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.

 

U.S. Army Practices Urban War Inside U.S.A.

page: 3
11
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 12:32 PM
link   
I'm certain we are just training on a much larger scale, with a bit more real world environment that changes. We do have small urban warfare training cities like Military Operations on Urban Terrain [MOUT] McKenna in Fort Benning, Georgia.



...but this is the same layout and it never changes. We need to train in an ever changing environment, because using the same old layout over and over doesn't help since we memorize the layout. It's much better to be able to train or practice in unfamiliar terrain. Also most MOUT facilities lack common things like real world landscape, light posts, glass windows with reflections, furniture, signs, and other stuff that could be used against you in urban combat. Streets, play a major role in urban combat, and being able to adjust your tactics to factor in different street layouts is a must. If you practice in a fake city environment with the same street layout, there is only so much you could learn.

So, it is much cheaper to practice in real world cities, and instead of practicing on the same street and building layout over and over, you can pack up and move to another section of a city you are unfamiliar with.

Like I said, training on the same city layout is not good enough. We need to train on unfamiliar layouts so that we can learn to "ADAPT".


[edit on 30-9-2006 by LAES YVAN]




posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 12:49 PM
link   
I have many friends, marines, navy & Army.. I really dont think we have to worry about them comming into our streets and homes, becasue for one, they wont do it!
My friends tell me if they ever got an order like that, they would not follow those orders. You have to think how many people have guns, about 96% of us all own some sort of firearm, or atleast a sword on the wall. My friends also tell me that if anything like that happened, they would have to pull the guns from their dead hands personally, and these guys are upper ranking members of our military.
I for one know that if guys in black suits come to my door telling me I have to leave for a FEMA camp, they are going to have to drag my dead body there, as I wont go willingly and neither will anyone else in my shoes.. They wont take our guns, they will just stop selling them if anything.. That will be my first flag that something will go down when they say you cant own guns anymore, then I might be worried. Im not saying it couldnt happen, just very unlikely that they would have to go door to door, killing Americans.. They would be better off giving us all shots at hospitals and take us out that way... One reason I do not trust hospitals, its to easy to affect everyone in the USA with a single shot in each hospital around the USA.. IM not sure where this road is leading us, but glad you made this thread to discuss the possible actions of these Neocons...



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by WithoutEqual
To me that's the biggest threat we'll face as far as a facist takeover is concerned. Despite what alot of people think on here, the average soldier is just like you and I, and would resist like you and I.


That's exactly why they are planning on implanting radio frequency locators under the skin of every US soldier. Foriegn mercenaries will be able to hunt down the deserters.

www.examiner.com...


Originally posted by zysin5
One reason I do not trust hospitals, its to easy to affect everyone in the USA with a single shot in each hospital around the USA..


Just wait until they unviel the new bird flu vaccine. They will scare everyone in the country into getting innoculated. They may even resort to forceful innoculations for those who hold out.

[edit on 30-9-2006 by In nothing we trust]



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 02:08 PM
link   
Seriously guys, the U.S. Army and the Marines have been training to do urban combat and guerilla warfare for years now. After all, the recent analysis has reported that 80% of the world's population will be in urban areas. We have seen that warfare are in the cities and town. Not in the fields. And no where do I see in the links about American troops are being trained in U.S. cities!! Its in mock cities only as of right now. Yes its true that some places, soldiers and Marines have practiced where civilians are involved for many years. But its not meant for to put any possible insurrection by American citizens which does not say. In fact, the military has been trying to train soldiers and Marines to fight in urban warfare for years now, learning from hard lessons overseas that resulted in failures. For example the fight for Mogadishu, Somalia. As well as Iraq where many Marines and soldiers have been killed because they are not trained for urban and guerilla warfare. And its possible that if this keeps up, many of America's enemies will resort to this type of warfare. Not to mention that the recent Israel-Lebanon conflict will definitely be studied on.



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 02:30 PM
link   
I think that everyone here understands the need for urban war training. that is, after all, why we have urban warfare training facilities. We get nervious when we see that our cities are being used insteaad of those expensive training bases.

This concern is framed in the context of recent legislation. As you know, the President is about to sign a new law in to effect which provides Federal and Military officials with a shield in regards to torture and detainment. It's the detaiment part of that law which has so many of us looking at the Army with worry.

