Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 2/12/2002 4:34:31 PM EDT
I thinking something along the lines of nazi's following orders to exterminate. If the US military were ordered to round up all members of the socialist party, for example (tried to pick someone we all should hate), and told to put them to death for treason (or whatever other reason) would the order be followed by the average grunt? I used to think not, but after reading many of the comments in the "manditory military service" thread I'm having my doubts. There seems to be a well cultivated feeling of superiority in the members of our armed forces. I would guess that this is probably promoted in order to help make them more effective in fighting (boosting confidence and whatever) but could this make them more likely to follow orders to round up "pussy, fat assed lazy, gimmie gimmie civilians?" Sort of like the stereotypical "cop with power gone to his head" but with the military.
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 4:46:13 PM EDT
Well when that first leftie peanut farmer gave away the Panama Canal (which is now in the hands of the Commies along with the largest deep water port in the world just a few miles off our shores) and when he opened up immigration to hundreds of thousands of Mariel Boat Criminals and commie agents ..followed up by 8 years of Clinton opening up our borders to the terrorists of 911 and the KGB/Russian Mafia maybe its about time the military started rounding up a few million... [:)] I trust our military more than I trust our politicians...Watch the Enron -Andeson- Global Crossing -Morgan/Chase fallout thats comin'
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 4:46:17 PM EDT
You mean like the Nisei during World War II?
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 4:47:04 PM EDT
When my unit was deployed to L.A. for the riots back in 92(Bco 3/17INF 7th ID)it was discussed and agreed upon, that no matter what order we were given, we would not fire on any civilian. Obviously if they were hosing us with 7.62x39 we would return fire,but there would be no "cattle roundup" of civilians or warning shots.(Kent State style) We would have all have taken article 15s before we would injure fellow Americans.
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 4:50:25 PM EDT
Originally Posted By 9divdoc: Well when that first leftie peanut farmer gave away the Panama Canal (which is now in the hands of the Commies along with the largest deep water port in the world just a few miles off our shores) and when he opened up immigration to hundreds of thousands of Mariel Boat Criminals and commie agents ..followed up by 8 years of Clinton opening up our borders to the terrorists of 911 and the KGB/Russian Mafia maybe its about time the military started rounding up a few million... [:)] I trust our military more than I trust our politicians...Watch the Enron -Andeson- Global Crossing -Morgan/Chase fallout thats comin'
View Quote
Yeah, that's why I picked socialists as an example.
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 4:50:30 PM EDT
I am [b]NOT[/b] a part of the socialist party and I [b]DONT[/b] agree with that form of political thinking,but if i were to ever be a target of US military force used against me or anyone in my immediate area I would resort to using deadly froce of my own.No matter how far a grunt may be brain washed,he/she should know right from wrong! [b]Come for my guns............I'll give ya the bullets first![/b][50]
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 4:58:53 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 5:00:50 PM EDT
as a member of the armed forces, i took an oath, to defend the constitution against all enemies FORIGHN AND DOMESTIC. an order to fire apon fellow americans would be a blatent violation of that document. i could not in good concience follow such orders. i would be forced to first point out the err of those orders and then if necesarry, turn my back (figuratively only) on the officer placeing those orders,. on a side note, any officer placeing orders like this would likely show up later on slightly ventilated, so i don't think there are any officers that dumb.
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 5:02:59 PM EDT
Simply put, I wouldn't follow an illegal order. That becomes hazy at some points, though. What if they banned guns, and after the one-year amnesty ordered us to round up the remaining known gun owners? That would be [i]unethical[/i]. Not to mention dangerous.
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 5:03:24 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 5:05:03 PM EDT
Originally Posted By the_survivalist: as a member of the armed forces, i took an oath, to defend the constitution against all enemies FORIGHN AND DOMESTIC. an order to fire apon fellow americans would be a blatent violation of that document. i could not in good concience follow such orders. i would be forced to first point out the err of those orders and then if necesarry, turn my back (figuratively only) on the officer placeing those orders,. on a side note, any officer placeing orders like this would likely show up later on slightly ventilated, so i don't think there are any officers that dumb.
