Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 42

Thread: Using troops stateside

  1. #1
    Member  
    Join Date
    08-09-08
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    87

    Using troops stateside

    This article discusses a report by the War College. I personally don't like the sounds of it.

    "Pentagon resources and U.S. troops may be used if needed to quell protests and bank runs during an economic crisis, the U.S. Army War College's Strategic Institute reported."

    Here's the link on the story.

    http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?f...w&pageId=83977

  2. #2
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    02-24-07
    Location
    Southeast CT
    Posts
    331
    A "strategic shock" could require the nation to use "military force against hostile groups inside the United States."
    Note that such military force would likely respond with superior weaponry,
    even if they were wrong. A strategic shock may not necessarily be a bad thing.

    Of particular interest was the photographic advertisement of three books.
    The book on the right was entitled "The Audacity of Deceit". The title, in combination with another element of the bookcover, intriques me.

  3. #3
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    04-19-04
    Location
    Oklahoma City, OK
    Posts
    1,838
    Oh, good. I'm not the only person who has noticed that, at the moment anyway, we have a large military with substantial "peacekeeping" experience (i.e. not killing people and breaking things, but police work, management of civilian populations, etc.)

    I'm not suggesting this was preplanned--that borders on some ugly conspiracy theories, and I think that's bunk. I am however saying that having such a tool available increases the likelihood that it will be used. "When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail." Well, in this case, we (potentially) have nails, and we have a tool that has been used to do hammer-like things.

    Of course, it's a jackhammer, not a framing hammer, but it successfully drove nails, so the tendency is to continue using it that way.

    Same problem we're seeing with SWAT teams: they have to be used to justify their continued existence, so we'll use them.

    Again, I'm not suggesting any sort of conspiracy or preplanned civil insurrection to trigger the use of the military, simply pointing out natural tendencies to use that which we've seen work before, even where it's not the ideal solution.
    Be cruel. Make someone think.

  4. #4
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    02-07-07
    Posts
    6,090
    World Net Daily ehh? I kind of like a toned down version of the National Enquirer

  5. #5
    Member  
    Join Date
    08-09-08
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    87
    WND just happens to have been the third venue for this report that I've read. I don't care if it were the enquirer as long as the information is factual. I suppose I could get a more authorative version from the NY Times (not).

  6. #6
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    02-16-05
    Location
    Staunton, VA
    Posts
    373
    The US Army has always had a land defense mission, just haven't had to do it in a while. They've also been used in domestic "situations" such as during certain civil rights "events". The brigade often mentioned is being trained to respond to NBC threats and things similar to the 9-11 acts. This is not policing civilians day-to-day in normal circumstances.

    However, what was planned for one circumstance by one administration (or more) with one intention can be subverted to be useful in other circumstances with other agendas.
    Sincerely,

    Hobie
    Shooting with Hobie

  7. #7
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    06-06-05
    Location
    Epping, NH
    Posts
    390
    World Net Daily
    I read it on the Internet...It MUST be true.

  8. #8
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    04-22-06
    Location
    Goodyear, Arizona
    Posts
    850
    I guess every one is too young to remember the riot's and the National Guard in Detroit in the 60's. They shot up the town, really. They did return sniper fire with 50 caliber Mg's. During the Democratic Convention in Chicago in 68. the 101st was on stand by and there was a company of armed gunships ( Helicopters )on station at O'Hare airport. These helicopters were armed to the gills and would have been used if necessary. By the way, the helicopter bit that was secert information at the time

  9. #9
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    02-15-08
    Location
    Las Vegas,Nevada
    Posts
    587
    This has been talked about for months already...but all in all,whether true or not,I dont know of any military personnel that would 'fire' on their own people.

    Most Army and Marines I have spoken with about this sort of thing was 'wrong command sirs,I wont do it'...

  10. #10
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    12-27-02
    Posts
    3,738
    The news stories I followed a month ago said that initially, 20,000 troops would be deployed in the country chiefly to react to terrorist events. Most of us have believed until recently that the posse comitatus act prevent use of the military for domestic opperations including quelling the civilian population after terrorist attacks. This is no longer the case.
    Of course, troops were used to keep the civilians in line during Reconstruction and in subduing the indian tribes whether in the States or territories. During the breakup of the Soviet Union, some elements of the military refused to fire on civilians and in fact, joined in the revolutionary movements. The incoming government will not hesitate to turn the military loose on disloyal civilians but it could prove a two-edged sword for them.

