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

Originally posted by Griff
reply to post by deltaboy

 

You are correct. I never said that we were in martial law then.

As far as what happened to them. I don't know. Went back to their posts I would assume.

My point was that they were there. I would wager that they had the order to shoot also. But, that is total speculation.

Has anyone had this happen in their city before? Where you NOT intimidated by it? Even when you know that you've done nothing wrong?

Even under those conditions, there were specific rules of engagement. There was never any free fire zone mentality established. Unless you approached them in a threatening manner, you would have no reason to fear them. There'd be several levels of escalation before any shooting would be done, and any improper discharging of weapons would result in the offender being punished. We're not talking about some armed Meth user, that's tweaking. Seeing as how there wasn't one incident post 9/11 of any citizens being fired upon by "trigger happy" troops, I'd say it's an irrational fear

Originally posted by SolPower

Originally posted by ralph nader
reply to post by BlueRaja

 

man your a tool ,you need to wake up and open your eyes...i hope they shoot you first.....

What a rude statement. This discussion has simply made me more proud and honored that I can call myself a member of the United States Military. I don't know how much more of these unfounded conspiracy's I can read. What a wakeup call for me on how truly ignorant the mass public is.

[edit on 5-2-2008 by SolPower]

SolPower-

The ironic thing is that those of us in the military are supposed to be the bloodthirsty warmongers, but here's an individual that would like to see me killed, because of a difference of opinion. Nice....sounds like somebody could use a hug.

Well, I was at my squadron today and I chatted with a bunch of kids that just got back from basic.

Nope, didn't say anything about killing civlians. I even asked the Security Forces guys, and they sure didn't have any sort of training about that, either.

Of course, they could also be brainwashed robots that are trained only to kill American Citizens when a certain phrase or code word is sent out to them!!

Originally posted by Griff
reply to post by deltaboy

 

Has anyone had this happen in their city before? Where you NOT intimidated by it? Even when you know that you've done nothing wrong?

Yes. Los Angeles. Riots. Rodney King. OJ Simpson verdict. Armed soldiers on the roofs of Beverly Hills businesses and various soldiers patrolling streets. It was very scary, very intimidating and many of these soldiers looked like they wanted action (perhaps its just practicing fierce face for intimidation).

One thing is for sure- it didn't feel like they were there to help- they looked like a clean-up patrol.

And delta, you know what time it is. Don't get so easily riled by a devils advocate. You are not alone.

In my opinion on this is- there will be soldiers who will and there will be soldiers who wont. This might be why these drills are being conducted- to weed out the ones who won't shoot.

I will carry a gun just in case.

[edit on 5-2-2008 by dk3000]

Originally posted by PokeyJoe
I think that many of you around here fail to have even the slightest idea how the military works, how military training works, or what happens when someone is "ordered" to do something.

Im not sure if you guys knew this, but there is a little thing that says you only have to follow LAWFUL ORDERS. If the order given to you breaks the law, you simply dont have to do it. I think murder classifies as unlawful.

God, it pisses me off so bad when people say "brainwashed robot"

[edit on 4-2-2008 by PokeyJoe]

Pffft you better take a good look at the sweeping changes are President has made then because an enemy combatant is ANYONE and the language in the legislation is so ambiguous compared to the UCMJ and US criminal codes. Disobeying a lawful order is held to such specific definition but have you read the latitude given for what IS allowed?

The fact is they don't HAVE to follow any orders, albeit their is a consequence for that but it is the orders they WILL follow that has many worried. Have you guys forgotten the treatment of those people who had all there guns taken away? NONE of that was legal! The video of that 80 year old woman being roughed up by three huge guys in military garb.


www.youtube.com...&rel=1

Blackwater was already found to be at fault for killing innocent Iraqi's and the crap they did during Katrina, who the hell are these guys to bully people around, and Blue don't even bother because I have grown tired of proving you wrong but I have the copy paste ready for your anticipated reply nevertheless. When you say you know something that you can substantiate with more then "I think" or "my opinion" or "you're just going to have to trust me" then don't waste your time.

I don't trust a military that lied about the jessica lynch rescue that lied about the tillman execution which by the way and without media attention, was found to be "an execution". The tillmans live in my state and went to congress to get to the truth and that seems to be the problem is that while there are laws prohibiting such actions, THE MILITARY OBVIOUSLY CARRIED OUT A HIT ON NOT JUST A CIVILIAN,,

BUT ONE OF YOUR COMMRADES!

