October 1. Please Post Here if You See Our Troops in the USA.

page: 22
34
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Dewm0nster
 
not necessarily the us invading canada but if you will take a look at

The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) was launched in March of 2005 as a trilateral effort to increase security and enhance prosperity among the United States, Canada and Mexico through greater cooperation and information sharing. This trilateral initiative is premised on our security and our economic prosperity being mutually reinforcing. The SPP recognizes that our three great nations are bound by a shared belief in freedom, economic opportunity, and strong democratic institutions.
www.spp.gov...

and this partnership was signed into effect 1/08 without the citizens of the united states knowledge by

President George W. Bush stands with Mexican President Felipe Calderon, left, and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper upon their arrival for dinner Monday, Aug. 20, 2007, during the North American Leaders' Summit at the Fairmont Le Chateau Montebello in Montebello, Canada.
www.spp.gov...

george, felipe and stephen are commonly referred to as "the 3 amigos" i might add. so to these three fellows i say, "Welcome to the North American Union." www.uaff.us...



[edit on 5-10-2008 by musselwhite]




posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 02:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Dewm0nster
 


Your sarcasm is not going unnoticed, and you are participating in a sub-subject of the topic, and I'm asking you as the FSME of this forum to stay on topic.

I did not post to get a response to what I said - I posted to get the nonsense out of the thread.


P.S. I'm not a guy



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by enigmania
 



Answered via U2U



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 03:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
That said, I am retired Air Force and my generation would not have even thought about going against American citizens. However my 2 sons tell me that things have drastically changed in the Army and Marines. Less leaders and more followers or loose cannons. Not all but...
One more point, I have been hearing about this since the early 80's and now it's here. Wow


Thanks for that perspective AA, I have been wondering about this, cause my Dad has always said not to worry about these things ever coming to pass, that there is no way the Generals would betray our Country in the end, and they would fight for the Constitution at all costs, if the leadership went bad, but I honestly think the world has changed from the time of his perspective, and if your post is sincere,and you are what you say, "now it's here. Wow"?



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Relentless
 


I agree that military leaders would not betray the constitution, however if there was a disaster our military probably wouldn't have a problem maintaining order in the US.



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 03:40 PM
link   
reply to post by dizziedame
posted on 1-10-2008 @ 05:40 AM
You wrote:
>

Your signature tell us to trust no one and yet you were on your way to get a flu shot??? A Flu Shot??? Anyone who trusts the manufacturers of the flu shots is too trusting. Don't you realize who controls the pharmaceutical companies? Don't you how the pharmaceuticals are being used to slowly kill those who are partaking of them - either in shots or pills?



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 04:15 PM
link   
I live near Fort McClellan in northern Alabama, haven't noticed more than the usual Army traffic, not any more cops out than any other day.

There are gas shortages though, most gas stations are still out of gas and there are limits and waiting lines at the few stations that have gas.



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 05:44 PM
link   
Not hijacking- just adding. In regards to the gas shortages, this man explains it best and how quickly it is going to spread.

uk.youtube.com...



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 05:47 PM
link   
I live in a very rural part of Minnesota....around 2pm this afternoon I saw a convoy of military vehicles heading south..



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by minniesoda
 


I live in Southern NH. No sign of troops. And do you know why? Because there is no reason to have military on the ground since there has been no natural or man made disaster...or rioting in the streets.

Which is, of course, the only reason they would be deployed.



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 06:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Night Watchman
 

Good point! There IS NO reason for it...the question is, will there soon be?

I have learned through the years with this administration, that nothing is quite normal anymore. "Its a different world!" !!!!! Yes it is, but while they are real busy telling you to be afraid, but go on with life as usual, and other oxymorons, they continually plot and deceive the citizens and its to the point where nobody knows which way is up any more.
You see?
Would it take some horrendous act to send the troops to the streets???
YES.
But such acts are coming. The problem with the economy itself, if the people revolt and cant find a way to make a living, cant eat, are desperate would indeed cause the biggest riot and THE TROOPS WOULD HAVE TO STEP IN.

Strange is how, by coincidence, the troops were due here October 1. Right on the heels of this economic HEIST. I'd say that was one hell of a coincidence, wouldnt you?

It is now known that THE ADMINISTRATION twisted the arm of Congress and senate to pass the bailout bill OR THERE WOULD BE PHYSICAL MARTIAL LAW FOR US CITIZENS.
Strange indeed. Leadership by threat.

So you see, there are plenty of reasons why our troops would be set loose on the streets.

