It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


National Troop Mobilization.....Holy Crap

page: 11
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 20 2008 @ 08:41 PM
First and foremost, the words "congratulations 2Lt" are the 6th worst words you can hear.

The first 5 worst phrases, as I was taught through unofficial channels as a Marine infantryman, are:
  • 1. A private saying "I learned this in boot..."
  • 2. A Sgt. saying, "I just got word..."
  • 3. A warrant officer saying "watch this stuff..."
  • 4. A 2Lt saying, "based on my experience"
  • 5. A Col. saying, "I've seen this stuff before..."

And Drooper, you have no idea how close I came to applauding that post about your experience. lol.

Then of course, since I'm in this thread, I may as well say something on topic too, just as a matter of CYA:

Another sign I see that says that something big is coming down the pike is the very strange direction of speculation on Obama's cabinet. Too many New Democrats and Republicans being talked about for high offices to be "normal" for the most liberal member of the senate (as a reformed neo-con turned flaming liberal, I say that in the fairest and most well-meaning way humanly possible).

My opinion is that Obama is saving his political capital for that "unpopular decision in the first 6 months" that Biden warned us about right after the big NATO "hunting trip" that took place in close proximity to the army base that handles logistics for troops in the North East.

I strongly doubt that the problem in question will directly involve Russia or China however, and my reason has nothing to do with the capability or lackthereof of the nations involved.
(although I will go on record as saying that China would probably smoke us almost anywhere within 500 miles of their borders on the Asian Mainland (with the possible exception of India- which isn't a war I expect anytime soon), but is questionable in the Koreas and completely out of their league in any situation which vitally includes a blue water naval conflict.

The main reason I doubt Chinese or Russian involvement in this hypothetical upcoming problem which allegedly is threatening to force a full or total mobilization is simply that the strategic tendencies of both Russia and China tend towards the patient and defensive, and thus it is very unlike either nation to assume the offensive at the outset of a conflict. Both nations are slow tempo fighters who have historically been outmatched by enemies and have survived by sheer force of will, thus surviving long enough to take advantage of situations created by the mysterious and seemingly irresistible force which Clausewitz called "friction" (the tendency for unforseeable random failures in relatively simple and mundane aspects of war such as weather, logistics, external geopolitical developments, and the aggressor's political commitment, to weaken an army). Additionally, China's emphasis on soft power, and internal frankness about the fact that they cannot hope to be a straight up match for the US for at least another decade, further argues against impending aggression from those two rivals.

Neither nation is likely to repeat the Japanese mistake of awakening a sleeping giant.

As I said before, I think the only plausible scenario that leads to that level of mobilization is an attack by a persistent biological agent (and its a little premature to say that such a mobilization is indeed in the works anyway, even if things do seem to be heating up a bit- an impending lower intensity conflict, and some exaggeration in the grapevine would explain everything equally well- I bet Somalia or Iran, in that order. Taking an international coalition to Somalia to mop up what the Ethiopians missed when we sent them in last X-mas would be a rare point of likely agreement between Obama and Bush, which overcomes the lame duck problem that would apply to the reasons for a larger mobilization as I discussed earlier).

posted on Nov, 20 2008 @ 10:58 PM
I really can't wait to see how people respond to a tighter grip on their personal freedoms. My guess is pretty passively.

It will probably happen slowly but of course their will be plenty of interesting "incidents".

My only fear is that we won't get to see a lot of the crazy stuff that happens because it won't get reported.

posted on Nov, 20 2008 @ 11:04 PM

Originally posted by hoagy1199
The worst words you ever want to hear:
"Cngratulations 2nd LT."

The next line will read:

"killed in training accident" (truthly by his own men)

On the subject at hand, I asked someone up the chain about this last night and they did not reply one way or the other. So what ever that is worth (or not).

posted on Nov, 20 2008 @ 11:53 PM
GODSPEED to all of those who love this country.

It is a Great country with good people. Always remember that! Do what you can to do your part and live your life. And do this!