So spare me what you THINK won't happen when what HAS already happened is more then enough for me know unequivocally that it CAN happen again and again and again.

My god when you consider the things we find out after all kinds of investigation through all kinds of cover-up and red tape it makes you wonder about what else is still not known by those who don't have the resources to dig through all the garbage they feed people.

-Con

reply to post by Conspiriology


There was no hit on Pat Tillman, unless you think his buddies wanted to shoot one of their own. Whatever covering up there happened out of A- wanting the family to feel better about the loss B-the embarassment of putting out info too quickly that proved to be wrong. Were a lot of mistakes made- definitely. It was tragic that fratricide happened, and then the debacle that happened putting out bad info, but there was no sinister plan to kill off Pat Tillman. Those even suggesting such a thing, have no idea what they're talking about, or the close knit bonds that exist within military culture. Spare me the examples of loose cannons where disgruntled soldiers have killed people they had a beef with. That's not even the same thing as an intentional killing of a specific individual, under order by the chain of command.

reply to post by dk3000


The way to stay safe in a riot, is to avoid being involved in a riot. If you're not looting, vandalising, burning police cars, etc... chances are good you won't have to worry about soldiers/policemen shooting at you.
If I'm understanding what some of you are saying, you're saying that there shouldn't be any consequences for folks participating in violent, criminal behavior, and that it's fascist for the authorities to try to stop them.

Originally posted by BlueRaja



My remarks have nothing to do with undenying affection of anybody.

That's what scares me

Speculation is a waste of time,

but then you say

You have nothing to fear about the military imposing martial law.

How do YOU know? You don't know, you can only speculate and worse has happened without martial law so don't tell me people don't have anything to worry about

Short of a nuclear attack, or something of that scope, it simply isn't gonna happen.

Oh put the crystal ball away Blue because the FACT is YOU DON'T KNOW!

YOU DON'T RUN THINGS,

YOU AREN'T THE PRESIDENT,

YOU DON'T MAKE POLICY,

YOU DON'T MAKE GUARANTEES BECAUSE YOU THINK THIS OR THAT.

YOUR EXPERIENCE DOES'NT SUBSTANTIATE JACK WHEN IT SMAKS OF NAIVETE.

YOU DON'T BACK UP YOUR BRAVADO WITH PROOF,

YOU SPECULATE, USE CONJECTURE AND A FEW NEW WORDS YOU LEARNED FROM A THESAURUS BUT YOU HAVEN'T SAID A THING.

NOT ONE THING.

- Con


[edit on 5-2-2008 by Conspiriology]

Originally posted by BlueRaja

There was no hit on Pat Tillman, unless you think his buddies wanted to shoot one of their own.

Wait,, Ill call her up (pats mom) see if she can fax me the info. I had it before but can't find it here. I think I can get it or find out where. This is info you wouldn't have seen as it is very recent.

Okay,, I'm back,, well apparently the Tillmans agreed not to talk about it and the initital forbes website that gave the details has also agreed. I don't know what the Tillmans were given in recompense but I do remember this going past the first investigation which determined it was friendly fire all the way to an order being given to kill him.

From Forbes:


Army medical examiners were suspicious about the close proximity of the three bullet holes in Pat Tillman's forehead and tried without success to get authorities to investigate whether the former NFL player's death amounted to a crime, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press.

"The medical evidence did not match up with the, with the scenario as described," a doctor who examined Tillman's body after he was killed on the battlefield in Afghanistan in 2004 told investigators.

The doctors - whose names were blacked out - said that the bullet holes were so close together that it appeared the Army Ranger was cut down by an M-16 fired from a mere 10 yards or so away.

Ultimately, the Pentagon did conduct a criminal investigation, and asked Tillman's comrades whether he was disliked by his men and whether they had any reason to believe he was deliberately killed. The Pentagon eventually ruled that Tillman's death at the hands of his comrades was a friendly-fire accident.

The medical examiners' suspicions were outlined in 2,300 pages of testimony released to the AP this week by the Defense Department in response to a Freedom of Information Act request.

Among other information contained in the documents:

_ In his last words moments before he was killed, Tillman snapped at a panicky comrade under fire to shut up and stop "sniveling."

_ Army attorneys sent each other congratulatory e-mails for keeping criminal investigators at bay as the Army conducted an internal friendly-fire investigation that resulted in administrative, or non-criminal, punishments.

