Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Regular Military Vs Reserve Forces / National Guard in a SHTF Scenerio.

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 3 2014 @ 01:58 AM
link   
One thing I personally see when it comes to the US military firing on it's own civilians..I think it could and would happen. America is just too big and divided, we do not feel united as a people anymore. In some countries if the military were asked to fire on it's own it would be people from their hometown or the next city or two over. Here in America, all you gotta do is send the troops born in one part of the nation to the opposite part of the nation and they will immediately feel less empathy toward these people, IMO.

Plus, Americans are so completely divided on so many issues. People gun their fellow Americans down in the streets everyday out of anger, and even less reasons. Why wouldnt the military?

Also, I agree with an above poster in that it would depend on how things happen. Say there is a group of people peacefully holding signs and signing for example, if the order was given to mow em down i dont think it would be followed by most, however take that same group of people and have them throwing rocks and hurling molotovs and that order to mow em down comes a whole lot easier to many..




posted on Apr, 3 2014 @ 03:45 AM
link   

pheonix358
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Having studied your Constitution to some extent .... It is difficult to do so from outside the country .... I don't care how smart I am .... I just can't get the same perspective because, well, I don't live there.

As I understand it, in times of peace, the National Guard is commanded by the various State Governors.

When War is declared, the Command of the National Guard is transferred to the President. If I have that right then was the War on Drugs and the War on Terror merely a conduit to remove the Command of the National Guard away from the States?

Thanks for your views and for everyone's, I am learning and I am happy to do so. The perspective of one looking in, from without, is always limited and yet still has merit due to the differences in perspective.

P


Close...

National Guard troops are a duel role force depending on the situation and orders. NG troops work under two different titles of orders:

Title 10:
Federal Orders and Missions, Commanded by the POTUS, JoC etc - Federal Deployments (i.e. Iraq, Afghanistan), funded by the U.S. government.


Title 32:
State Orders and missions (i.e. wild fires, mudslides, civilian support, etc..) conducted by the Governor or the TAG of the respective state, funded by the state.

Grim



posted on Apr, 3 2014 @ 04:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Grimmley
 





National Guard troops are a duel role force depending on the situation and orders.

NG troops work under two different titles of orders:

Title 10: Federal Orders and Missions, Commanded by the POTUS, JoC etc - Federal Deployments (i.e. Iraq, Afghanistan), funded by the U.S. government.

Title 32: State Orders and missions (i.e. wild fires, mudslides, civilian support, etc..) conducted by the Governor or the TAG of the respective state, funded by the state.

Grim


So what happens if a Title 10 order says confiscate weapons and a Title 32 says kill anyone attempting to confiscate weapons?

P



posted on Apr, 3 2014 @ 07:54 AM
link   

pheonix358
reply to post by Grimmley
 





National Guard troops are a duel role force depending on the situation and orders.

NG troops work under two different titles of orders:

Title 10: Federal Orders and Missions, Commanded by the POTUS, JoC etc - Federal Deployments (i.e. Iraq, Afghanistan), funded by the U.S. government.

Title 32: State Orders and missions (i.e. wild fires, mudslides, civilian support, etc..) conducted by the Governor or the TAG of the respective state, funded by the state.

Grim


So what happens if a Title 10 order says confiscate weapons and a Title 32 says kill anyone attempting to confiscate weapons?

P


Title 10 orders would cancel out Title 32 orders. There is a LOT of politics involved with that one.

I don't know how it has played out since, but I remember that many National Guard units were pretty much stripped of their prime movers and major weapons systems due to everything being sent overseas. I curious if they have gotten them back yet.



posted on Apr, 3 2014 @ 07:57 AM
link   
I appreciate your willingness to hear Americans' pov on this.

My spouse is former Army National Guard MP (Military Police, not Member of Parliament
). He is as much a soldier as any active duty one, has worked several domestic missions as well as cooperative missions with other countries in troubled regions south of our border; earned Humanitarian Service Medals on two separate occasions.

I can tell you that he will fight for innocent people, and against threats, FOREIGN OR DOMESTIC. Otherwise he just wants to be left alone. I'm grateful to have the love and companionship of someone with deep integrity, honor, and commitment. If SHTF, I will be protected, and I will/do take his lead on whatever threat approaches us. I trust him completely.