Remember those who have served before you and those who died protecting you. They believed in what they were doing and they believed in their country.

There are many men out there who are keeping an eye on this great nation, to make sure it stays jsut that, a great nation.

Believe me when I tell you this, IT WILL!!!!!!!!



Eye of Eagle

posted on Nov, 21 2008 @ 12:38 AM

Originally posted by ShadowMaster

The next line will read:

"killed in training accident" (truthly by his own men)

Are you talking about LT Neidermeyer from Animal House??

posted on Nov, 21 2008 @ 12:52 AM
I didn't serve in any of the National Guards. However, I served in the Air Force from Fall '02 to Fall '07. Eight year obligation says between now and Fall '10 that I can be recalled back into active duty at any time. I haven't been contacted yet. Last night, my roommate and I received a phone call from the gov asking to speak with anyone in the household that is between the ages of 18 and 24 to take a survey about where they are career wise and what they would like to do in their future. My friend likes surveys and is 24 so I handed him the phone. ^_^ Needless to say, it angered him for he too was in the military recently.

posted on Nov, 21 2008 @ 08:39 AM
reply to post by The Vagabond

So it comes down to trust?

We both agree that they have the capability and means to act in ways not acceptable by the constitution, but that the ways in which they have already done so do not affect the general population so obviously.

I see that you agree that this is not justified, and that, indeed, they shouldn't be doing it, but they are.

I wish I was as trusting as you.
I fully believe that if they feel able to disregard the constitution in small ways without argument (as seen by some suggesting that it doesn't affect the majority too adversely, so it's OK) then they will do in major ways if required.

Personally, I do believe that the constitution will be continually ignored and that people will not argue about it, until such a massive breach of it is made against the majority.

posted on Nov, 21 2008 @ 06:02 PM

posted on Nov, 21 2008 @ 06:26 PM

Originally posted by detachedindividual
reply to post by The Vagabond

So it comes down to trust?

We both agree that they have the capability and means to act in ways not acceptable by the constitution, but that the ways in which they have already done so do not affect the general population so obviously.

Not exactly. I agree they have the means to violate it in small ways. I do not agree that there is any plausible scenario under which they would have both the means AND the motive together to violate the constitution in more major ways.

It's not that I trust them. It's that I have looked at the situations in which my government might concievably take an action that I was willing to fight them over, and based on the circumstances of those forseeable scenarios, I have calculated a very high probability that my side would win.

Personally, I do believe that the constitution will be continually ignored and that people will not argue about it, until such a massive breach of it is made against the majority.

OR until a massive breach is made against a minority that the majority is finally shocked into seeing through the "otherness" imposed on minorities by propagandists and seriously asks itself "what if that was me?".

In either of those two cases, the government would lose. Any attempt to impose martial law will certainly fall under one of those categories in my opinion.

And I think the powers that be know that there are fights they can't win. They know that the working people who built this country have the know-how and the grit to tear it right back down if it is ever turned against them, and that's a bear that the elites don't want to poke.

posted on Nov, 21 2008 @ 11:19 PM
reply to post by warrenb

Exactly how do you suppose that China would get those soliders to the USA and how would they supply them?


China's army is a problem for their immediate neighbours.

posted on Nov, 22 2008 @ 06:17 PM
reply to post by Anonymous ATS

From the Army's HR site, it doesn't seem the approval of Congress would be needed to mobilize retirees:

Mobilization of Retirees

The Secretary of the Army's approval is required to mobilize retirees. Sections 688 and 12301 of Title 10, U.S. Code, and Army Regulation 601-10 govern the recall and mobilization management of retired soldiers of the Army. When directed by the Secretary of the Army, retirees from any component may be mobilized and recalled to active duty.

How long am I required to be a mobilization asset?