View Quote
That is a VERY good point you made,but i must remind you of the Kent sate university anti vietnam war demonstration,the US troops did use deadly force against people that were not using deadly force.
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 5:22:12 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 5:25:47 PM EDT
You mean like when the Union Army arrested Newspaper Columnists in the Northern States who objected to fighting against the South. Or like when the US Army murdered the Bonus Marchers in Washington DC
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 5:38:50 PM EDT
AlClenin: I used to think not, but after reading many of the comments in the "manditory military service" thread I'm having my doubts. There seems to be a well cultivated feeling of superiority in the members of our armed forces.
View Quote
This would seem to be an argument FOR mandatory military service, since the military would BE the population. If the force was mostly conscripted, there would be less chance of "turning on the population". Of course, in 226 years, this tragedy has not yet happened. At least not officially. Was the Federal enforcement of the Union against those States which wished to seperate "turning on the population"? Superiority? Not unless you call putting your life on the line, abandoning your family for months at a time, and receiving welfare wages for it from a population which to some degree loathes you for your sacrifice makes you feel superior. Haven't seen many turned away by the recruiters, either. By and large, those who wish to serve can do so. Then you too, could be deployed to put your life in jeopardy in some third world paradise by politicians for their own purposes. You did see BHD, didn't you? You could miss three Christmases at home in a row, or your son's first, second, and third birthdays, for the princely sum of than $12,000 per year. Maybe step on a mine and lose your sight, or arms, or a leg? All while your high school or college buddies make more money while sleeping at home every night. "Well cultivated feeling of superiority"? Naaaah, its just job satisfaction. Tell you what, at the end of this tour, let's trade. You take a piece of metal for your collar, and with it a damaged marriage, a broken back, fractured pelvis, two bad knees, assorted other disabilities and several extra chunks of metal for 50% of what you earned (no extra money for the injuries - offset dollar for dollar by retirement pay). Sit in on the funerals of a couple of dozen of this countries' finest young men, along with weeping widows and 4 year olds crying and to know when their Daddies are coming home. Add in the suspicion and dislike by many of the civilian populace you served and throw on a heaping helping of character assasination by the media. What a great deal! Walk a few miles in these boots before you assign a "well cultivated feeling of superiority" to your fellow Americans who value service to the nation over self. I have the utmost respect for those who have served their country, and even more for those who have paid for it in blood. I don't see much chance of military action against the civilian populace of this nation, unless your elected leadership orders it. Then it would be up to the conscience of those who have sworn to "uphold the Constitution of the United States, against all enemies, foreign and domestic" to determine if the orders were legal. When the NPGS students conducted a survey of military members to determine who would be willing to attempt confiscation of privately owned weapons, there was very little support for it. I suspect that in the coming years, the percentage will rise. The active duty military is prohibited from performing law enforcement duties by posse comitatus. NG is a different story. If you were a Guardsman with a loaded weapon and observed a mob attacking other civilians or burning and looting their way through a neighboorhood near you, what would you do? Would that constitute "turning on the population"?
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 5:43:26 PM EDT
Originally Posted By M4_Aiming_at_U:
Originally Posted By the_survivalist: as a member of the armed forces, i took an oath, to defend the constitution against all enemies FORIGHN AND DOMESTIC. an order to fire apon fellow americans would be a blatent violation of that document. i could not in good concience follow such orders. i would be forced to first point out the err of those orders and then if necesarry, turn my back (figuratively only) on the officer placeing those orders,. on a side note, any officer placeing orders like this would likely show up later on slightly ventilated, so i don't think there are any officers that dumb.
View Quote
That is a VERY good point you made,but i must remind you of the Kent sate university anti vietnam war demonstration,the US troops did use deadly force against people that were not using deadly force.
