Leaked documents show Army's bold plan to acquire 10,000 square miles of Colorado

Artillery ranges and tank maneuvers on fragile grasslands. Depopulated farm towns, suitable for urban warfare exercises for thousands of troops. A military installation the size of Massachusetts, sprawling across southern Colorado from Trinidad to the Kansas border. If you're going to plan, plan big. And the U.S. Army's plans for expansion of its Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site have an audacity that's hard to beat.

Source

The military is planning to build a training facility the size of Massachusetts, wow!

With that size they could hide anything they wish to and even have room for one of those FEMA camps as well.

Army study for land and use
Within this study is states that "operations in the Middle East will continue for some time..." giving an insight that ANY promise to pull out troops in the region is a bunch of political hype.

The move would involve displacing a population of at least 17,000 civilians and transferring the Comanche National Grasslands from U.S. Forest Service to military control, but the study predicted that holding large-scale training exercises there "will be a positive change and natural wildlife habitation possibilities [will] increase."

Through FOIA requests, opponents of the expansion plan ultimately pried loose an even more revealing document -- an exhaustive 2005 study prepared by Fort Carson known as the "Pinon Vision" plan. Page down to see a key page; it talks about how the acquisition could eventually lead to ghost towns that would offer an "exciting opportunity" for urban training exercises.

Official website of PCMS here.

Interesting, because they used to have training flights in the Bristol area of Virginia because the terrain was the most similar to that of Iran. Colorado is quite different than the Middle East, from a terrain point of view as that area is grasslands.

reply to post by Ahabstar


Colorado and Iran share a few common traits.. Well, they both have mountainous regions anyway.

It seems like the government has a lot of interest in Colorado. My guess is because of the elevated terrain..

Hasn't there been a lot of talk about other operations moving there recently as well?

When will all this stuff end?
Training grounds for what.......The next Iraq,

The USA is really a mess right now and just what is needed is another really expensive play ground for the military there.
Having a good gag here.
Regards, Iwinder

reply to post by Ahabstar


That was my thought also. The mountains are "somewhat" close by for training related to regions as such overseas. Yemen's terrain is close to the grasslands region of Colorado as is parts of Africa also.

Yemen terrain - Terrain: narrow coastal plain backed by flat-topped hills and rugged mountains; dissected upland desert plains in center slope into the desert interior of the Arabian Peninsula.

Africa terrain - Vast interior plateau rimmed by rugged hills and narrow coastal plain.

Perhaps an insight to where we will invade next? Who knows.

reply to post by jessejamesxx


My understanding is from family who lives near Kremmling CO, is that the military likes it there because it is easy to gain access because of the BLM and Fish & Game agency having control of most of the land out there, so they put things in off corners of the regions with little notice or a lot of attention. There are also lots of big equipment that travels through that region on a regular basis so no one ever thinks anything out of the ordinary when they see something.

And, if you own that much acreage it is almost impossible to narrow down where anything in particular is at.Makes hiding things a heck of a lot easier.

I should and I will clarify that I am Canadian and I mean no disrespect but ...........The people of the Worlds,'s nations are really getting pissed with this war crap.

Just watch the next election here as it's almost a given that Mr Harper is toast for lying about when we were getting out of Afghanistan and how much it has cost us here in lives and money also.
I can't wait for this crap to end and end now!
Regards, Iwinder...........To the Op S&F

reply to post by Iwinder


I agree. I'd like to see as much effort placed into trying to get along with people (and nations/countrys) rather than pouring the money into military complexes, bases and equipment. I say that while still believing we should support the military BUT the shift from "protecting" towards controlling the people is obvious and it needs to be stopped at all costs. Just my min rant there. Have a nice one up there neighbor

Originally posted by Humint1
reply to post by Iwinder

 

I agree. I'd like to see as much effort placed into trying to get along with people (and nations/countrys) rather than pouring the money into military complexes, bases and equipment. I say that while still believing we should support the military BUT the shift from "protecting" towards controlling the people is obvious and it needs to be stopped at all costs. Just my min rant there. Have a nice one up there neighbor

I agree 100% with your above statement that "Protecting" versus controlling should be a fine line......invading sovereign nations is a not an option but it appears to be the norm now.
Regards, Iwinder

The USA is somewhere around 14 trillion dollars in debt ( correct my numbers if they are wrong)...how can they justify this major expense when people are losing their homes and there are no jobs?

Regards, Iwinder

reply to post by Iwinder


Remember during the meeting after WW2 Russia, Britain and the US agreed that wars would be fought in third world countrys in the future to avoid the total nuclear effect on one another.

reply to post by Iwinder


The government can print the money while the people cannot. JFK signed an EO removing the Fed Reserve from oversight of the money. 6 mos later he was shot. No president since has ever used that EO and it has never been recalled either. its still on the record as "in effect".

Originally posted by Humint1
reply to post by Iwinder

 

The government can print the money while the people cannot. JFK signed an EO removing the Fed Reserve from oversight of the money. 6 mos later he was shot. No president since has ever used that EO and it has never been recalled either. its still on the record as "in effect".

Yeah is makes you wonder that is for sure, Is an Executive order the law down there:? If it is and has never been used it is one screwy situation you have there.
Regards, Iwinder

reply to post by Iwinder

Executive Orders (EOs) are legally binding orders given by the President, acting as the head of the Executive Branch, to Federal Administrative Agencies. Executive Orders are generally used to direct federal agencies and officials in their execution of congressionally established laws or policies. However, in many instances they have been used to guide agencies in directions contrary to congressional intent.

Not all EOs are created equal. Proclamations, for example, are a special type of Executive Order that are generally ceremonial or symbolic, such as when the President declares National Take Your Child To Work Day. Another subset of Executive Orders are those concerned with national security or defense issues. These have generally been known as National Security Directives. Under the Clinton Administration, they have been termed "Presidential Decision Directives."

Executive Orders do not require Congressional approval to take effect but they have the same legal weight as laws passed by Congress. The President's source of authority to issue Executive Orders can be found in the Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution which grants to the President the "executive Power." Section 3 of Article II further directs the President to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." To implement or execute the laws of the land, Presidents give direction and guidance to Executive Branch agencies and departments, often in the form of Executive Orders.

Source

reply to post by jessejamesxx


The majority of it is granite rock if im not mistaken...great place to be if there are catastrophic events.
it could be best protection against sea levels rising, earthquakes etc.

Thanks for the information there, Interesting read indeed as an EO can be really important or almost a frivolous affair so who is to judge what is what here?
I am actually shocked at what you posted, I will leave it at that for now, but again thank you for the invaluable information.
Regards, Iwinder

How far away from the Denver International Airport is this land?
Could be connected

Originally posted by gmac10001
reply to post by jessejamesxx

 

The majority of it is granite rock if im not mistaken...great place to be if there are catastrophic events.
it could be best protection against sea levels rising, earthquakes etc.

Are we talking "between a rock and a hard place" LOL

Actually if it is Granite that is a very good point and worth some consideration indeed.
Regards, Iwinder

I had looked at land out in southern CO years ago. That are of Trinidad, San Luis and Gardner have had unexplained creepy things go on there, like calf mutilations.

Maybe this is an area the gov wants to keep private for some reason other than military practices.