Under the guidelines of this new law. it's not hard to classify anyone as an enemy combatant. Trouble is, those loosey-goosey definitions are literally just one pen-stroke away from allowing warrantless arrest of U.S. citizens...who could be held indefinitely...without charges...

With this in mind, we understand that it would be easy-peasy to pass a small minor tiny little insignificant exemption to the Posse Comitatus which would allow the Army to be used to carry out some of the more 'difficult' arrests. This is the larger picture through which we view this problem.

I don't think you'll find anyone here who wants this to get nasty. What we are seeing is a slow erosion of the laws which protect US from THEM. It's likely to be true...as many hear have said...that some in the Army won't follow these orders. As good as that is, it won't be enough to prevent the bulk of the force from carrying out it's orders. Today's military is much more politicized than it used to be. We know this, and we worry about it.

We would all like to be wrong about this, but it's not lookin' like we'll have that chance.



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 03:17 PM
link   
My greatest concern is the lust for power and how that could result in a failed election
this November or in 2008.

If there is enough civil unrest, this administration would not hesitate to declare Martial Law.

Doing so suspends the U.S. Constituiton without recourse for no less than 6 months.
No one, not even Congress can reverse that decision.

Suspension of the Constitution also suspends your right to bear arms.

The internet has played a crucial role on making the public aware that these congressional elections
are important.
After seeing what went down in the Maryland primaries, I can't help but worry about November.
If the results of this election come into question, there WILL most certainly be civil unrest.

I honestly believe that this administration will stop at nothing to protect themselves from criminal
prosecution or impeachment. If they lose their majority in Congress, they are vulnerable.

When we consider the state of anarchy that resulted from Katrina, just imagine that taking place in
every major city all at the same time.

I do hope that those who have risked their lives for this great country will stand up to defend
our OWN Freedom when our own government becomes the greatest threat.



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
Under the guidelines of this new law. it's not hard to classify anyone as an enemy combatant. Trouble is, those loosey-goosey definitions are literally just one pen-stroke away from allowing warrantless arrest of U.S. citizens...who could be held indefinitely...without charges...


The richest 1% of Americans are implementing a plan to control and imprision the other 99% of the American population through the use of force.

Anyone who disagrees with the government (that they control) will disappear without a trace. They will start by picking off the loudest disenters one at a time for re-education or execution, which will forego the need for mass detentions.

They probably won't have to do house to house search and seizures of arms. They will trick the masses into turning in thier own guns willingly (It's for your own safety, the government is your friend, etc). Then they will classify government disenters, and anyone who still owns a weapon, as a terrorist and get thier friends and neighbors to turn them in to the authorities.



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 03:53 PM
link   
I don't think the Bush administration has the mojo to forcethe issue and stay in power after 2008. I do think that the next President, whoever that is, may berry well have the positioning needed to pull that of, if they so desired.

Anyone who has read my work will know how I think that could play out. As closely linked as the Democrats and Republicans are, it may not matter which ofthem is in power. I think that either party is capable of crossing that line you mentioned. that's why I decided to become an author.

The next President will be in a position to build on what Mr. Bush has done. With just a few pieces of legislation, we could see the nightnare scenario that you and others talk about. This is why I thought the issue was important enough to post this story to ATS which started this thread.



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
I don't think the Bush administration has the mojo to forcethe issue and stay in power after 2008. I do think that the next President, whoever that is, may berry well have the positioning needed to pull that of, if they so desired.


I don't think that Bush needs to remain in power. Each succeeding president moves them closer to thier goal of total dominance over the population. Each succeeding president passes more and more presidential powers that will allow them to nullify the constitution in it's entirety and destroy america as we approach the time of unrest.



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 04:15 PM
link   
So what would you bet on to be the most likely excuse to declare Martial Law between now and 2008?

A failed election
Another "terrorist event"
A bird flu pandemic.
A natural disaster
A UFO encounter
Stock Market Crash
A military coup by the joint chiefs of staff



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 04:34 PM
link   
Answers in Bold


Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree

So what would you bet on to be the most likely excuse to declare Martial Law between now and 2008?