  11. #11
    Most of us have believed until recently that the posse comitatus act prevent use of the military for domestic opperations including quelling the civilian population after terrorist attacks.

    no most believed that they couldn't perform leo functions

  12. #12
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    10-30-07
    Location
    Sunny Florida
    Posts
    266
    Most of us have believed until recently that the posse comitatus act prevent use of the military for domestic opperations including quelling the civilian population
    Posse comitatus goes out the window as soon as the President decides to declare Martial Law. With that all your Constitutional rights are not even worth the paper it is written on.

    The war college studies are public knowledge, available on the internet. WND and PrisonPlanet and others might be 'tinfoil hat' quality sites, but I would think that subject details straight from the horses mouth at a .MIL site would add some credence to what domestic scenarios the US war strategists are gearing up for. Here is the link to the War College .MIL site:-

    http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute....Cfm?pubID=890

    How military and LE respond to superior orders depends on how loyal they are to their units, or how patriotic they are. In the end, money will decide. Everybody has his/her price.
    http://www.saf.org/journal/4_Schulman.html

    Thomas Jefferson stated, "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms ... disarms only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater ... confidence than an armed man."

  13. #13
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    07-13-06
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    2,369
    This has been talked about for months already...but all in all,whether true or not,I dont know of any military personnel that would 'fire' on their own people.

    Most Army and Marines I have spoken with about this sort of thing was 'wrong command sirs,I wont do it'...
    Honestly, it depends. The psychology of troops interacting with mobs is very complex and has lots of room for bad things to happen. If you ask troops if they'd just open fire on unarmed civilians, the negative responses would be almost completely universal.

    Put the same troops in an urban area where they're spit on by the civilian population, pelted with rocks and the odd molotov cocktail and subject to sporadic, inaccurate small arms fire, and you'll see a rapid erosion of that resistance to using deadly force. Good troops with good discipline will still hold the line in most cases, and even mediocre troops with mediocre discipline will be resistant to completely crossing the line, but set up that basic scenario and then put the same troops into a riot control mission where there is (or appears to be) sniper fire or something, and you've got really good odds of another Kent State or Bloody Sunday on your hands.

    Best solution is not to put the troops in that scenario at all. Second best scenario is what is usually done when it comes up -- extremely restrictive issue of ammo and rules of engagement that expose troops to higher risk if a real firefight breaks out in favor of reducing the risk to civilians otherwise.

  14. #14
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    12-09-04
    Location
    Monroe County, New York
    Posts
    1,932
    The government can get army men to do their bidding. During the Upshot-Knothole Test Grable in 1953, the government had military men walk directly towards atomic ground zero right after detonation, with every 'participant' being fully aware that they could develop a cancer or some other serious illness. Still onward these men marched into the danger zone. You know why? Because they were given orders. God forbid if they refused.
    The Anti-liberal

    There's slow, then there's Nebraska.
    http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=216153
    There's ADD, then there's this thread:
    http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=225740

    The 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution: "When seconds count, police are just minutes away."

  15. #15
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    02-07-07
    Posts
    6,090
    My snarky comments about WND have more to do with the way they present the news with a bias and distortion towards paranoia rather then disputing portions of their reports (some of which have been found to be quite false and some of which are very true). They have to sell bandwidth just like all other providers and so they go about it it in their way.

    Facts are that the Army War College does not make policy, control how any troops are deployed, or have any say for any operation anywhere in the world, much less the US...

    They also have studies covering a war in the Tokin Gulf, a war between Taiwan and China, a second Vietnam War, Responses to the invasion of the Baltic States by the Russians, Iran invading Afghanistan and many, many more. Your own level of paranoia to a conspiracy theory will determine which are relevant.

  16. #16
    Member  
    Join Date
    01-26-04
    Location
    San Antonio TX
    Posts
    4,839

    marine Corp Ignores Posse Comitatus


  17. #17
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    11-17-07
    Posts
    140
    Quelling protests and protecting banks from The People both sound to me like domestic law enforcement. I suppose that they might lawfully be deployed in cases of actual insurrection, but barring that it would seem unlawful. Furthermore, barring actually invasion or insurrection I do not believe that the POTUS has the power to declare martial law, and even in those cases I only see the power to have a rather limited militarily policed state.