View Quote
M4_Aiming_at_U: Negative. That was a group of the State of Ohio's citizen soldiers from the NG.
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 5:47:12 PM EDT
No!
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 5:56:48 PM EDT
I was in the MArines from 95 to 99. This oath that all military have taken I took three times. Once in DEP, Once on leaving for Boot. and once when promoted to NCO. Although all soldiers take this same oath "to protect and defend the constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic" Yet for the entire four years not on single class on the constitution I was protecting. now that it is no longer taught in schoolswhat will happen in ten years? The soldiers will probably just listen to the other half of the oath about following orders. And I also firmly believe alot of the 18-20 yr old kids would "just follow orders"
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 7:04:10 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/12/2002 7:05:49 PM EDT by prk]
Originally Posted By SF: The active duty military is prohibited from performing law enforcement duties by posse comitatus...
View Quote
Well, at least [b][u]some[/u][/b] of the active duty military is prohibited from doing that..... [red]Title 18 US Code, PART I, Chapter 67, § 1385, The Posse Comitatus Act § 1385. Use of Army and Air Force as posse comitatus Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.[/red] Which active duty forces are [b]not[/b] covered by this law?
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 7:19:06 PM EDT
Originally Posted By prk:
Originally Posted By SF: The active duty military is prohibited from performing law enforcement duties by posse comitatus...
View Quote
Well, at least [b][u]some[/u][/b] of the active duty military is prohibited from doing that..... [red]Title 18 US Code, PART I, Chapter 67, § 1385, The Posse Comitatus Act § 1385. Use of Army and Air Force as posse comitatus Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.[/red] Which active duty forces are [b]not[/b] covered by this law?
View Quote
Coast Guard, as befits their special status, is not covered. I believe that the Department of the Navy is prohibited from civilian law enforcement roles.
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 7:20:33 PM EDT
Navy and Marines (both under Dept of the Navy) also the Coast Guard which during times of war fall under the Dept of Defense.
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 7:30:11 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 7:42:11 PM EDT
I believe firmly that the VAST majority of our Armed Services members would NOT obey that unconstitutional order under any circumstances. The few who WOULD obey the order would be restrained by their wiser brothers. If any actually got out and attempted to fulfil their mission, you can be pretty sure that they wouldn't get too far. They probably wouldn't get ten houses into the search/roundup before encountering someone who truly takes exception to this invasion and takes drastic, potentially lethal, action. If such an order WERE to be issued to the military, the military ITSELF would probably become the first combatatants in a new revolution, and I mean that the military would strike the first blows against the leadership. I really think that our military would be a major partner with all freedom loving Americans in the event of another revolution. Imagine, if you will, what could be done to our political leadership's positions if the nearest major military bases were to mobilize against them. Poof. Gone. Just like that. Every plane, every tank, every bomb, every rocket, are all handled, maintained, armed, and operated by military members who are citizens who have taken the oath to defend the Constition against ALL enemies, foreign AND DOMESTIC. I can also certainly imagine our top brass reacting strongly against a power grab by our politicians, and relaying this information down the chain of command to make the military ready to defend us. Hopefully, none of this will ever happen, but if it does, I am confident that the military will take up arms in defense of the people, and do it in a very big way. CJ
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 7:45:45 PM EDT
surely you have read the [url=http://gulagamerika.homestead.com/29Palms.html]29 palms survey[/url]
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 7:45:47 PM EDT
History says it won't be that way. Fighting today's war using the previous war's tactics is a recipe for defeat. It won't be a large, brazen, Nazi-style round-up but rather a steady incremental chipping away at individuals (Maryland & Chicago-style). Using ALL angles such as taxation, federal lawsuits, EPA regs, public health concerns, licensing/registration, ex post facto punishments, eminent domain, garnishing wages, public property use restrictions, RICO, child-protection laws, federal witholding, and on and on... the Gov't can do A LOT to "neutralize" you without even making a direct physical confrontation with you. Worst case scenario... Grunts would only be given "need to know" information, not the big picture. That would include such tidbits as "those people are wacko/terrorist/child-abusers", or "they're only going to be temporarily detained", or "they're violating laws - let the courts sort it out" or "they've already killed one of us...". Whatever is working already around the country to violate our rights will continue to be done, as precedent upon precedent is set in stone. As we, and THEY, become systematically desensitized to the regular suspension of our Constitutional rights, until it gets to the point, on THEY'RE side, that it's simply "ho-hum, just another raid on a wacko citizen violating another law". Slowly... with glacial incrementalism.
