It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Obama Orders 1 Million US Troops to Prepare for Civil War

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 12:14 PM
link   
Russian Military Analysts are reporting to Prime Minister Putin that US President Barack Obama has issued orders to his Northern Command’s (USNORTHCOM) top leader, US Air Force General Gene Renuart, to “begin immediately” increasing his military forces to 1 million troops by January 30, 2010, in what these reports warn is an expected outbreak of civil war within the United States before the end of winter.


Obama Orders 1 Million US Troops to Prepare for Civil War
Read and form your own opinion

www.eutimes.net...

November 28, 2009




posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 12:19 PM
link   
Sigh. Gotta love all these predictions and people in the know saying things that won't ever come true.

Do you really think that any american will revolt as long as American Idol or Dancing with the stars is still on TV.

You're deluding yourself into thinking that we give a rats ass.



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 12:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Bejing
 


"And to Obama’s “last ditch gambit”, these reports continue, he is to announce in a nationwide address to his people this coming week that he is going to expand the level of US Military Forces in Afghanistan by tens of thousands of troops, while at the same time using the deployment of these soldiers as a “cover” for returning to the United States over 200,000 additional American soldiers from the over 800 bases in over 39 countries they have stationed around the Globe bringing the level of these forces in America to over 1 million, a number the US Military believes will be able to contain the “explosion of violence” expected to roil these peoples when they learn their economy has been bankrupted."

Wow, I must admit, at first I thought this article was pretty far fetched. But that paragraph actually made we start to wonder. Although I dont know how reliable this news source is. Good find though, it will be interesting to see if this plays out the way they predicted. Maybe I wasnt so crazy after all for stocking up on weapons, ammo, food and water.

The question is, what side would you be on?



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 12:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Bejing
 


If you don't mind i thought i would bring the video off the site in to the thread for you.

S&F

If you have youtube Russia Today is a good news source to subscribe too!




[edit on 3-12-2009 by OpTiMuS_PrImE]



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 12:32 PM
link   
Personally, and this is just pure opinion but I think that the US troops would refuse to fight American citizens after a short period of time. Fighting a foreign adversary is one thing, but killing your brethren will get old very quickly especially in the United States. I don't think our brothers will take kindly to enslaving their friends, family, and comrades. You really can't use the excuse of "the War on Terror" when it comes to the American Populace.



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 12:33 PM
link   
I call BS on this one.

The reason being...

The total number of Troops the US has in total, according to DoD Deployment Figures is 1,379,551. Only 882,201 are in the contiguous United States, the majority of which are recruits undergoing training or awaiting deployment, or are National Guard or Reserves.

With asking Congress to approve increasing Troop Deployments to Afghanistan, this figure will drop significantly.

USNORTHCOM specifically has the 3rd and 4th Infantry Divisions under their direction. This represents only 30,000 Active Duty Troops.



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 12:36 PM
link   
I took a poly sci course a long long time ago and we learned from history that certain benchmarks must exist in any society before a civil war or revolt wil occur.
I don't remember all of them but it was things like. Unemployment must be at a certain level
A certain level of people must live in poverty
A certain number in prison. Things like that and historically when you reach these numbers then your society in ripe for revolt. Safe to say we are not even close. So relax and go watch some tv



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 12:38 PM
link   
And just where is President Obama supposed to get one million troops to station in North America while keeping up with commitments in the field? We are scraping the bottom of the barrel to put an additional 30,000 more troops in Afghanistan as it is. Not to mention the recent estimate that as many as 75% of Americans of an age to join the military are not fit enough to actually enlist.



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 12:45 PM
link   
I call BS on this one because it`s written by Sorcha Faal. I wouldn`t trust good old Sorcha to tell us the sky is blue.



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 12:49 PM
link   
So....Russia says its true...therefore it must be?


Wow.

I wonder what makes Russia all knowing & All powerful to have this sort of insight?

Are they the elite super power that the USA can never be????



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 12:51 PM
link   
reply to post by DaMod
 





Personally, and this is just pure opinion but I think that the US troops would refuse to fight American citizens after a short period of time.

I'm gonna have to disagree. There's many psyche studies that allude to people being very submissive to authority. You can people to do some pretty crazy stuff just by making them think you're in charge. I don't see why a civil war would be different for americans than any other country. And it may not be troops on citizens, what about troops on troops?



You really can't use the excuse of "the War on Terror" when it comes to the American Populace.

I think you could find about a million threads on this website that would tell you otherwise.



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by citizenbob
I took a poly sci course a long long time ago and we learned from history that certain benchmarks must exist in any society before a civil war or revolt wil occur.
I don't remember all of them but it was things like. Unemployment must be at a certain level
A certain level of people must live in poverty
A certain number in prison. Things like that and historically when you reach these numbers then your society in ripe for revolt. Safe to say we are not even close. So relax and go watch some tv


While I think the OP article is BS, this post got me thinking.

It is true that several aspects of "change" are necessary before people will revolt.

In our current state of affairs, I don't think we are that far off. Unemployment estimates of 17.5% are pretty close to the abyss.

Dissatisfaction with the current government is at an all time high (thanks to Bush, Cheney, Obama, Pelosi, and others).