    I find it a matter of grievous concern that there are now 20,000 battle hardened troops deployed on American soil for possible use against her own people. In the past century roughly 3 times as many people have been killed by their governments than by hostile foreign armies in war.

  18. #18
    with every 'participant' being fully aware that they could develop a cancer or some other serious illness.


    ummm no

  19. #19
    alex jones?! well at least we have the REAL journalists out now.

  20. #20
    you gotta read the comments to fully appreciate the "class" of journalism jones fronts for.

    they are hilarious

  21. #21
    Member  
    Join Date
    01-26-04
    Location
    San Antonio TX
    Posts
    4,839


    Ron Paul on Martial Law

    Remember, rembember the 5th of November...

  22. #22
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    12-09-04
    Location
    Monroe County, New York
    Posts
    1,932
    with every 'participant' being fully aware that they could develop a cancer or some other serious illness.


    ummm no
    Ummm Yes

    Or would you care to elaborte? Are you saying "no" to them developing cancer or other serious illnesses? You see, back in the 1940's just after the war, Japanese civilians who survived the blast suffered serious burns. Some had symptoms of serious radiation poisoning. Others developed cancers.

    http://www.cfo.doe.gov/me70/manhattan/hiroshima.htm

    Another review and analysis of the various death toll estimates is in: Richard B. Frank (2001). Downfall: The End of the Imperial Japanese Empire. Penguin Publishing. ISBN 0-679-41424-X.

    The Spirit of Hiroshima: An Introduction to the Atomic Bomb Tragedy. Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum. 1999.

    Or are you saying "no" to the fact that men were given orders to walk towards ground zero after the blast?

    http://www.aracnet.com/~pdxavets/reedk.htm
    _________________________________________________________________

    I stand by my convictions. If Martial Law is declared a large number of army men will follow their orders to arrest, detain in camps, and even fire upon civilians if necessary. Yes fair number of soldiers will likely resist, but it's the ones who don't resist we will have to worry about.

    You know ... every time I read and type on threads as such, I get a sudden urge to purchase more ammo. Am I paranoid? You betcha!
    The Anti-liberal

    There's slow, then there's Nebraska.
    http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=216153
    There's ADD, then there's this thread:
    http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=225740

    The 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution: "When seconds count, police are just minutes away."

  23. #23
    no to the "every 'participant' being fully aware"

  24. #24
    http://www.aracnet.com/~pdxavets/goetchius.htm
    Operation Upshot/Knothole

    US Atomic Veterans

    Arnie Goetchius

    Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006
    From: Arnie Goetchius arnie.goetchius@att.net
    To: pdxavets@aracnet.com
    Subject: My Atomic Test Experience in UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE

    Keith,

    I enlisted in the Army in Sept 1952 after three years of mechanical engineering at Cornell University. I took basic training at the Field Artillery Replacement Training Center (FARTC) at Fort Sill, Oklahoma where I was the only enlistee in the training battalion. Every one else was a draftee and I really took a ribbing over that. After basic training, I was assigned to the 59th Field Artillery battalion (280mm Gun) where I was part of the survey team. The job of the survey team was to establish the coordinates of the target(s) and feed the information to the Fire Direction Center (FDC). While at Fort Sill, we practiced with High Explosive (HE) shells and lobbed them from one side of the base to the other. Part of my training was learning how to assemble the atomic shells to be used in the 280mm gun on which we were training. This gun was later to be known as "Atomic Annie" but we (at least in the enlisted ranks) never called it that in 1952.

    In late April of 1953 we boarded a train with the 280mm gun and associated equipment for the trip from Fort Sill to Camp Desert Rock in Nevada. The train went through El Paso where we had an over night stop. That evening, many of those on board paid a visit to Juarez, Mexico. The impact of that side trip to Juarez probably had a greater negative impact on the health of the soldiers than any subsequent exposure to radiation. The next day the train headed for Las Vegas via Yuma, AZ and Barstow, CA. Having recently been promoted to Cpl., my job on the train was to guard the kitchen car. It was a converted box car that had stoves, grills and ovens added to it. The guards could eat anything we wanted all day long and we did!

