U.S. Troops Asked If They Would Shoot American Citizens

reply to post by BlueRaja


If you read my post again you will see that I said some might be the “overall good guy type” or are you purposely leaving that bit of information out?

I also have stated in two posts two different types of people I have met both military personnel. One is the “overall good guy type” the other is the “robot type”. These were questions I ask them a year ago and was recently speaking on the subject again with the friend.

Believe what you want I know for fact there are those who would shoot without asking why. The one that said he would told me that if he was told to do so they must be an enemy.
Again I am going from people themselves who told me face to face their answers.
I am not implying anything I’m stating for fact there are military who would do so, as they have told me.

Just because you do not agree with me does not in any way mean that you are right. All the disagreement in the world will not take away what I was told face to face. I have my facts in front of me in personal experience.

What I am talking about has nothing to do with self defense. And I guarantee you that there are military who would shoot without asking questions.

Raist

Originally posted by ItsHumanNature
reply to post by BlueRaja

 

I already stated a concrete undeniable answer to the OP: Would American troops fire on American Citizens. The answer is YES, because they already have done so. I could stay here all day and hit the "softballs" you are tossing, but I won't, because I am certain that your intention is to make me do exactly that. Good Day sir.

You are providing no context. You made a universal statement that US troops will fire on US citizens. Without context, such a statement is useless to discuss. Will troops defend themselves- yes(just like a police officer will defend themself). Will troops conduct offensive operations, and randomly shoot US citizens without provocation- I'm gonna have to put my money on a resounding NO.

Remember Katrina? And the news report about confiscations? The soldier they interviewed said he "Did not want to think about what he would have to do if someone popped around a corner." "You mean shooting an American?" the reporter asked? "Yeah." the soldier said.
Shoot an American

For now let's forget about the American troops. What about the Mexican or even Canadian ones? There is an SPP emergency plan between USA, Canada, and Mexico that basically states that whatever country in North America a disaster happens in, the other countries troops will deploy into that country to help. So if the USA has a disaster, Canadian and Mexican troops will deploy.

I have absolutely no doubts that the Mexican army would fire on American citizens if ordered to do so.

reply to post by BlueRaja



.................

OK. For the tenth time in two pages .... we again hear where you'll put YOUR money.

Thanks for that, but you've already said this several times now.

But all you can do here is state YOUR opinion .. say where you'll put YOUR money.

Kindly don't presume to put MY money or anyone ELSE's money on YOUR opinion.

Because YOUR opinion is just that and ONLY that ... yours.

And there are clearly many of us who have our OWN opinions re: this issue ... and they differ from yours quite considerably.

I know a few vets. They all agree that one day this may happen. Fortunatly, if and when this happens, I think Big Brother will encounter more resistance than they would have ever imagined from both citizens and soldiers. There are more of us than them also, even with their "weapons of mass destruction."



[edit on 2/4/2008 by Amaxium]

reply to post by Raist


There are those in the military that take drugs, shoplift, abuse their spouse/children, etc... too, but they are the distinct minority. I won't say you didn't hear what you may have heard. The individual in question may have meant exactly what you think they did. There's also the possibility, that they weren't the most eloquent speaker, and didn't understand exactly how what they were saying to you, was interpreted. In any event, you're not gonna have a statistically significant amount of troops and leaders agreeing to kill on command without any sort of justification other than "we did as we were told."

reply to post by Dock6


It's obvious that we share different opinions, so thanks for bringing that to my attention. My problem is that many look for evidence that supports their opinions, rather than basing their opinions on where the evidence leads. They'll take some hearsay evidence, or offhand remark that plays to their fears, and then say -aha! I knew it. I've been Active Duty for 15yrs and it simply has not been my experience that the types of individuals being discussed are found in any significant number throughout the military. I have yet to find people that have no opinions, and merely blindly go along with anything. None of the assertions presented have given any context. Merely that US troops would have no issue shooting citizens. Some have said, well perhaps only 1/3 of the military would do that. I'm just not gonna sit back and let the military be slandered, because Joe Schmuckatelly said such and such to Snuffy Smith, and then Beatle Bailey overheard it.

reply to post by BlueRaja


Blue,

When I ask both men this they both knew exactly what was being ask, they both also were well trained enough in speaking that they could clearly make their minds known.

I added law enforcement into my statistics in my original post if you recall that would be why my numbers were where they were. I also believe that in five years the “good guy” will be fewer in number as the aged veterans are and will be leaving. It is the aged veterans that will help the citizen as they know full well what their job is and what real justice is.

The difference between the two men I ask was simply age. The oldest and my good friend would not do so, the youngest would. The age difference was a mere 14 years what is it going to be like for many younger generations?

Raist

Military members are PEOPLE....... you can subject them to any type of opinion you want, but the fact remains that they will decide for themselves what is right. They are not brainwashed. My OPINION and HOPE, being a military member myself, is that there would be NO harm done to civilians, ever. Civilians should realize the seperation of the military and government. There is a distinct and important line between a soldier and politician. Just imagine if politicians had guns!! AHHH!!!!!!!!!!!

reply to post by Raist


Like I said, there are a minority of folks in the military who would go along with something like is being suggested. The situation where US troops would be operating on US soil would require a pretty significant disaster(natural or otherwise) to have happened. Restoration of order, prevention of looting/other lawlessness/self defense, would be times where force might be needed. I don't see a scenario like in The Siege occurring. Even after 9/11, which I think can be agreed on as being a significant event, you didn't see the Army rolling through and rounding up folks/shooting people.

Click here for more information.

This stuff has been floating around the internet for 10 years. It started out along the lines of " USMC asked if they would support gov, and take guns from civi" This is total crap. Never would the governemnt put the fate of National Security at risk over guns. Makes for a good story....again....but wont happen. next will come out the "UN troops" taking gun story. Round and around we go. My feeling is that the arms makers, and dealers invent this crap to boost sales. That IMHO is the real conspiracy here. Old Dwight D had it right on his way out, huh. Also who are you going to get to take the guns. National Guard..lol....Please.....Cops...No way.....USMC, hel they would be on OUR side. ARMY....Nope.....Not enough to last more than a couple months at best...so that leaves us the USAF....Living in a USAF town I can assure you that they could not take a pair of socks from me

[edit on 4-2-2008 by TXMACHINEGUNDLR]

reply to post by pc is here


That's just cold....... cold and uncalled for. I would hate for this thread to turn into a racist debate. Let's just all assume that you were meaning to be playful and hypocritical, and just worded it very, very badly.

Originally posted by Amaxium
reply to post by pc is here

 

That's just cold....... cold and uncalled for. I would hate for this thread to turn into a racist debate. Let's just all assume that you were meaning to be playful and hypocritical, and just worded it very, very badly.

I forgot the white vans (WV), for those too sick or injured to be moved. To ease their passage into the next world.

ooh my #ing god

things are really falling into place now...

Well, it may be crazy in the opinion of manbearpig. But again I suggest people look for old News reels and such stories about the Civil War back in the '60's. Yes, "4 dead in Ohio" was part of a song. Yes, it evolved over until troops shot civilians, and according to one Ordered to do that, around 5000 people died in the end. It depends though on the factors. Uncontrolled riots like what happened back then also in LA may not be put up with as easily as they were before. But probably that also can be reviewed also on the old News reels or whatever is available nowadays. It depends I guess, and it may not be taken lightly overall. The factors have to play out first along with the scenario of what may happen.

That may depend first on the upcoming decision about the Second Amendment from the Supreme Court. Frankly it seems a question that was asked being in my opinion half-witted with the question posed in that article from Alex Jones on that website.

Although I am not one, there are some people who are hot-headed enough still perhaps in this Country, and I have to guess what Alex Jones is writing about, because he himself seem to lack communications. I take he is an old ex-veteran who still has some deep feelings of his own perhaps to deal with.

The person Ordered to do so in the Civil War of the '60's along with the others had to see where the Order was more important than the Freedom of the Individuals Opposing led up the Order finally given by the Commander in Charge. Otherwise, there will be investigations always held afterwards, and even if it is seemingly sluffed off then there are other ex-veterans who would eventually make their comment and their voices heard in that kind of reality back to the committee or people making the investigation into what happened by testimony in the first place, probably being Congressional People.

So in the end I still wonder what kind of military some in this type of situation of the world they still may be attempting to build -- professionals or just ones who do their bidding no matter what. The Veterans always has the option there also. In a sense I sure it also leads back to WWII and what some soldiers did there, ending up being Heros in WWII and doing what they thought they had to do without any Commander being there to give the Order in the first place. Maybe an unusual circumstance but again a circumstance that is a reality in any war. I'm sure like in Greece when that protest just happened a few years back now, that that Country also had to decide how far to let it happen. Right now in Africa also with what is going on, but in the end perhaps a real different situation.