I never said they would kill us. At least i sure hope not. Then again who knows? They are not exactly arriving home in the best frame of mind. :shk:

Whatever credence you want to give this, they were asked to come for a reason- we just dont know yet.
We will soon find out.



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 06:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe
reply to post by Night Watchman
 


Whatever credence you want to give this, they were asked to come for a reason- we just dont know yet.
We will soon find out.


With all due respect, DG, I don't know how many times this 10/1 thing can be explained here before it is understood. The ONLY thing that has changed is that there is now a designated unit that would be deployed should it become necessary.

The events that would trigger an actual deployment on 10/1 would also have triggered a deployment on 9/30...or 6/30...or any other day. Prior to 10/1 the troops to be deployed would have been decided on a case by case basis.

Now, since they have designated the troops in advance, deployment can be done faster and more efficiently, which should be viewed as a positive thing.

So, the troops werent asked, as you put it, "to come," anywhere. There was no troop movement involved with this...only a designation.

That is why many of us feel this whole thing is way overblown.



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 06:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5
That’s why they make google…


Brigade
The typical NATO standard brigade consists of approximately 4,000 to 5,000 troops. However, in Switzerland and Austria, the numbers could go as high as 11,000 troops.


Switzerland and Austria aren't in NATO.



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 07:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by minniesoda
I live in a very rural part of Minnesota....around 2pm this afternoon I saw a convoy of military vehicles heading south..

Generally speaking the National Guard does their monthly weekend training (their two days a month) on the first weekend of the month. It is on the first weekend of the month for 2 reasons: (1) it makes it predictable for planning purposes for the military and for the personal lives of the National Guard members and (2) it gets the monthly obligation over with and provides 3 more weekends for make up duty, if needed.

Military vehicles usually have stenciled information on the bumpers that are abbreviations of the unit that the vehicle is assigned to. That would tell whether it is National Guard, Reserve, or Active Duty.

Warning: Recording troop movements could be interpreted as espionage activity (i.e spying). So, if you do it because you are paranoid, you could have the military or FBI give you reasons to believe your paranoid delusions are real.



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 07:26 PM
link   
you yanks have been told that you are to have troops on the streets for 'crowd control'......hehehehehe. i wouldnt question it either..!! hahaha
 

Mod Edit: Courtesy Is Mandatory – Please Review This Link.
Do not personally attack other members.




[edit on 7/10/2008 by watch_the_rocks]



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 07:30 PM
link   
There's no troops on the street, nor has anyone said there will be. I've already taken care of another poser on this thread, don't make me embarrass you too. Facts are NOT on your side.



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 07:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Night Watchman
With all due respect, DG, I don't know how many times this 10/1 thing can be explained here before it is understood. The ONLY thing that has changed is that there is now a designated unit that would be deployed should it become necessary.


With all due respect, Night Watchman, since something DID change on this date (and there has been enough posting at this point to show this is something new) I don't see it as being blown out of proportion to see if we notice anything new going forward from this date.

That's pretty much all I see. It's being blown out of proportion by the rest of the conversations going back and forth, not reports of seeing a presence, or not (some people are reporting business as usual too). As far as I'm concerned, the proof that our Country is no longer what we believed it to be was the last two weeks of watching the CONgress. A lot of "tin foil" became real in the past month, so I can no longer discount anything happening now.

I for one am very curious to hear what is going on around the rest of the States, and as it was no secret that this was going into effect, I don't see a big deal discussing it (for the person who thinks it might be dangerous to report troops sightings on our own soil). Anyway, if it is a problem to be discussing it we will all know soon enough, cause DG will be the first one picked up, and since she's such a prolific contributor, that will not go unnoticed.



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 07:43 PM
link   
hehehe...oh god...a gw bush moment..!!

 

Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 7/10/2008 by watch_the_rocks]



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 07:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by SuperViking
There's no troops on the street, nor has anyone said there will be. I've already taken care of another poser on this thread, don't make me embarrass you too. Facts are NOT on your side.


I didn't see you win any debates here yet Viking, (that's a matter of opinion, apparently yours) and if it is your purpose to be on this thread to threaten other posters with embarrassment, instead of staying on topic like I keep asking of you I suggest you go read the TOS.

I have been trying to be patient with you since I notice you have only been on the board since yesterday, but I'm getting a little tired of this. STOP baiting people.

The rest of you, please don't feed the trolls. This is an interesting thread, but it's got way too much "deflection" going on.

Thanks!

[edit on 10/5/2008 by Relentless]

[edit on 10/5/2008 by Relentless]



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 07:46 PM
link   
its also interesting that the troops will be under the power of the 'commander in cheif', not congress. so its bushs army to do with as he will.





new topics
top topics
 
34
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join