Certainly, not all soldiers are the same; the training itself is destructive and can cause PTSD. Guardsmen/women take their positions just as seriously as full-time soldiers. They are also in touch with (have one foot firmly planted in) civilian life in an inextricable way. I'd rather have a Guardsman 'cover me' and get my back than an active duty career service-man or officer 'deployed' to me/my neighborhood or whatever. Just my feedback for you.





edit on 4/3/2014 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 3 2014 @ 08:56 AM
link   
Command of the troops should not be a federal job. Congress can declare war, but the states should be the ones to wage it. The federal governments power should only derive from the states, not from within itself.



posted on Apr, 3 2014 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by BuzzyWigs
 


Thank you for that very different POV.

I think, with all the replies, I have my answer and my thanks to all that have responded.

P



posted on Apr, 3 2014 @ 07:36 PM
link   
We are ALL the same we all take the same oath and all of us combat arms pukes love our guns ,America and of course ...bacon.
Oh and 99.999 of us are conservative because the dang libs can't fight and get us killed for doing things pollitically and NOT strategically.The other guys start everything,essentially because they are money ghouls.They are the ones who are the higher evil
If they actually tried something it would blow up in their faces.



posted on Apr, 3 2014 @ 08:38 PM
link   

bigfatfurrytexan
Command of the troops should not be a federal job. Congress can declare war, but the states should be the ones to wage it. The federal governments power should only derive from the states, not from within itself.


I agree with the sentiments, but, 50 commanders in chief? How would they get anything done!

The original intent, I think, was for the National Guard to provide a balancing power to Federal Military. That balance is out of whack.

I would suggest that it should be Congress and State Governors, being in agreement, to Declare War.

It is not as if the US suffers terribly from invading armies. The last time that happened was 1776 I think.

P



posted on Apr, 3 2014 @ 09:00 PM
link   

pheonix358

bigfatfurrytexan
Command of the troops should not be a federal job. Congress can declare war, but the states should be the ones to wage it. The federal governments power should only derive from the states, not from within itself.


I agree with the sentiments, but, 50 commanders in chief? How would they get anything done!

The original intent, I think, was for the National Guard to provide a balancing power to Federal Military. That balance is out of whack.

I would suggest that it should be Congress and State Governors, being in agreement, to Declare War.

It is not as if the US suffers terribly from invading armies. The last time that happened was 1776 I think.

P


I read the constitution as not allowing for a standing army. I guess it ultimately comes down to a viewpoint that is either federalist or anti-federalist.

But you don't have 50 commanders in chief. You have 50 states all playing a role in the grand scheme. A framework is built and developed to allow for cohesion. But battle operations should likely only be carried out on US soil, as it should only be a DEFENSIVE force.



posted on Apr, 3 2014 @ 09:08 PM
link   
reply to post by pheonix358
 


Regular, Reserve, or National Guard, there will always be a few misfits that will say "Yes."
But they won't last very long. That is why Biden says that he doesn't trust the military. That is why obama is pulling out our teeth and cutting off our claws. They don't trust us to follow their order to murder U.S. citizens. In mass, it will Never Happen!
Any questions?



posted on Apr, 3 2014 @ 09:14 PM
link   

pheonix358

bigfatfurrytexan
Command of the troops should not be a federal job. Congress can declare war, but the states should be the ones to wage it. The federal governments power should only derive from the states, not from within itself.


I agree with the sentiments, but, 50 commanders in chief? How would they get anything done!

The original intent, I think, was for the National Guard to provide a balancing power to Federal Military. That balance is out of whack.

I would suggest that it should be Congress and State Governors, being in agreement, to Declare War.

It is not as if the US suffers terribly from invading armies. The last time that happened was 1776 I think.

P


Mmmmm...1812 or if you want get into semantics, The Mexican-American War.

Both long ago. Geography is a blessing.



posted on Apr, 3 2014 @ 09:16 PM
link   

TDawgRex

pheonix358
reply to post by Grimmley
 





National Guard troops are a duel role force depending on the situation and orders.

NG troops work under two different titles of orders:

Title 10: Federal Orders and Missions, Commanded by the POTUS, JoC etc - Federal Deployments (i.e. Iraq, Afghanistan), funded by the U.S. government.

Title 32: State Orders and missions (i.e. wild fires, mudslides, civilian support, etc..) conducted by the Governor or the TAG of the respective state, funded by the state.