    After arriving in the Las Vegas area, we debarked and were bussed to Camp Desert Rock and were assigned to a tent. Every night, the army ran buses into Las Vegas and many of us took advantage of it. I entered the Golden Nugget and promptly lost all my money. I called my father and asked for some money and he replied immediately by sending the money through Western Union. Unfortunately, the money went to Las Vegas NM instead of Las Vegas NV but after a few hours, the money finally arrived. I then promptly lost a big chunk of it and at this point was convinced that I was a poor gambler. I used some of the money left to buy a carton of Kent cigarettes and a gallon of Gallo wine which lasted me the rest of the time I was there. I never went back to the gambling tables.

    Fortunately, the Las Vegas casinos sent performers to Camp Desert Rock so I didn't miss out on any of the entertainment. One night we were visited by Jan Murray (comedian) and Toni Arden (singer) with a bevy of show girls. They put on a great show for us and it was very much appreciated. After the show, we returned to our tents except for a couple of us who went to the latrine. The latrine had showers and toilets sitting on a concrete slab but the tent siding and roof and not yet been constructed so it was an open air operation sitting right next to the main road. Unbeknown to us, all of the show girls had taken a bus tour of the camp and the bus came right by the latrine. One of the guys was taking a shower and I was sitting on the toilet facing the bus not 20 yards away. What could we do but wave and smile to the girls on the bus? They returned our waves with a big round of applause. It was the highlight of the trip and there was no radiation exposure!

    The event it self was called Grable conducted on May 25 and was a part of Operation UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE. Prior to the shot, we were briefed several times on what to expect. We were given a dosimeter badge to measure the radiation. Based on the results of the test, it appeared that very few of us from the 59th battalion exceeded the limits of 3.9 rem. For the vast majority, most were exposed to less than 3.0 rem. For details of the shot including exposure estimates, see http://www.cddc.vt.edu/host/atomic/a...pshot-Knothole

    Our unit was assigned to the trenches about 2 miles from ground zero. J. Lawton Collins, Army Chief of Staff, was several trenches ahead of us so we weren't worried as long as the main man was in front of us. We were part of a team that would move forward to ground zero after the blast. The weather was hot and clear that day and we were in trenches about 5 to 7 feet deep. When the blast came, we were all hunched down at the bottom of the trench. I remember a bright light but don't remember any sound. After the wind passed over head, we were allowed to get out of the trench. One guy was so scared that he didn't know anything had happened. He was still rolled up in a ball at the bottom of the trench and we had to lift him out.

    When we came out of the trench, we could see the mushroom cloud. We then moved forward to near ground zero where we could observe the destruction of houses and a railroad bridge that had been built for the test plus some animals that had been tied up at ground zero. They had a railroad locomotive and a freight car on the bridge which had been tossed several hundred yards by the blast. None of the animals appeared to have survived. Chemical Biological Radiological (CBR) teams preceded us on our movement to ground zero and marked every site that had been contaminated with radiation. Most of those contaminated sites appeared to have contained some kind of metal and it seemed as if the metal absorbed the radiation more then other materials. Obviously we stayed clear of these sites.

    Our pre-test briefing discussed the impact of the Nagasaki and Hiroshima on the Japanese population. The army's estimates were that Japanese casualties were: indirect effects of the blast e.g. flying toilet seats - 50%, direct effects of the blast, e.g. blown ear drums - 35% and radiation - 15%. Based on what I saw at ground zero, that estimate appears to be reasonable. What I took away from this experience was that if I were ever to be involved in a nuclear attack and had any kind of warning, I would get down as low as I could, take a shower after the attack as soon as possible and stay from anything metal that could have been contaminated by radiation.

    In January 1989, I received correspondence from the Defense Nuclear Agency outlining the "Radiation Exposure and the Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program". The purpose of the Program "is committed to provide each test participant the recorded radiation exposure or to assess the most probable exposure". According to the document they sent, 200,000 test participants had an average dose of .625 rem well below the Federal Guidelines (1989) which permitted up to 5 rem per year. There was a questionnaire as a part of the package they sent. I filled it out and sent it in but did not keep a copy. Based on the apparent low dosage I received, I have never concerned myself with that issue.

    Arnie Goetchius
    Email: arnie.goetchius@att.net

    Keith Whittle
    December 22, 2006

  25. #25
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    12-09-04
    Location
    Monroe County, New York
    Posts
    1,932
    You're right. I almost forgot, we're talking about the Army.
    The Anti-liberal

    There's slow, then there's Nebraska.
    http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=216153
    There's ADD, then there's this thread:
    http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=225740

    The 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution: "When seconds count, police are just minutes away."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •