It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Actual or hypothetical compact between the ruled and their rulers. The original inspiration for the notion may derive from the biblical covenant between God and Abraham, but it is most closely associated with the writings of Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Hobbes argued that the absolute power of the sovereign is justified by a hypothetical social contract in which the people agree to obey him in all matters in return for a guarantee of peace and security, which they lack in the warlike “state of nature” posited to exist before the contract is made. Locke believed that rulers also were obliged to protect private property and the right to freedom of thought, speech, and worship. Rousseau held that in the state of nature people are unwarlike but also undeveloped in reasoning and morality; in surrendering their individual freedom, they acquire political liberty and civil rights within a system of laws based on the “general will” of the governed. The idea of the social contract influenced the shapers of the American Revolution and the French Revolution and the constitutions that followed them.
Page 20: (2) The use of deadly force is authorized only under conditions of extreme necessity and as a last resort
when all lesser means have failed or cannot be reasonably be employed. Deadly force is justified under
one or more of the following circumstances:
(a) Self- defense and defense of others. When deadly force reasonably appears to be necessary to
protect law enforcement or security personnel who reasonably believe themselves or others to be in
imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm.
(b) Assets involving national security. When deadly force reasonably appears necessary to prevent
the actual theft or sabotage of assets vital to national security. DoD assets shall be specifically
designated as “vital to national security” only when their loss, damage, or compromise would
seriously jeopardize the fulfillment of a national defense mission. Examples include nuclear
weapons; nuclear command, control, and communications facilities; and designated restricted area as
containing strategic operational assets, sensitive codes, or special access programs.
(c) Assets no involving national security but inherently dangerous to others. When deadly force
reasonably appears to be necessary to prevent the actual theft or sabotage of resources, such as
operable weapons or ammunition, that are inherently dangerous to others; i.e., assets that, in the
hands of an unauthorized individual, present a substantial potential danger of death or serious bodily
harm to others. Examples include high risk portable and lethal missiles, rockets, arms, ammunition,
explosives, chemical agents, and special nuclear material.
(d) Serious offenses against persons. When deadly force reasonably appears necessary to prevent
the commission of a serious offense involving violence and threatening death or serious bodily harm.
Examples include murder, armed robbery, and aggravated assault.
(e) Arrest or apprehension. When deadly force reasonably appears to be necessary to arrest,
apprehend, or prevent the escape of a person who, there is probably cause to believe, has committed
an offense of the nature in (2) through (4) above.
(f) Escapes. When deadly force has been specifically authorized by the Heads of the DoD
Components and reasonable appears to be necessary to prevent the escape of a prisoner, provided
law enforcement or security personnel have probable cause to believe that the escaping prisoner
poses a threat of serious bodily harm either to security personnel or others.
(3) Every Soldier has the right under the law to use reasonably necessary force to defend himself
against violent and dangerous personal attack. The limitations of this paragraph are not intended to
infringe on this right, but to prevent the unauthorized or random use of other types of deadly force.
(4) In addition, the following policies regarding the use of deadly force will be observed:
(a) Give an order to halt.
(b) Warning shot will not be fired.
(c) When a firearm is discharged it will be fired with the intent of rendering the person(s) at whom it
is discharged incapable of continuing that activity or course of behavior prompting the individual to
shoot.
(d) Shot will be fired only with due regard for the safety of innocent bystanders.
(e) In the case of holstered weapons, a weapon should not be removed from the holster unless there
is reasonable expectation that use of the weapon may be necessary.
Page 40: AREA CONTROL TECHNIQUES (3) Sales Restrictions. Restrictions on the sale, transfer, and possession of sensitive material such as
gasoline, firearms, ammunition, and explosives will help control forces in minimizing certain forms of
violence. Limiting the availability of weapons to the potential sniper or terrorist may reduce the
likelihood of such violence. The effective enforcement of these restrictions, however, requires extensive
planning and the commitment of adequate manpower to this effort.
originally posted by: Britguy
What I find chilling about this is the term "other GLOBAL megacities". Global? Really?
Are they talking about invasion of sovereign states to maintain the lapdogs and puppets they have in place as well, in foreign states? Sounds like they could be rather busy and stretched a bit thin if that is their goal.
General William Devereaux: The Army is a broad sword, not a scalpel. Trust me, senator - you do not want the Army in an American city.
originally posted by: KawRider9
a reply to: Char-Lee
If you think the military (or who ever) can take over every "megacity" in the United States, you are extremely foolish or have no understanding on how real life works.
And don't anyone start with the, "government has tanks, jet fighters, drones, nukes" BS. That's pure hyperbole BS.
The only thing we need to worry about is tomorrow. (cue scary music)...
Cities with populations of ten million or more are given a special designation: megacity. There are currently over twenty megacities in the world, and by 2025 there will be close to forty. The trends are clear. Megacities are growing, they are becoming more connected, and the ability of host nation governments to effectively deal with their explosive growth and maintain security is, in many cases, diminishing. Megacities are a unique environment that the U.S. Army does not fully understand.
originally posted by: TinfoilTP
originally posted by: MALBOSIA
originally posted by: TinfoilTP
a reply to: AnteBellum
Good, who wants them filthy Occupiers or whatever comes after them taking over cities and lowering quality of life for all by disrupting key infrastructure and distribution of essentials in their quest to fulfill their dear communist manifesto.
They plan for all eventualities whatever the times suggest, it is their duty.
Which
Those "filthy Occupiers" ?? Real classy.
They were just your university students that showed more intelligence than you and your degenerate wall street thug boyfriends that need the army for protection since they are too frail to do anything for themselves.
Every story I read about them had them shatting all over public squares and raping those same naive university students who thought it was worthwhile. Oh and the commies took the peoples donations and ran off with the pots of gold.
originally posted by: thov420
a reply to: TinfoilTP
This has prob already been posted but I wanted to make sure since I haven't read the entire thread yet.
General William Devereaux: The Army is a broad sword, not a scalpel. Trust me, senator - you do not want the Army in an American city.
A quote from "The Siege" by Bruce Willis and 100% the truth. The military is not for minor problems and the fact you would be happy to use them against the "filthy Occupy protesters" reveals your true intentions. You don't care about Americans, or at least that's what I take from your comments here so far.