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 7:54:23 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 8:11:54 PM EDT
It suprises me that no one has braught up that little church burning down in Texas. Hey you think those Tanks that were used belong to FBI? Comeon Delta operators and armored vehicles are just like a good "rent a car company."
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 8:19:07 PM EDT
I have no doubt that the military would turn on citizens. Particularly if the citizens were properly labeled and demonized as Waco's, gun-nuts, extremists, or the like. Which is why the founding fathers were against the idea of a standing army. Our current Media is the most effective propaganda machine the world has ever known. Never underestimate it's power. The question is an interesting one, but has been answered again and again in history. Bonus march, Kent State, Waco, the civil war, and I believe more than a couple labor disputes. It's not so much a question of if, but of when and where.
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 8:25:19 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 8:53:29 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/12/2002 9:26:00 PM EDT by flashman]
Paul - I’ve been thinking of ways to say that I agree with you. I’ve though about this, I’ve thought about that, and finally I’ve just come up with this. - Paul, you’re right - the military is far more sophisticated than civilians and even 4 year privates understand. We are in good hands. Thanks for serving. Mike
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 9:00:04 PM EDT
From my experience in the Army (signal corps FWIW) I would have to say that most of the non-commissioned would blindly follow orders. SUre, we all took the oath to uphold and defend the Constitution against all enemies--both foreign and domestic, but the over-whelming majority had never been educated as to what is contained in the Constitution. Col Santose mentioned recently on the mailing list that something under 5% (WELL under IIRC) of the army are riflemen. Most of the servicemen (Army at least) are in for college money--their stay is only a temporary one. By no means are the majority of the members "professional soldiers" or folks actually versed in the Constitution. So how can they uphold and defened something they know NOTHING about? Of those who DO know, how many have already disregarded orders in previous Unconstitutional situations? Did the folks in Vietnam refuse to protect one drug dealer over the other? How about Panama (That was about drugs, too)? How long have the military services been used for the aims of their corporate masters without objection from the body of servicemembers? Recently had a conversation with a friend. The individual swore up and down several months ago that Osama would be dead within 2 weeks. I asked him if we ever killed Mohammar Qadafi, or Manuel Noriega, or Saddam Hussein, or the Russian "meanie of the moment" (TM). You know his answer. Of course not. In order for our unholy government to succeed in this divide and conquer strategy, there MUST BE A BADGUY. There must always be the possibility that the current "meanie of the moment" (TM) will commit their evil deeds AGAIN. In the eyes of the public, many of us absolutist gun-owners ALREADY are the badguys. Just takes a little 60 minute special and a few well-publicized events (whether real or not) that show us to be rabid dog-raping, child kicking monsters before the masses WILLINGLY ask for our REMOVAL. From these admittedly limited experiences, I fear that servicemembers WOULD in fact turn on the population AGAIN. Others have noted instances already where this has been the case. "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed --and thus clamorous to be led to safety -- by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." -- H.L. Mencken
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 9:01:39 PM EDT
If the military were asked to "turn" on the population. I think they would readily follow that order. If given compelling but false information about why they were taking this course of action. But to give OUR military (who is made up out of the population) credit. It would not take them long to figure out the game. It would not take the population long to figure it out either. All it would take is one days worth of news stories with video of the military or law enforement busting in the front door of the average middle class family's home to "grab the guns" or haul them in for questioning. I guarantee you with no doubt in my mind. The very next day John Q. Public would be waiting for the "gov't" to show up at their door and they would be ready with handguns, rifles, shotguns, slingshots, nail-guns, chainsaws and whatever else was handy. I think the first time news footage of an LEO or NG or regular military getting split in two with a chainsaw will curb their desire to be first through the door. Don't you?
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 9:18:15 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/12/2002 9:22:55 PM EDT by Paul]
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 9:42:20 PM EDT
Originally Posted By blackeye: If the military were asked to "turn" on the population. I think they would readily follow that order. If given compelling but false information about why they were taking this course of action. But to give OUR military (who is made up out of the population) credit. It would not take them long to figure out the game. It would not take the population long to figure it out either. All it would take is one days worth of news stories with video of the military or law enforement busting in the front door of the average middle class family's home to "grab the guns" or haul them in for questioning. I guarantee you with no doubt in my mind. The very next day John Q. Public would be waiting for the "gov't" to show up at their door and they would be ready with handguns, rifles, shotguns, slingshots, nail-guns, chainsaws and whatever else was handy. I think the first time news footage of an LEO or NG or regular military getting split in two with a chainsaw will curb their desire to be first through the door. Don't you?
View Quote
No. Sorry [b]blackeye[/b]. I don't. It's happening right now in Chicago, Iowa and elsewhere. It already happened to the "Citizen of the Year" in Maryland. Where's the public outrage? You'll hear more outrage over a couple of Canadian Skaters denied their Gold Medal than guns being confiscated from law-abiding American citizens. Where's the news/media? Covering the "Bush-Enron" Recession. Where's the "honest" LEOs? Ignorantly silent or being silenced. [b]Paul[/b], I have to respectfully disagree. I don't see it happening. The grunts won't know the "big picture". They won't be given the whole story at best, or just plain lied to at worst. It's already happening - and not enough LEOs are refusing these orders. You are right about one thing[b] Paul[/b]. They are our neighbors. They do send their kids to the same schools, root for the same ball teams, and drive the same cars as us, that's true. They're sheeple just like us.
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 9:42:30 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 9:44:08 PM EDT
I really hate to post this without knowing the title or who was in it, but I recall seeing a movie once about state NG fighting each other becuase they were ordered by thier governers, Basicly all hell broke loose. 1/3 of the troops following orders 1/3 not following orders and 1/3 exacuting the ones that didnt.... had something to do with a road block and a woman .. come on someone knows what im talking about.
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 9:52:59 PM EDT
Hey beekeeper - Nice post. Mike
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 10:11:49 PM EDT
Would they turn on 10,000 of us....Probably. Would they turn on 10 million of us....No. If something gets everyone pissed at once, chances are the soldiers will have heard about it and be pissed too. If a few thousand of us decide to take Washington after they make ARs illegal, we would be taken out.
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 11:14:48 PM EDT
Originally Posted By exsanguinate: surely you have read the [url=http://gulagamerika.homestead.com/29Palms.html]29 palms survey[/url]
View Quote
Wow! Followed this link for hours! Pretty much an eye opener. I would recomend it to all
Link Posted: 2/13/2002 3:12:33 AM EDT
Originally Posted By cluster: I really hate to post this without knowing the title or who was in it, but I recall seeing a movie once about state NG fighting each other becuase they were ordered by thier governers, Basicly all hell broke loose. 1/3 of the troops following orders 1/3 not following orders and 1/3 exacuting the ones that didnt.... had something to do with a road block and a woman .. come on someone knows what im talking about.
View Quote
[URL=http://us.imdb.com/Title?0120086]The Second Civil War[/url] I'm more worried about a smaller force turning on the people. Something like a Homeland Security Force. They build up to a few thousand or more with tanks, helicopters, airplanes, etc. Checkpoints, papers please, your reason for going to so n so?
Link Posted: 2/13/2002 4:46:05 AM EDT
Originally Posted By exsanguinate: surely you have read the [url=http://gulagamerika.homestead.com/29Palms.html]29 palms survey[/url]
View Quote
That's all lies: [url]http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/militarysurvey.htm[/url] "Some" people really want to believe that the US military would turn on the population. They're the same folks that really, really want to believe that the UN is going to invade and sieze all our guns. Why do people want so badly to believe these things are true? It's simple. When they're standing there, posing in front of the mirror, with their SHTF costumes and their BOBs on their backs with their faces all cammied up.... ...They'd feel pretty silly if they didn't think these fantasies were true.
Link Posted: 2/13/2002 4:47:13 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Kentlik:
Originally Posted By exsanguinate: surely you have read the [url=http://gulagamerika.homestead.com/29Palms.html]29 palms survey[/url]
View Quote
Wow! Followed this link for hours! Pretty much an eye opener. I would recomend it to all
View Quote
See my above post.
Link Posted: 2/13/2002 5:03:15 AM EDT
Keep in mind that if getting killed by irate gun owners is a regular occurrence, they'll stop going inside. They'll demand your compliance over a bullhorn, then just burn you out. That's pretty much JBT SOP, correct?
Link Posted: 2/13/2002 5:38:31 AM EDT
Originally Posted By geezhound: there would be no "cattle roundup" of civilians or warning shots.(Kent State style)
View Quote
I'm with you in sentiment but I'd hardly call the shots fired in Ohio [i]warning[/i] shots.
Link Posted: 2/13/2002 8:13:54 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/13/2002 8:20:28 AM EDT by DJbump]
PAUL-- First, I respect your standing on the front lines in defense of the Constitution and all that many of us hold as righteous and just. Second, as I mentioned in my post, I have no PERSONAL experience of the military turning on the population. Absent that, I looked at history and my personal experience with the low-level non-commissioned members of the branch in which I served. History has shown far too many incidents where in fact the military HAS turned on the population here in the U.S. I DO sleep well at night for the following simple reason. Any individual or group who infringes or attempts to infringe our GOD-given rights has chosen the losing side in the battle. Nothing will ever change that fact. I know the side of life/liberty/GOD/and justice has ALREADY won, so that unshakable faith and understanding makes me sleep like a baby at night. Believe me, I hope that I am incorrect in my PERSONAL assessment of this question. I hope that if any such order is given AGAIN (see: history) that somewhere in the chain-of-command the order is slapped down as the anti-life abomination that it is, but past history has shown that NOT to be the case. If only the military ranks were FILLED with folks such as yourself and Colonel Santose, to name but a few. The reality is, though, that the number of folks in the services of suspect will and minimal understanding of the principles upon which this country was founded far outweigh the solid, honorable folks like yourself and the aforementioned Colonel. These are indeed trying times in which we live. "The time is now near at hand which must probably determine whether Americans are to be free men or slaves, whether they are to have any property they can call their own, whether their houses and farms are to be pillaged and destroyed and themselves confined to a state of wretchedness from which no human efforts will deliver them. The fate of unborn millions will now depend, under God, on the courage of this army. Our cruel and unrelenting enemy leaves us only the choice of brave resistance or the most abject submission. We have, therefore, to resolve to conquer or die." -- George Washington Edited because I have still not learned how to use the damn spellcheck
Link Posted: 2/13/2002 8:27:29 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/13/2002 8:29:47 AM EDT by trickshot]
I think they would do it in a heartbeat. It's all in the exploitation--you don't say "hey, go and shoot those white, law-abiding Americans over there." First you bring in a foreign army to mix with your own troops. Then you tell them all about the horrible atrocities taking place--terrorism, drugs, pedophilia, or whatever. Take the tiny grain of truth and infuse it with a big dose of propaganda (outright lies) marginalizing the claims of the soon-to-be enemy (and don't let them speak out in their defense in any effective manner). Wait a few days or weeks for the hatred and ire to really get simmering, and then--VOILA--you can get any group of people you want to heedlessly vent their murderous rage against any other group. It's the all enemies foreign and DOMESTIC phrase that has the latitude, you see. Any student of history can tell you about Whiskey Rebellions, Indian wars, Bonus Marchers, etc. etc. I hope I'm wrong, but I think the stage is already being set. Why else have the military train in actual cities and towns across America? Hell, the people in charge are getting ready to defend the government from the American people. By the way, there has been no outrage over the slow but relentless gun grab taking place--just yesterday a guy in MD was arrested for having 41 guns, ammo and body armor in his apt. Job well done by the cops for taking this dangerous perp off the streets--so says the media. The gun grab isn't going to happen all at once.