_ The three-star general who kept the truth about Tillman's death from his family and the public told investigators some 70 times that he had a bad memory and couldn't recall details of his actions.

_ No evidence at all of enemy fire was found at the scene - no one was hit by enemy fire, nor was any government equipment struck.

The Pentagon and the Bush administration have been criticized in recent months for lying about the circumstances of Tillman's death. The military initially told the public and the Tillman family that he had been killed by enemy fire. Only weeks later did the Pentagon acknowledge he was gunned down by fellow Rangers.

With questions lingering about how high in the Bush administration the deception reached, Congress is preparing for yet another hearing next week.

The Pentagon is separately preparing a new round of punishments, including a stinging demotion of retired Lt. Gen. Philip R. Kensinger Jr., 60, according to military officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because the punishments under consideration have not been made public.

liberaljournal.blogspot.com...

That is part of it and what you will see anywhere else on it with the exception of what was given in testimony that I had seen ealier on the pentagons website which I see has been removed.

There was no hit on Pat Tillman, unless you think his buddies wanted to shoot one of their own.

Yes,, that is EXACTLY what I think.

Oh and if you ask Pats family who have proof now

they will tell you off the record what they and you asked me to spare you from hearing. So you are granted your wish.

Damn shame too.


- Con


[edit on 5-2-2008 by Conspiriology]

Of course the USA military can be placed in a situation where they will fire upon US citizens. It has happened numerable times since this country first organized a military.

If you also take into the equation the national guard, civilian contractors and the relatively new joint special operations training; there is training geared more toward "urban operations" regardless of which country they are operating in.

The original question implies an organized bent against ordinary lawful citizens that represent no hazard to the security force. If it can not be supported with facts and figures it is only opinion.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
There'd be several levels of escalation before any shooting would be done, and any improper discharging of weapons would result in the offender being punished. We're not talking about some armed Meth user, that's tweaking. Seeing as how there wasn't one incident post 9/11 of any citizens being fired upon by "trigger happy" troops, I'd say it's an irrational fear

Actually I can agree with you. Now that I think about it. Remember the guy who drove his truck into the mall (what is called the Washington mall...not a shopping mall) and sat there for a couple days right after 9/11? He didn't even get shot.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
reply to post by dk3000

 

The way to stay safe in a riot, is to avoid being involved in a riot. If you're not looting, vandalising, burning police cars, etc... chances are good you won't have to worry about soldiers/policemen shooting at you.
If I'm understanding what some of you are saying, you're saying that there shouldn't be any consequences for folks participating in violent, criminal behavior, and that it's fascist for the authorities to try to stop them.

WOW- you got all that from my comment? That's truly amazing! No wonder this country is going down the tubes so fast!

Let me help you understand my version of English. First of all- I worked in Beverly Hills at the the time at a talent agency (even in the middle of a war you can bet your arse that a Hollywood talent agent is not going to stop trying to make a deal or cash in on carnage). Secondly, these soldiers did not need to point rifles in peoples faces who were wearing three piece suits (how many looters dress like that and step out of a Mercedes to grab a hot television set?). Third, there wasn't one person possibly posing a threat any where near BH- but the soldiers remained for three days.

And finally- I would use another word for "authorities". These supposed authorities were nothing more than a peopled power trip- looking out for the elite wealth in Southern California. There were no soldiers stationed like this in Watts, East LA or in the S.F. Valley.

reply to post by BlueRaja


I would assume that blackwater men will do what they are told to do, no questions. That was probably understood at the beginning when they were hired and trained. It's not like these are ordinary officers of law that is assigned to a certain town, city, state. More like gov't. law officers, special missions. They will do what they are told or they can work somewhere else( I assume).

Originally posted by LoneGunMan

deltaboy, you seem to be such a tough talking guy behind your computer aways cheerleader for the Government and military. Yet I don't see anywhere that you have stated you are military or have served.

If you are such a lover of bootlickers why are you not in Iraq?

You seem so casual in most of your posts about killing for the greater good yet are not putting your own butt on the line. Frankly I am sick of it.

So just what is a bootlicker? Care to expand on that comment? So what about all the computer warriors suggesting that the Military is being prep/trained to shoot US citizens? I read a lot of tough talk from people who must live in fear to believe the OP's story is even remotely factual.

