Pentagon plans 20,000 uniformed troops inside U.S. by 2011, page 7
Pages: <<  4    5    6    7    8    9  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 31 times


reply posted on 2-12-2008 @ 04:00 AM by open_eyeballs
reply to post by Xilvius


I admire your patriotism. Certainly, it is a good thing, but I think the big picture is flying over your head.

We (the U.S.A.) are not Russia. We are no monarchy. We are not a socialist state. We are not a fascist state (although steps in that direction have been taken). When our own military is deployed on American soil to help police, not only is it illegal, it is unconstitutional. It is also plain un American.

I agree that our soldiers are good people for the most part. They are doing their job like everyone else. But you put 20,000 of them in the street you will see society deteriorate. Dont ever confuse your freedom and liberties as priviledge. They are not. They are rights. And there are certain steps that have been taken by our forefathers to keep those in place. A military presence in America would open a wound that would bleed for decades and may never heal.

Personally, I dont think it will ever happen, but we must always remain vigilant to a government taking steps in the wrong direction. Especially against its own people.



reply posted on 2-12-2008 @ 04:10 AM by anonymousATS
Originally posted by Xilvius
The whole idea behind the government placing militants in urban areas shouldn't be looked at in the negative light that everyone is placing it in. I don't know the true motives behind doing such a thing, but you have to look at the whole picture sometimes and not just fragments at a time.



Who said anything about "placing" "militants" in urban areas?



Everyone is placing OUR own military in a negative perspective, like they all want to kill everyone or something. Just because there are planned to be 20k uniformed troops in the USA doesn't mean its some way of domination or any such absurdity.



It is illegal for US troops to be used in civilian policing. Even tho these troops are for "emergency response", this is nothing more than a ploy to get their foot in the door.

This whole operation sounds like a prelude to a declaration of war against the US population. Nazi checkpoints. "Papers please".



The United States is a great nation built on diversity. This nation is made of many people from many cultures. As is our military. I cannot conceive our own military killing its own citizens. I know and have known many many people that serve this nation in it's militant branches, and they all stand on defending the people of this nation. I'm really getting sick of this whole anti-American attitude of ATS.



Great nation built on diversity?? That's nothing more than feel-good rhetoric.

Truth is -- we are a nation that allowed criminals gather together under our political system. They are working hard to damage our sovereignty and our culture.

Truth is -- we are a nation that allowed the military-industrial complex to get out of control -- to the detriment of the world and our own people.

Truth is -- we have allowed corporations to gain control of our mainstream media -- and they excel at treating our people like mushrooms.

Time to open your eyes my friend......


reply posted on 2-12-2008 @ 09:47 AM by AceWombat04
After Hurricane Katrina a national security bill was passed which ammended the Posse Comitatus Act as follows (paraphrased):


The President may employ the armed forces... to... restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition... the President determines that... domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order... or [to] suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy if such... a condition... so hinders the execution of the laws... that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law... or opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.

en.wikipedia.org...

The bill itself

However, this bill was repealed, and so using U.S. military forces for search, seizure, and other law enforcement activities is still illegal.

Since technically the plan is only for these forces to be used for emergency medical aid, logistical support, etc. it doesn't appear to conflict with the law. 20,000 troops aren't sufficient to subdue even one large city, let alone the entire country.

Now, some people are reading that and thinking, "Ah, another person defending this plan." On the contrary, I'm vigorously opposed to it. I'm just saying that it has all the appearances - to most people probably - of a completely rational, legal, and justifiable plan.

Is that all it is? I don't know (nor can I form a suspicion that seems more probable than the other.) Neither does anyone else. As such, there's no rational, justifiable, socially acceptable reason to oppose it so vocally.

Therein lies the potential problem, if you take my meaning.

[edit on 12/2/2008 by AceWombat04]

[edit on 12/2/2008 by AceWombat04]


reply posted on 2-12-2008 @ 09:56 AM by ProfEmeritus
reply to post by anonymousATS




It is illegal for US troops to be used in civilian policing. Even tho these troops are for "emergency response", this is nothing more than a ploy to get their foot in the door.

Please go back to page 6 of this thread and read my post, which states that this action is NOT illegal. Furthermore, since Congress actually authorized this action several years ago, such action is perfectly legal. Now, whether it is wise or not, is another matter, but again, I ask -What if a biological or nuclear attack were to occur, and the government had NOT been prepared? The outcry would make the Katrina outcry seem like a whimper.

Could it become something more than advertised? Of course it could, but let's not anticipate a problem yet. There are plenty of other problems that exist NOW, and should be handled. If the financial crisis continues to get worse, none of this will matter anyway. Can you say "World-Wide Depression and Starvation"?

Pages: <<  4    5    6    7    8    9  >>    ^^TOP^^