The extended war in Iraq / Afghanistan with no end in sight.

The economy in general is getting worse instead of better.

Corruption and Greed by banks, corporations, and politicians is rampant.

If we get a hard winter, and poor Christmas sales, and see any type of energy crisis or heating problems in the Northeast, it could fuel a small riot or revolt that would instantly polarize the rest of the US!! A civil war is just one inciting act away!!

(On a personal note, I had a fight with my brother this weekend, just a family thing, but it got me thinking, (Entirely Hypothetical) if the police had showed up and tried to take anyone to jail, the civil war may have started right there!! A citation would have been fine, I am all for the police doing their jobs and protecting the public, but I would have refused to be taken to jail over a minor skirmish with a family member and no amount of local police would have gotten the job done. Now, if they decided to call in reinforcements, I would have done the same. In a matter of hours the situation could have turned very very serious and volatile. Many people are just looking for a reason to fight the system. Situations like mine are occuring all over the country every day. Eventually the wrong person will be tazered, or taken into custody for some ridiculously minor charge, and they will be connected to the right groups, and it will spark some historic events!)



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by DaMod
Personally, and this is just pure opinion but I think that the US troops would refuse to fight American citizens after a short period of time. Fighting a foreign adversary is one thing, but killing your brethren will get old very quickly especially in the United States. I don't think our brothers will take kindly to enslaving their friends, family, and comrades. You really can't use the excuse of "the War on Terror" when it comes to the American Populace.



Americans and foreigners all look alike from 30,000 feet brother.



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
I call BS on this one because it`s written by Sorcha Faal. I wouldn`t trust good old Sorcha to tell us the sky is blue.



Uhmm I see nothing about Sorcha Faal, the source cited is the American Resistance Radio which is not a bad site.





posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by OnTheFelt
Uhmm I see nothing about Sorcha Faal, the source cited is the American Resistance Radio which is not a bad site.


Yes. But apparently they didn't reveal the True source of this "article".

By: Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Western Subscribers

This being but yet another example of Booth taking "editorial liberties" to the Extreme.

... nothing like sensationalized "journalism" on steroids.



[edit: to fix link]

[edit on 3-12-2009 by 12m8keall2c]



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by LibertyLover
 





Not to mention the recent estimate that as many as 75% of Americans of an age to join the military are not fit enough to actually enlist.


Speculation is one thing, and I agree this is a very outlandish sentiment, but please do not write crap that is totally false.

This is not your daddy's Vietnam military, entry into the Armed Forces has one of the most demanding prerequisites in regards to being physically fit. Mental dexterity may be another thing all together, but that should scare you even more.

AR 601-210



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by OnTheFelt
 


This is the third time this exact same article appeared on the boards. Once from a Pakistan source, once from another source, and now. The other two both cited Sorcha as author. Sorry I can`t do links on the phone or I`d link them.



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by 12m8keall2c
 


I stand corrected, thank you for the clarification.
Nonetheless, I think for many of us it is all about connecting the dots. IMO, those that are able to do this seem to have a better understanding of the big picture.
Meaning.....that this claim although orchestrated by a confirmed hoaxer is not as far fetched as it may seem.
Particularly when these type of reports were being reported this past summer.


U.S. Northern Command’s primary mission is Homeland Defense, and the command stands ready to respond to any homeland defense or civil support mission requirement. “The U.S. military absolutely has the capacity to respond to potential threats within our nation today. It will get better in this coming year and continue to improve beyond that,” said Gen. Gene Renuart, USNORTHCOM commander. Established in 2002 as a result of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, USNORTHCOM has dramatically expanded DoD’s focus on all aspects of Homeland Defense, including planning and exercising, as well as organizing new headquarters and units that are specifically tailored for domestic response. USNORTHCOM has prepared detailed plans for responding to situations that range from pandemic influenza to Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear events, and the command has redefined its readiness capabilities since Hurricane Katrina. When it comes to providing forces in response to incidents, the command has nearly 50 National Guard officers fully integrated within its operations, in addition to National Guard Civil Support Teams located within every U.S. state and territory, and 17 regional consequence response units. USNORTHCOM also utilizes an active-duty military response unit of nearly 450 Marines who are the “gold standard” for responding to weapons of mass destruction attacks. In addition, there are pre-identified active-duty and Reserve components (4,000 members each) on a short string to provide additional muscle to initial response teams. USNORTHCOM’s primary mission remains defending the homeland, and Americans can be assured the U.S. military is ready and capable of responding to attacks within the United States.



As we have witnessed on more than one occasion in recent American history, the nature of a national security state is precisely to usurp civilian power and transfer it to opaque, unaccountable militarist bureaucracies such as the Pentagon. The Hill reported August 10 that "a bipartisan pair of governors is opposing a new Defense Department proposal to handle natural and terrorism-related disasters, contending that a murky chain of command could lead to more problems than solutions." Vermont Governor Jim Douglas (R), the chairman of the National Governors Association and Vice Chairman, West Virginia Governor Joe Manchin (D) wrote a letter opposing the Pentagon power-grab. Under current law, governors and not the Department of Defense, exercise control over National Guard units in their own states as well as DoD personnel or any other Guard units from other states deployed under their jurisdiction. Their objections arose over a Pentagon proposal for a "legislative fix" that would give the Secretary of Defense authority "to assist in response to domestic disasters and, consequently, control over units stationed in an affected state," The Hill revealed.