In the end, I think it was stated by someone else to remain calm, and voice the opinion in an appropriate manner, but sometimes emotions are hard to suppress, it will take will power and presence of character also.
Sometimes humans will make mistakes, but even if I do, it is not in his/her presence and some people do it just to do it with iritating others in this Country just to do that because they are more selfish and end up not thinking as much about the person and do not want to think, I think in this Country. These type of people assume they are always right even if they are wrong like perhaps some protesters and end up getting too emotional. I think soldiers are not really there to be that, like also what has happened over in Iraq a person can view recently Past in the News. These type of people feed on the emotions even doing business in the end it seems, and then you end up with the Elections coming up in the future.

Ah, but Capitalism or Socialism without ethics should perhaps be the main question, and the tug and pull of whether troops would have to defend theirselves or shoot others may never arise first of all in a situation that did not fester into that state of reality ever in the first place.

The rest is left to the Order of Command even though it may take place either in Iraq or in the USA. If the question is that "Can the military can shoot people in this Country?", then the answer is still unfortunately "Yes".
Let's hope the reality is that it still works in the USA as they want it to work in other parts of the world also. But then, that is another question and I am sure someone along the way will mention God in the end.

However, there are those also in this Country who will end up making decisions basing on what they have as facts and then there may be disaggreement. Then the question may be something similiar to "Are you married to the military or to the U.S. Constitution?" That answer may be different also depending on what day it is, let's hope that day never comes to have to come to a decision. Civilians then also have to make a decision also because it seems to be in the Second Amendment, but then that comes up later this year along with anything else, like Iran or Israel or whatever may be in the News.

By the way, "how do you feel?"
I really have no opinions at this time about what is more correct or right or what is more wrong or incorrect. I simply want to know how this Country ended up like it is, right now in this Present Day and Age, without getting into a debate on who caused it. The answer is what to do about it, and again as an informed civilian again who has to make a decision about the politics then........................

Capitalism or Socialism without Ethics puts the politics down in the sewer along with the garbage of the smelling time-distorted field of either prolonging this world out of having a n-day or else leading up to this world having a n-day. Whatever it decides, I decided that in my present situation, that really I had nothing to do with it and the debate may be ended by any foreign Country or group of Radicals anywhere in this World and the decision was made by an Order of Command.

That also depends also on the current Command and the upcoming Elected Command.





[edit on 2/4/2008 by AmoebaSized]

Originally posted by AmoebaSized
Well, it may be crazy in the opinion of manbearpig. But again I suggest people lool for old News reels and such stories about the Civil War back in the '60's. Yes, "4 dead in Ohio" was part of a song. Yes, it evolved over until troops shot civilians, and according to one Ordered to do that, around 5000 people died in the end.

Dude, I think you're mixing up the Draft Riots in NYC in the 1860's and the Kent State riot in the 1960's.

No idea if they know how many people were killed in the draft riots. That was also 140+ years ago.

Kent State was a goatrope. From what I've read, the Guard felt threatened by the mob and someone opened fire.

I don't think US troops will be just shooting American civilians for no reason. I'm more inclined to believe even if they were rioting and trying to get onto a US base, more would just get busted in the head than shot. US troops aren't going to shoot their own citizens.

Asked the same question to a couple of "soldiers" on another thread, they laughed it off, yet I don't think they understand if they are trained (brainwashed) and told to do something, they will. If they don't they themselves would probably be in some serious trouble. Think about Nazi Germany, the soldiers there would do things due to being ordered to.

watchZEITGEISTnow

Originally posted by watchZEITGEISTnow
Asked the same question to a couple of "soldiers" on another thread, they laughed it off, yet I don't think they understand if they are trained (brainwashed) and told to do something, they will. If they don't they themselves would probably be in some serious trouble. Think about Nazi Germany, the soldiers there would do things due to being ordered to.

The one thing that separates US soldiers from other countries troops is that we are trained to think for ourselves. Kill a platoon leader, the platoon sergeant will take over. No brainwashing.

reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow


trained=brainwashed=BS.

The military doesn't teach people what to think. They do teach them that teamwork and unit cohesion are essential to mission success, and that requires discipline, not an automaton. You don't lose self identity, or the ability to think independantly. It's more like a sports team- you can't win a game with a bunch of individuals running around. You have to learn to work as a team. That doesn't mean that you stop thinking. Just that you aren't only thinking about yourself.