Can the Guard go against US citizens who are breaking the law in a lawless situation such as Katrena was? Sure. Is that a bad thing for that situation? I would say no, but to take an isolated situation for a short peroid of time does not also mean a nation wide on going marshall law state could even remotely happen or is right around the corner.

If something like that happened the actual marshall law would be the lease of our worries for whatever it would take to mandate that would be something so bad that the endangerment of the country if not the world would be at stake.

[edit on 5-2-2008 by Xtrozero]

reply to post by Conspiriology


You(the plural you) in the alarmist camp speak as if you know what is gonna happen with a high degree of certainty, so how can you tell me that I'm the one speculating. You have a number of military members here, who have a consistent story, that you all simply ignore, because some how you know more than we do. Let's just call our view an educated guess.

reply to post by Conspiriology


No where did I claim that there was enemy fire, or that the incident wasn't a case of friendly fire, with regard to his death. The cover up was that his death was friendly fire, not enemy fire as was originally stated, not that the friendly fire was intentional. A lot of mistakes were made, but that doesn't show proof that a hit was put out on Tillman. Telling someone to stop sniveling is hardly motive for murder, and there's zero evidence that the chain of command or higher wanted Tillman killed.

reply to post by imysbbad


Nobody agrees to follow orders, no questions asked. Many of these folks are prior military or law enforcement, with specialized training/skills. They aren't gonna just grab some schmo off the street, who looks like he wants to shoot people, hand him a gun, say "do what we say, no questions asked, oh and by the way here's your $100,000." Does that mean that there aren't folks whose discipline level is lower than ideal never make it onto the payroll? You'll find that in any business/profession. What you do have is an individual that has a marketable/critical skill(i.e. "I know I'm in demand, so my service will cost X amount"), and due to prior military or police experience, a willingness to work in dangerous areas. Expecting someone to take on risk without compensation is unrealistic, especially when they have a skill that is in demand(and no I'm not talking about killing). It's the same as if you had a technician on some specialized equipment, a doctor, lawyer, consultant, etc.... they'll get whatever the market will bare. There's nothing untoward there. This does not mean that because they're willing to assume risk to their personal safety, that they're willing to do whatever they're told no questions asked. That's a huge assumption.

reply to post by dk3000


It sounds like your complaint is that high value property recieved more priority for protection, more than the fact that there were soldiers present, as your initial post would lead one to believe. That's a valid discussion, but it's a different discussion than this one.

reply to post by LoneGunMan


Whether I served in the military or not is not your concern. Whether I fought in the current Iraq war or the Vietnam war or never got in any of those conflicts is not your concern either.

Based on my observation of peoples response to Iraq war veterans who tend to correct peoples speculation or assumptions about the conflict in Iraq is disconcerting in my view. Some of the members tend to view any veterans as a bunch of ignorant, brainwashed, too patriotic government lapdogs when making a counterargument.

When someone like Blueraja or Speakeroftruth as well as others tell that the military was not responsible for most of the casualties because they've been there, you people get pissed off because their stories don't go your way saying "oh see these soldiers and Marines tells how they kill men, women, and children for fun in Iraq, that shows how bad this war is".

To Lonegunmen:
If you don't like my posts, then just put me ignore. If we were face to face, I ask that you walk away or I'll help you on that and I walk away.

Cau Chuc Ma May.

Originally posted by deltaboy
"oh see these soldiers and Marines tells how they kill men, women, and children for fun in Iraq, that shows how bad this war is".

The problem is that there are quite few of these desensitized kids that have been raised on violent video games and TV that have ZERO empathy. Not all of course but there is a still way too many that are doing these horrific things in a country that we are supposed to be liberating. Search Youtube, ask any soldier that stills has some of their humanity left they will tell you. We don't need to be turning our children into killers. We are in a strategic position on this continent that we do not need a standing army for defense. It is for offense only.

To Lonegunmen:
If you don't like my posts, then just put me ignore. If we were face to face, I ask that you walk away or I'll help you on that and I walk away.

Cau Chuc Ma May.

You may walk away from evil, I don't. My friend you seem to be on the dark side and you need to wake up. I save lives as my duty and job. ANYONE that talks about killing as easily as yourself is the ENEMY.

Check the man/boy in the mirror and ask him to change. Please. Help people that are in need. See that war is NOT a necessity. If we were not taking others recourses for the McCorporate and raping others lands we would NOT be hated. EVERYONE loves a hero. America used to be that hero. Lets make her all shiny and wonderful again.