A failed election (Unlikely - all elections are rigged by skull and bones)
Another "terrorist event" (Likely - However it will be a false flag government sponsored terrorist event)
A bird flu pandemic. (Unlikely - Bird flu is most likely propaganda)
A natural disaster (Unlikely, we see how the government operated during Katrina - They will just leave people to die and fend for themselves)
A UFO encounter (Unlikely - If there is a UFO encounter it will be a staged event)

Stock Market Crash (MOST LIKELY - 1929 all over again, this time the failure will be attributed to the large scale failure fo the banking system, due to the comming wholesale record real esate foreclosures, corporate and government accounting fraud and the large scale movement of fortune 500 jobs to China, Mexico and India. This is a manufactured fall in my opinion, caused by manipulating the federal reserves prime interest rate which was done right after 9/11.

9/11 was perpetrated to allow them to finish the economic manipulation needed to bring about the failure of the US economy.)


A military coup by the joint chiefs of staff (Unlikely - If anything the joint chiefs of staff will use a military coup to enact the presidential directives supporting the complete suspension of the US constitution NOT defending the constitution.


[edit on 30-9-2006 by In nothing we trust]



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 04:53 PM
link   
The Marine Corps has been conducting military exercises in US cities for a couple of decades now without much fanfare. Usually, they are well publicized in advance however, I believe that there was an incident some while back in which local residents were caught by surprise by such an incident.

I see nothing to be concerned about. We should be proud to see our tax dollars at work. Nobody gets too concerned about airshows and while they are not identical in missions, they are both visible examples of our defenses at work.



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 05:05 PM
link   
Interesting summary.

With millions of Americans now approaching retirement where these corporations will be forced to pay us
for doing nothing, I'm sorry to say that a total collapse of pension funding could very well happen.

It's either that or they need to thin out the population which is an even more frightening scenario.



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 06:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
However, it's also worth noting that most people don't protest unless they feel like they have something to protest.


Many people protest for the sake of it, because it has become a sort of trend. In the past people would protest for causes they truly believed in, Civil Rights, Equal Rights for women, Northern Ireland (1969 equal rights for Catholics/1972 against internment which led to 'Bloody Sunday'), Vietnam, these are all significant protests. However nowadays it's become an excuse for anarchists to cause trouble. This has especially been the case in the UK certainly since 2000. When the fuel strike went on, crippling much of the transport network here. Ever since, it's become a fad, a trend for people to join in the populist anti-authority/government movements. Has become rather irritating to be honest. We should look back to the 'protest' against fox hunting, which led to anarchy and civil unrest. Whilst i admit there are those who genuinely feel strongly for such causes and are obviously entitled to air their grievances in a peaceful manner.

There are others who will take advantage and turn it into anarchist frenzy wet dream. Because of all these developments, i find much of the protests an irritance, a chance for people to have a day off work or kids to bunk off school. Since many are like sheep, who can't/won't think for themselves and simply 'follow the crowd'. It no longer becomes a meaningful demonstration of vocal unison, but a trendy, havoc wreaking day out of fun. I have nothing whatsoever against voicing concerns and opinions freely, that should be every human being's right, we should always question things, that is how we progress. I just have a problem with the manner in which it is conducted. So remember, don't be so easily fooled as to the intentions or motives of protesters, they're not always so genuine or sincere.

On the topic of these training maneuvers, it is easy to succumb to cynicism and distrust. Especially since it is fashionable to label any government initiative as sinister and part of some major conspiracy. However there is the likelihood (however remote) that extremist insurgency terrorism may become a more common component of American suburban life. Considering this is the situation that faces Coalition forces abroad it provides good training for that, to combat that particular problem, while also preparing for a 'worst case scenario'. I think the saying "hope for the best, prepare for the worst" applies here. It should always be the responsibility of a government to look out for its people, to forsee every possible situation and prepare against it. Any government that doesn't pursue such a concept, frankly doesn't deserve to be in power, and would be a major liability. The populist conspiracy theorists would have you think this is part of a NWO or despotic scheme, or some such nonesense. Listen to your heads, to reason, think of all possibilities, and not to just blindly and narrowly reaching for the same overused excuse. One film that explores this is The Siege (1998) (a film 3 years ahead of its time). Although i don't agree with such methods, but it's about a General who goes too far. Which is a concern i can understand, however i think we would be treading into the realm of fiction here, it would not be in the interest of a government to do so, and so unpopular it frankly would not even reach implementation.

