should shoot people! Yeah! That will make them less funny![rolleyes] Huh? I don't what the Hell you are trying to say by that statment, so I can't really comment on it. WHAT? They are not real soldiers? Now I am confused? No, they aren't "real" soldiers. Yeah, we don’t have to worry about defending the US. Screw that. We should learn from Rome and China. All wars will be fought outside of our home. What is that Boy Scout motto? Never be prepared? Given the said level of preparedness, the inflated numbers of actual Guardsmen, the pathetic training, and poor fitness of the National Guard I would have to say that we will be very bad off if somebody does decide to invade us. Well if they are such a “joke” why do you care? And you fail to mention that states have used NG troops to oppose the US Government in the past. Let’s federalize everything…. -Velveeta I care because training troops to police American civilians is WRONG jackass. It is illegal, unconstitutional, and immoral. Fighting a real war and enslaving people are 2 very different things. Furthermore, when has the National Guard ever been used to oppose the federal government? I want some proof and citations please. And the NG is federal you ninny. They are [b]federal[/b] employees, using [b]federal[/b] land and [b]federal[/b] weapons. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 5:48:02 AM EDT
[#30]
Quoted: We are seeing the future SA and Gestapo being trained before our very eyes. [b]BINGO!![/B] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 5:50:51 AM EDT
[#31]
Wow, it certainly is good to know that my 3 years in the 1st Cav, 3 years in the 12th Combat Aviation Brigade in Germany, and 2 years in the 24th Aviation Brigade at Hunter Army Airfield, all active duty, as well as the hours I have spent flying in the guard since then doing things I never really did on active duty like flying hay out to cattle, carrying bambi buckets dumping water on forest fires, and carrying civil defense people around in nuclear power plant excersizes cause me to be less qualified than say a guy who got out of AIT a year ago. That kid is on ACTIVE DUTY and a real soldier. Clears up why he knows so much more than myself, and most of the guys in my unit, some who have been flying Army aircraft since Viet Nam. I guess the 2 former Marines, 1 former Navy, and 3 former Army troops in my platoon alone should search this "real soldier" out and seek advise from him. Thanks for clearing a lot of that up for me.
Aviator [img]www.milpubs.com/aviator.gif[/img] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 6:00:35 AM EDT
[#32]
Quoted: Wow, it certainly is good to know that my 3 years in the 1st Cav, 3 years in the 12th Combat Aviation Brigade in Germany, and 2 years in the 24th Aviation Brigade at Hunter Army Airfield, all active duty, as well as the hours I have spent flying in the guard since then doing things I never really did on active duty like flying hay out to cattle, carrying bambi buckets dumping water on forest fires, and carrying civil defense people around in nuclear power plant excersizes cause me to be less qualified than say a guy who got out of AIT a year ago. That kid is on ACTIVE DUTY and a real soldier. Clears up why he knows so much more than myself, and most of the guys in my unit, some who have been flying Army aircraft since Viet Nam. I guess the 2 former Marines, 1 former Navy, and 3 former Army troops in my platoon alone should search this "real soldier" out and seek advise from him. Thanks for clearing a lot of that up for me. Aviator [img]www.milpubs.com/aviator.gif[/img] Your individual training (gained while active-duty interestingly enough), while saying something about the possible effectiveness of the NG in a shooting war, is irrevelant. The National Guard is viewed by all of the active duty personnel I know (everybody in my family is in the military, as are all of my former teachers, 2 of my neighbors, and several of my friends) as a rather worthless organization in regards to preparedness for war. The sad accounting of actual numbers of personnel and generally piss-poor training wouldn't allow the NG to do much in a "real" war. The main point that I apparently didn't make clear enough is that it is a big no-no for troops to be used against the citizenry, and it begs the question, "What are the NG and the Army training for in AMERICAN cities?" They can only be training for a future violation of the Constitution, because their law enforcing involvement in any form of emergency (martial law) is illegal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 6:06:17 AM EDT