"We are concerned that the legislative proposal you discuss in your letter would invite confusion on critical command and control issues, complicate interagency planning, establish stove-piped response efforts, and interfere with governors' constitutional responsibilities to ensure the safety and security of their citizens," Douglas and Manchin wrote to Paul Stockton, assistant secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and America's Security Affairs. (Reid Wilson, "Governors Oppose DoD Emergency Powers," The Hill, August 10, 2009)



According to CNN, the Pentagon is "to establish regional teams of military personnel to assist civilian authorities in the event of a significant outbreak of the H1N1 virus this fall, according to Defense Department officials." "The proposal is awaiting final approval from Defense Secretary Robert Gates. The officials would not be identified because the proposal from U.S. Northern Command's Gen. Victor Renuart has not been approved by the secretary. The plan calls for military task forces to work in conjunction with the Federal Emergency Management Agency. There is no final decision on how the military effort would be manned, but one source said it would likely include personnel from all branches of the military. It has yet to be determined how many troops would be needed and whether they would come from the active duty or the National Guard and Reserve forces. Civilian authorities would lead any relief efforts in the event of a major outbreak, the official said. The military, as they would for a natural disaster or other significant emergency situation, could provide support and fulfill any tasks that civilian authorities could not, such as air transport or testing of large numbers of viral samples from infected patients. As a first step, Gates is being asked to sign a so-called "execution order" that would authorize the military to begin to conduct the detailed planning to execute the proposed plan. Orders to deploy actual forces would be reviewed later, depending on how much of a health threat the flu poses this fall, the officials said." (CNN, Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak, July 2009, emphasis added)



Much of the groundwork for the intervention of the military has already been established. There are indications that these "regional teams" have already been established under USNORTHCOM, which has been involved in preparedness training and planning in the case of a flu pandemic (See U.S. Northern Command - Avian Flu. USNORTHCOM website). Within the broader framework of "Disaster Relief", Northern Command has, in the course of the last two years, defined a mandate in the eventuality of a public health emergency or a flu pandemic. The emphasis is on the militarization of public health whereby NORTHCOM would oversee the activities of civilian institutions involved in health related services. According Brig. Gen. Robert Felderman, deputy director



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 02:01 PM
link   
CONTINUED:

www.youtube.com...


I hate to speculate, but humor me for a second. We have a purported Swine Flu/H1N1 epidemic occurring globally which in my view doesn't seem to be such an epidemic, just overblown hype.

Next, we have all these ridiculous government reactions, ie..pimping vaccinations, rearranging military policy so that Posse Comitatus is basically now non-existent, and that our military will be our first responders in regards to this supposed horrific Flu epidemic that is coming our way.

Now maybe, and I mean just maybe it's all a ruse to prepare for what's really in store which is an anticipated reaction to the American people once there is a complete economic collapse.

But hey, just food for thought


[edit on 3-12-2009 by OnTheFelt]



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 03:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by OnTheFelt
CONTINUED:

www.youtube.com...


I hate to speculate, but humor me for a second. We have a purported Swine Flu/H1N1 epidemic occurring globally which in my view doesn't seem to be such an epidemic, just overblown hype.

Next, we have all these ridiculous government reactions, ie..pimping vaccinations, rearranging military policy so that Posse Comitatus is basically now non-existent, and that our military will be our first responders in regards to this supposed horrific Flu epidemic that is coming our way.

Now maybe, and I mean just maybe it's all a ruse to prepare for what's really in store which is an anticipated reaction to the American people once there is a complete economic collapse.

But hey, just food for thought


[edit on 3-12-2009 by OnTheFelt]


Its still extremely rare to see US army troops doing routine police work. So no, I don't buy at all that the USA is on the verge of civil war. I wouldn't say its impossible to happen before 2012 or so, but saying by this winter or even next winter is ridiculous. And besides, we still have pretty strong freedom of speech right now in the USA.

Only after about 10% of the population realizes its actually morally wrong of them to be paying any taxes (as opposed to morally wrong to avoid paying them), because of the way taxes are being used for wrongs, will there be any problems IMO. A point maybe 10 years down the road will also be a threat where a good fraction of our labor goes to paying government interest... basically federal debt slaves, would be a more reasonable sparking point. And that day will come for sure but the US can simply decide not to pay back money thereby averting a civil war even then.

I would say only this year has talk of a real US civil war become a topic considered by even a small percent of the population. I'd be interested to know what the typical length of times is before initial rumors or civil war and widespread speculation of civil war is, and then from widespread speculation to real occurrence. I imagine it could be something like five years between the initial rumor and the actual occurrence.

To be honest it gives me a terrible feeling in my gut just thinking about it. I've just never thought about the prospect of it seriously until the mandatory insurance law was scheduled to be put to vote.

[edit on 3-12-2009 by truthquest]



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join