Peace out


[edit on 30/9/06 by Flyboy211]

[edit on 30/9/06 by Flyboy211]

[edit on 30/9/06 by Flyboy211]



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 06:26 PM
link   
Flyboy, that's exactly how it is here. Most protests are fine- look at the pro-marijuana rally in Hamilton I mentioned. People, peacefully staging a sit in. No arrests, no unruly behavior, no injuries.

Compare it, once again, to the Battle of Seattle. NGOs and other groups funded the transport of protesters and anarchists to the site. While most of the peaceful protesters scattered once the hammer started coming down, what was left was a hardened core of anarchists, vandals and thugs. There was no idealism there- just a desire for violence and mayhem.

Unfortunately, groups such as Street Medics and certain NGOs aid and abett the continuation of violent and destructive protests. They become less and less about the issue, and more about 'taking it to the man'. An objection to a law or treatment by officials suddenly gives people the idea that they have carte blanche to run amok, throwing rocks at police or even others who don't share their views, to take out their rage on corporate icons, regardless of size.

Protests, especially those of globalization or poverty, rapidly become nothing but protests of rule of law.

DE



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 06:44 PM
link   
The legislative backdrop upon which all this plays out would seem to indicate that the career politicians has no fear of the people they claim to represent. If anything, the establishment seems to hold us in contempt. With so much power to be gained from any sort of catastrophe, it seems likely that they are willing to bide their time until the prize falls in to their lap.

I could just as easily still be a nameless and faceless bureaucrat. If that one turn of events had never happened, I would not be part of this conversation. None of my work would be published. I would have never spent any time on radio. I would have influneced...nobody at all.

How many of us here would be doing other things if not for that one moment? If the government had never gone beyond a certain point to acquire more power, a lot of us might not be on this board today. Trouble is, the career politicians have crossed that line and we are here.



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by In nothing we trust

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
Under the guidelines of this new law. it's not hard to classify anyone as an enemy combatant. Trouble is, those loosey-goosey definitions are literally just one pen-stroke away from allowing warrantless arrest of U.S. citizens...who could be held indefinitely...without charges...


The richest 1% of Americans are implementing a plan to control and imprision the other 99% of the American population through the use of force.

They'll fail. These people arn't even capable of pumping their own gas. Sure they have power, but they need people to impliment it.

Anyone who disagrees with the government (that they control) will disappear without a trace. They will start by picking off the loudest disenters one at a time for re-education or execution, which will forego the need for mass detentions.

They probably won't have to do house to house search and seizures of arms. They will trick the masses into turning in thier own guns willingly (It's for your own safety, the government is your friend, etc). Then they will classify government disenters, and anyone who still owns a weapon, as a terrorist and get thier friends and neighbors to turn them in to the authorities.


Maybe small groups but that's it. With all due respect you must not know many firearm owners. No one I know would ever give up their guns, for anything, or be able to be tricked by any means. Most shooters I know are some pretty smart folks, that would grease a gov't thug, just as fast as a robber in their home. Any tax paying citizen is fully aware the gov't is not your friend, hell, it's your enemy. I agree they'll get some people, but most would be the younger generations that don't know anything other than something their told on TV, and those on the West, and East coasts. Midwest, Northern Plains, the South, no freakin way. Any place where cowardice is considered 'cool' is screwed you're right, which is why I said West and East coasts.

If a couple thousand, no talent, inaccurate shooting, noobs are causing us this much trouble in Iraq to the point where we can't impliment our goals, then how in the hell are they going to deal with millions of armed citizens that actually know how to use the weapon they're holding? Someone mentioned earlier, that they believe Iraq is practice to do the same thing here. If that is the case, then boy they suck, and have a hell of alot more practice needed before they tangle with their own. U.S. citizens have a history of holding their ground even when it looks futile. Battle Of New Orleans, Korean shop owners during the L.A. riots, Hurricane Katrina and the armed civies that were doing the job the gov't failed at, ect. Granted they arn't the same thing, but I believe alot of you are underestimating the intellegence of the average U.S. citizen.

The country was born from an insurgency, and if given the chance, we're capable of showing the world what a real insurgency is. The only reason people think the insurgents in Iraq are badasses, is cause the gov't isn't fighting to win over there. Remember everyone, short wars are not profitable wars. And as with anything in life, it's all about money.