By law, retired solders are mobilization assets for life. Current Army policy removes you from mobilization and recall to active duty at age 60. However, volunteers may be recalled up to age 70. Retirees with critical skills may be recalled at any age.

posted on Nov, 22 2008 @ 06:31 PM
reply to post by The Vagabond

Lengthy thread (ATS thread here) on that mysterious flight into the Adirondacks.

I live close to Drum as well. Took a drive over to that airport but the Executive plane (Air Force 2?) was not there anymore. Also posted a link to some 757 flight data showing that it 'could' land at that airport, albeit not by a large margin. ATS - Thread (pg3).

Noticed you didn't link to the ATS thread on that when you brought it up :p (btw, is the last page on that not loading for you either? Edit - okay, it shows a pg4 but I think there is just nothing posted to it yet)

[edit on 11/22/2008 by toepick]

posted on Nov, 23 2008 @ 07:36 AM
I have not received my letter as of yet.

What would be the reason to reinduct all these troops?

posted on Nov, 23 2008 @ 09:11 AM

I got my letter in the mail today.

Here’s what it said in part…..

SUBJECT: Recall from Retired Status

A. Name:***** *****
B. Retired grade: E-6
C. Serial Number: ***-**-****
E. Current mailing Address:
F. Date Retired: 10 OCT 86

Petty Officer *****, You have been selected for recall to active duty for a period of not less than three yrears; or a period of time which will extend beyond your 55th birthday or 30 years active Federal service whichever is sooner and; You will not be eligible for voluntary release from active duty during the period of service for which recalled, but may be released from active duty for the convenience of the Government; and while recalled to active duty, You will be subject to all provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice including discharge from the service pursuant thereto and all Navy regulations including those providing for administrative reduction; but any administrative separation from the service will be accomplished by releasing you from active duty rather than by discharge, except where other action is directed by Headquarters, Department of the Navy.

1. Enclosure
Report of Physical Examination

The rest was just crap about where i was to report to and when for processing.
warning racist comments

This letter is posted by a recipient of the letter, which is not me. I have not gotten my letter yet.
I believe the letter is on one of the likns that I posted though.

[edit on 23-11-2008 by fmcanarney]

posted on Nov, 23 2008 @ 09:15 AM
I have a medical discharge from the navy, Was not able to re-enlist with any branch.

Hope Im not goin back, I sure as hell dont want to fight anyone elses war.

posted on Nov, 23 2008 @ 10:10 AM
reply to post by fmcanarney

fmcanarney... was this a letter to you or did you post it from somewhere else? I'm still checking out the links you posted. Thank you, very enlightening.

edit: Thanks for updating your post. I cannot find the letter. Guess I'll just keep an eye on this thread.

[edit on 11/23/2008 by dreams n chains]

posted on Nov, 23 2008 @ 10:26 AM
If one person allegedly received a letter, surely there are more of you out there who have received one also. Perhaps someone could actually scan a copy of said letter and of course omit personal info.

Thanks! The proof is in the pudding. Lets see how many respond.

posted on Nov, 23 2008 @ 11:33 AM
reply to post by fmcanarney

I've been waiting for conformation or disproof of this this post and this keeps it going. Nice find FMcanarney but not w/out a direct link and even then would seem shady. Hopefully by Thanksgiving we can have this all sorted out.

posted on Nov, 23 2008 @ 11:42 AM
Link I had posted had bad info so i'm removing.

Nice catch.

[edit on 23-11-2008 by whoshotJR]

posted on Nov, 23 2008 @ 11:48 AM
Well perhaps I will be the first to post something that does not go along with the lead lemming.

I have an uncle, who is sitting here with me reading through all this, he is retired from the military, and has not receieved any letter or order re-calling him to active duty whatsoever.

Oh and btw, he was not just your ordinary soldier either. He was a part of the Seals, and if anyone is going to get recalled to active duty, they will.

And I, nor my uncle, sees any massing of troops down mainstreet USA right now, as anyone can view via the thousands of live, online webcams all across this country. An easy way to find them is by doing weather by city google searches.


top topics

<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in