[#33]
Quoted: Quoted: Yeah! Screw training they should shoot people! Yeah! That will make them less funny![rolleyes] Huh? I don't what the Hell you are trying to say by that statment, so I can't really comment on it. WHAT? They are not real soldiers? Now I am confused? No, they aren't "real" soldiers. So D Company (Ranger), 151st Infantry, Indiana Army National Guard (In Vietnam) were not real soldiers? Why are they not real soldiers? What about all the Ex-Active Duty soldiers (Some of them combat vets!) Are they not real soldiers as well? Do you now or have YOU ever served? Yeah, we don’t have to worry about defending the US. Screw that. We should learn from Rome and China. All wars will be fought outside of our home. What is that Boy Scout motto? Never be prepared? Given the said level of preparedness, the inflated numbers of actual Guardsmen, the pathetic training, and poor fitness of the National Guard I would have to say that we will be very bad off if somebody does decide to invade us. But the same could be said about the regular Army units and America in general as well. Americans are generally in poor fitness and probably would be very bad off if someone invaded us. Well if they are such a “joke” why do you care? And you fail to mention that states have used NG troops to oppose the US Government in the past. Let’s federalize everything…. -Velveeta I care because training troops to police American civilians is WRONG jackass. It is illegal, unconstitutional, and immoral. Fighting a real war and enslaving people are 2 very different things. Where are they “Enslaving” people? Furthermore, when has the National Guard ever been used to oppose the federal government? I want some proof and citations please. September 2, 1957 Governor Orval Faubus, Arkansas. And the NG is federal you ninny. They are [b]federal[/b] employees, using [b]federal[/b] land and [b]federal[/b] weapons. Ninny? Hey man don’t get your panties in a bunch! The NG is dual state-Federal force BTW. Have a nice day! -Velveeta |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 6:10:44 AM EDT
[#34]
Quoted: Wow, it certainly is good to know that my 3 years in the 1st Cav, 3 years in the 12th Combat Aviation Brigade in Germany, and 2 years in the 24th Aviation Brigade at Hunter Army Airfield, all active duty, as well as the hours I have spent flying in the guard since then doing things I never really did on active duty like flying hay out to cattle, carrying bambi buckets dumping water on forest fires, and carrying civil defense people around in nuclear power plant excersizes cause me to be less qualified than say a guy who got out of AIT a year ago. That kid is on ACTIVE DUTY and a real soldier. Clears up why he knows so much more than myself, and most of the guys in my unit, some who have been flying Army aircraft since Viet Nam. I guess the 2 former Marines, 1 former Navy, and 3 former Army troops in my platoon alone should search this "real soldier" out and seek advise from him. Thanks for clearing a lot of that up for me. Aviator [img]www.milpubs.com/aviator.gif[/img] Aviator, Thought you left us. I left a few questions for you back on pg 2 of this thread, the gist of which is this: [b] 1) They are [u]rehearsing[/u] the suspension of our Constitutional rights. 2) The fact that the "practice run" is happening on State Land, or is being conducted by Nat'l. Guard vs "army" is irrelevant. Aren't you concerned with the implications of what this is a "practice" FOR? [/b] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 6:21:59 AM EDT
[#35]
Hrmm interesting. I used to look down on the Guard when I was Active Duty as well. After actually being a member of the guard I understand I was wrong. The level of knowledge the people have in my guard unit never ceases to amaze me. We are constantly having units rotate in and out of places where Active duty forces are such as in Kosovo. These units from the Minnesota Guard leave after gaining the respect of the active duty units they work with.
Our units usually have the same personnel on the rosters for years and years. This allows people to know the men and women they work with much better than an active duty unit where people come and go every 2-3 years. Knowing the people you work with this well is a great benifit that most active duty units don't enjoy. Things like this that most people don't take into consideration make a big difference. No, we may not do a lot of marching, sometimes the guys look a little sloppy, but for the most part, these are guys who know what the hell they are doing, and enjoy doing it. Add the total flight hours up from any guard unit, and active duty unit and you will most likely find that the guard unit has a total number of flight hours double that of any active duty unit. Aviator [img]www.milpubs.com/aviator.gif[/img] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 6:32:44 AM EDT
[#36]
The_Macallan
Yes, and no. I understand the concerns people here have. The way I see it though, the unit is practicing securing an area that may be vital. For those of you who worry about this, I would say that the specifics ofwhat they rules are have not been posted. Would you still be all up in arms if when stopped you could just say, "look guys, I don't have time for this"? and go on your way. Yes you can to a certain extent train for something like this at Camp Dodge, or Ripley, but to actually get out and do it in public allows both more realistic training, and allows the population to see what is being trained for. If things DO get real bad in the US, you would have to be a fool to think that things would go on as normal. Ask anyone who lived through World War II what changes they had to make to thier lives. I'll bet you might be surprised as to the restrictions that were imposed. Thats war buddy. Sometimes you have to give tings up for a bit. All those changes made during WWII reverted back after the war. I don't like it any more than you, but I do understand the possible need. And where the is a possible need, then you should train for it. Aviator [img]www.milpubs.com/aviator.gif[/img] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 6:39:10 AM EDT
[#37]
Quoted: Ninny? Hey man don’t get your panties in a bunch! The NG is dual state-Federal force BTW. Have a nice day! -Velveeta Federal funding, federal land, federal pay, and federal weapons, but it's a state force? OOOOkkkkkk....... |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 6:46:48 AM EDT
[#38]
Quoted: The_Macallan Yes, and no. I understand the concerns people here have. The way I see it though, the unit is practicing securing an area that may be vital. For those of you who worry about this, I would say that the specifics ofwhat they rules are have not been posted. Would you still be all up in arms if when stopped you could just say, "look guys, I don't have time for this"? and go on your way. Yes you can to a certain extent train for something like this at Camp Dodge, or Ripley, but to actually get out and do it in public allows both more realistic training, and allows the population to see what is being trained for. If things DO get real bad in the US, you would have to be a fool to think that things would go on as normal. Ask anyone who lived through World War II what changes they had to make to thier lives. I'll bet you might be surprised as to the restrictions that were imposed. Thats war buddy. Sometimes you have to give tings up for a bit. All those changes made during WWII reverted back after the war. I don't like it any more than you, but I do understand the possible need. And where the is a possible need, then you should train for it. Aviator [img]www.milpubs.com/aviator.gif[/img] During WWII there were FAR less liberal/socialists in our Gov't who drool at the chance of imposing Marshal Law or any lesser variant thereof. Suspending the Constitution for even one day gives these liberal/socialists/gun-grabbers free reign to pass laws that they have no intention of repealing, or for that matter, "amend" the Constitution before it is reinstated. No, personally I don't trust that the Gov't would repeal ALL of the restrictions (including registration/confiscation) they impose under "emergency" situations. Your points are well taken though, thanks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 6:53:18 AM EDT
[#39]
Its been a few years since I took the oath, and I was a wee bit hung over that day, but it is just like the Active duty oath except, instead of the president, we swore an oath to the "gov of Minnesota, and all officers appointed over me". That tells me state. (shrug).
Yes, we get funding from the feds, but a lot of it comes from the state. Aviator [img]www.milpubs.com/aviator.gif[/img] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 7:07:24 AM EDT
[#40]
Quoted: Its been a few years since I took the oath, and I was a wee bit hung over that day, but it is just like the Active duty oath except, instead of the president, we swore an oath to the "gov of Minnesota, and all officers appointed over me". That tells me state. (shrug). Yes, we get funding from the feds, but a lot of it comes from the state. Aviator [img]www.milpubs.com/aviator.gif[/img] But.... The president can and has called up the NG without the permission of governors. Your ultimate authority is the president of the United States, just like the active-duty military personnel. The oath is like the "state" nature of the NG, it's window dressing. It is not a state militia, it is a federal militia that the state can use when not needed by the president. I respect you as an individual, but I just don't quite see the need of what amounts to a federal militia that can be used illegally against citizens. The sandbagging for floods, trucking water to farmers, fighting forest fires, etc, etc, etc, can be done just as well by people who don't carry automatic rifles and have authority of "law" on their side. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 7:12:05 AM EDT
[#41]
Because of the recent cutbacks of defense spending, Most Guard units are now "roundout" units. there is not enough Active duty Army to go around. When an active duty unit gets mobilized, the Guard roundout unit goes with them to fill them to 100% strength. You can;t do that with civilians. I agree 100% we straddle the line. But, if it came down to it. I suppose I would do what Jessie Ventura asked if I was getting pulled both ways.
Aviator [img]www.milpubs.com/aviator.gif[/img] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 4:10:17 PM EDT
[#42]
SNIPERS WANTED
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/11/2002 6:47:28 AM EDT
[#43]
Ok not much of an update, but I wrote a E-mail to the local ACLU and just got a reply that they are in touch with the Guard and looking into the matter..thats all it said?
Later IAJack |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