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by WithoutEqual
If a couple thousand, no talent, inaccurate shooting, noobs are causing us this much trouble in Iraq to the point where we can't impliment our goals, then how in the hell are they going to deal with millions of armed citizens that actually know how to use the weapon they're holding? Someone mentioned earlier, that they believe Iraq is practice to do the same thing here.

The country was born from an insurgency, and if given the chance, we're capable of showing the world what a real insurgency is. The only reason people think the insurgents in Iraq are badasses, is cause the gov't isn't fighting to win over there.


If the politicians backed away from the Iraq conflict and let the military suppress the muslims in the middle-east they could and would flatten the entire region to nothing but rubble.

They could use that kind of tactic to fight american insurgents in america as well. But they aren't, the tactics being employed in Iraq are find and weed out the insurgents. Clearly leveling Iraq cities to rubble would be tolerated by americans, but just barely (especially if there was another false flag government terrorist event). BUt the wholesale destruction of american cities, by americans, would never be tolerated.

That is why the military is using Iraq as a training ground. They are learning how to perform search and seizure operations and use the public for information gathering purposes. This tactic will prove useful for those in power, in the battle for america.

Chances are that the suppression of America and the destruction of american cities, will be outsourced to foriegn mercenaries anyways. I guess there are just some jobs that americans just don't want to do. But american soldiers could and would weed out government disenters under the guise of fighting terrorists.

What US soldier is going to question his superiors when ordered to apprehend a suspected american terrorist? They will follow orders without question or else they will be court marshalled.

[edit on 30-9-2006 by In nothing we trust]



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 09:27 PM
link   
Actually fighting back is a whole 'nother matter. For those of you who are not clear on where I stand on THAT issue, I offer the following:

Resource

In the event that it does become necessary to fight back, I hope that we will be able to look back on discussion like this and use what we learned. I'm not willing to foam at the mouth and take off on a rant. Not yet, anyway. Now is the time for thought and constructively argued criticisms.

The actual nuts and bolts of anotehr American insurrection are a different matter. If that should happen, we will likely benefit from the knowledge and experience of retired, discharged, or deserted service personnel who join the revolt.

Even so, there's a lot that the rest of us non-military folk will have to figure out for ourselves. Again, I say, that's why this discussion is so important.

For those of you who would like to talk about what's coming from a different perspective, try this:

Invasion, Insurrection, or Civil War?

[edit on 30-9-2006 by Justin Oldham]



posted on Oct, 2 2006 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by In nothing we trust

What US soldier is going to question his superiors when ordered to apprehend a suspected american terrorist? They will follow orders without question or else they will be court marshalled.



INWT...i quote you because it was the last post with this thought/theme which i seem to see a lot. so this isnt directed at you per se, but yet it is lol

cmon guys, give the soldiers credit for having more brains than god gave a box of hammers huh?

do you think we are all just in such a hurry to kill someone we dont care who it is? even if its our next door neighbor? for many, being in teh military is simply a job. being in the military doesnt automatically make you forrest gump ok?

please dont be so condecending and superior as to think that you are so much more enlightened than anyone else. if theres a reason for US troops to be on US soil, and something about it stinks...give the guys/gals credit enough to be able to see it and question their orders.

agian ill reiterate the importance of the 2nd amendment. as long as it is in place, the government cant do much to us militarily. not because they dont have bigger guns, but because the kids with those big guns wont pull the triggers. the 2nd amendment is there to protect us from just what some of you think is happening. im not sure exactly how many gun owners there are in this country but i believe its upwards of 100million? (somone correct me if im way off but lets all admit, its a lot)

so, 100 million gun owners vs less than 4 million in the standing army. (again, someone feel free to correct me if im way off but lets not quibble over small discrepancies or semantics) not to mention that once the boys/girls in uniform decide taht their orders are BS do u think they're gonna give their guns back before the head out? only if they really are forrest gump.

so in the words of my father, lets not worry until theres something to worry about.

when they start rounding you up block at a time for weapons turn in and RFID implantation...then ill worry. but so long as my guns in my hand and there isnt a swat team down the street waiting for me to leave my house...think ill sleep ok at night.

Damo



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join