Grim


So what happens if a Title 10 order says confiscate weapons and a Title 32 says kill anyone attempting to confiscate weapons?

P


Title 10 orders would cancel out Title 32 orders. There is a LOT of politics involved with that one.

I don't know how it has played out since, but I remember that many National Guard units were pretty much stripped of their prime movers and major weapons systems due to everything being sent overseas. I curious if they have gotten them back yet.


No.
obama says it will cost too much to ship it back.
www.washingtonpost.com...

www.npr.org...

voiceofrussia.com...



posted on Apr, 3 2014 @ 09:32 PM
link   

Violater1

TDawgRex

pheonix358
reply to post by Grimmley
 





National Guard troops are a duel role force depending on the situation and orders.

NG troops work under two different titles of orders:

Title 10: Federal Orders and Missions, Commanded by the POTUS, JoC etc - Federal Deployments (i.e. Iraq, Afghanistan), funded by the U.S. government.

Title 32: State Orders and missions (i.e. wild fires, mudslides, civilian support, etc..) conducted by the Governor or the TAG of the respective state, funded by the state.

Grim


So what happens if a Title 10 order says confiscate weapons and a Title 32 says kill anyone attempting to confiscate weapons?

P


Title 10 orders would cancel out Title 32 orders. There is a LOT of politics involved with that one.

I don't know how it has played out since, but I remember that many National Guard units were pretty much stripped of their prime movers and major weapons systems due to everything being sent overseas. I curious if they have gotten them back yet.


No.
obama says it will cost too much to ship it back.
www.washingtonpost.com...

www.npr.org...

voiceofrussia.com...


All that equipment, much of which is not even ten years old will now be cut up for scrap or given to the local government.

And here we are, flying B-52 60+ years old, M1's and Bradley's nearing thirty.



posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 12:16 AM
link   
Here is what is going to happen.

The military will start going out door to door collecting firearms.

Within a couple days the military will receive Anonymous leads about groups with large amounts of military type weapons.

The military will send out a team to raid these places.

As the military surrounds the place there will be one or more large explosions.

The military will move in and find few if any weapons but a number of illegals, gang members or other innocent people ECT ECT ECT dead or injured.

Right after the explosion/s there will be a number of people telling others in the neighborhood that they saw military personal setting the explosives or dropping bombs from aircraft. ECT ECT ECT

Within hours sites like ATS and the media will be spreading these stories of innocent people being killed by the military.

As these stories spread other groups will start doing the same trick on the military units around them collecting guns.

Many veterans of vietnam iraq and afganastan have had this type tricks played on them and can play them too.
edit on 4-4-2014 by ANNED because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 12:23 AM
link   
We have suffered another shooting at my old post.I will point out he apparently didn't miss any shot.They heard 20.
This guy was NOT combat arms,he was a transportation soldier.We wield far better skills...not to mention we don't shoot up innocent people.



posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 12:29 AM
link   
reply to post by pheonix358
 


I asked a similar line of questiins a while back. I was trying to get a realistic idea for a story and youtube series my friend and I are working on. Of course when you admit its for a project people become more interested in nitpicking the project and telling you you wont be able to do it..

My question was in a revolution scenario who would fight a civilian army? Army isnt supposed to right? So national guard? Police? UN?



posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 06:30 AM
link   
Reservist are not considered the insulting 'weekend warriors' that is the National Guard which totally separate from regular army.

A solder is going to do what his/her superior has ordered then to do-end of story.

148 US solders were executed in WWII Europe for disobeying orders. 9 of them were hanged in front of their men.

That should clear up this insulting thread.



posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 06:39 AM
link   

spooky24
Reservist are not considered the insulting 'weekend warriors' that is the National Guard which totally separate from regular army.

A solder is going to do what his/her superior has ordered then to do-end of story.

148 US solders were executed in WWII Europe for disobeying orders. 9 of them were hanged in front of their men.

That should clear up this insulting thread.


The thread was a question seeking answers and clarification.

I can not see how you were insulted.

P



posted on Jun, 4 2014 @ 07:09 PM
link   
a reply to: pheonix358

i have thought about this alot also. i strongly agree with you about the usa being the last straw as far as internationals setting up thier nwo. we will fight. and we will win.





new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join