Link Posted: 2/13/2002 8:36:12 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Glo1: It suprises me that no one has braught up that little church burning down in Texas. Hey you think those Tanks that were used belong to FBI? Comeon Delta operators and armored vehicles are just like a good "rent a car company."
View Quote
Glo1: Armored vehicles M-113s, M2s, and CEVs) were requested by Federal Law Enforcement and provided to them, without ACTIVE DUTY PERSONNEL. Helicopters were TXNG. No operators were involved in the assault on the compound. POSSE COMITATUS!! All of the above actions would be illegal. The_MacAllan is on the right track, IMHO. We are in much greater jeopardy from an incremental loss of rights, and media portrayal of firearms (and owners) as evil combining to marginalize and delegitimize firearms ownership.
Link Posted: 2/13/2002 9:03:56 AM EDT
IMO, hell yes.
Link Posted: 2/13/2002 9:52:32 AM EDT
Originally Posted By trickshot: By the way, there has been no outrage over the slow but relentless gun grab taking place--just yesterday a guy in MD was arrested for having 41 guns, ammo and body armor in his apt.
View Quote
[b]Hells-Bells!! People in this very forum are already tired of hearing about it! Check out the response I got [url=http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?id=93922][b]here[/b][/url] for bringing this up when the media are focusing so much on the Olympics.[/b] I edited my response later to remove the "offending" references that you also describe above. I couldn't agree more [b]trickshot[/b]. Trouble is there's a lot of brain-dead sheeple even here [;D] that just want their "bread and circuses" and they'll be happy.
Link Posted: 2/13/2002 11:51:46 AM EDT
Originally Posted By ECS:
Originally Posted By geezhound: there would be no "cattle roundup" of civilians or warning shots.(Kent State style)
View Quote
I'm with you in sentiment but I'd hardly call the shots fired in Ohio [i]warning[/i] shots.
View Quote
My mistake. What I'd meant was that we knew "warning shots" sometimes escalate into a more violent situation(Kent State). I, in no way meant to trivialize the tragedy and I apologize if my post sounded that way.
Link Posted: 2/13/2002 12:33:22 PM EDT
[left]I tell you man! has for a SHTF if you dress in cammies, and stand in front of a mirror than you are living a fantisy a bad fantisy! has for WACO the Clitons were wrong for what they did, and that janet reno. for a total gun ban i think it will happen, but when? this nation is still divided. and i do believe the Military could be orderd to turn on us. i have been in the army(Bravo 2/17th INF Ft richardson Alaska) yea the army if orderd will shoot you.[/left]
Link Posted: 2/13/2002 1:00:10 PM EDT
!!!!!YES!!!!! We're all blood thirsty, trained, lunatics, that can't wait to kill. It doesn't matter what's in front of the sights. We just want to [b]KILL, KILL, KILL[/B] Sorry, I just couldn't help for saying that. it was just a joke. But it does seem as though some of you wish it was true and acutally want it to happen.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top