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.

 

Afghanistan is a base for a Quick Reaction Force to respond to a Domestic insurgency in the Homeland

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 10:59 PM
link   
The miltary takes an oath to defend America against all enemies of the government Domestic or Foriegn.

So if you were a miltary commander how would you prepare to defend America from a domestic attack on the government?

Station troops inside American borders sure.

But wouldn't you also ensure that you had a fully armed and ready force that was currently operating outside of US juristiction and had expierience in the field in dealing with undesirables?

We have learned from history.

During the rebellion of Spartacus the Roman army had to be called back to Rome to defend it from a domestic threat.

During the cold war the US military had a Rapid Reaction Force that could respond to threats worldwide from a Russian Communist invasion of a foriegn land.

Now it appears the threat of communisim is comming from within American borders.

Now where would you station troops?
edit on 20-10-2011 by InformationAccount because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 11:26 PM
link   
Okinawa, Japan.



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 11:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by beautyndissonance

Okinawa, Japan.


Fine, but not freshly combat trained

Think out of the kettle into the fire
edit on 19-10-2011 by InformationAccount because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 11:51 PM
link   
reply to post by InformationAccount
 


I like your way of thinking, however

haven't they done research into this area and found majority of US forces would not bring themselves to fire upon their own people?

and if I remember correctly, the answer was to hire guns from a nation who would not be so hung up about shooting innocent Americans....?



posted on Oct, 20 2011 @ 12:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Highlander64
reply to post by InformationAccount
 


I like your way of thinking, however

haven't they done research into this area and found majority of US forces would not bring themselves to fire upon their own people?

and if I remember correctly, the answer was to hire guns from a nation who would not be so hung up about shooting innocent Americans....?


Pretty easy to load a bunch of Iraqi or Afghanistani troops up on transport planes with Hallibirtan, KBR or Blackwater trained advisors if US forces stationed in Afghanistan refused to serve in a domestic situation.

The empire has friendly foriegn forces all over the world.

My thinking was simply that troops could be pulled out of one war zone and put into another and they wouldn't blink an eye.
edit on 20-10-2011 by InformationAccount because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 20 2011 @ 12:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by InformationAccount
The miltary takes an oath to defend America against all enemies of the government Domestic or Foriegn.

So if you were a miltary commander how would you prepare to defend America from a domestic attack on the government?

Station troops inside American borders sure.


Your hole premise is a lie.

As a army vet I swore and oath to defend the CONSTITUTION against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Right now the enemies are in the banks on wallstreet and within our own government. Obama is shredding our constitution on the behalf of his puppet masters. Not that Bush was any different.

The greatest threat to our nation is not the people on the streets who are exercising their CONSTITUTIONAL right to protest and calling for end of corrupt government and banking - which is constitutional, not communism.

The greatest threat is those traitors in the government and banking who KNOWINGLY AND PROUDLY intend to destroy our nation and our constitution.

Rockerfeller from his own diary:

David Rockerfeller's 2002 "Memoirs" ISBN 0-679-40588-7 Chapter 27 "Proud Internationalist" Page 405:

"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure — one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."


Not to mention Posse Comitatus. Your whole post shows an entire lack of understanding of our government, our constitution, and our military.

Those KNOWINGLY AND WILLINGLY shredding our Constitution are traitors and there is a penalty for that which should have been exercised more often with the globalist money barons who want to destroy our Constitution and return us to neo-fuedalism!



edit on 20-10-2011 by pianopraze because: added full quote



posted on Oct, 20 2011 @ 12:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by pianopraze

Not to mention Posse Comitatus.


Well that would explain why so many National Guard and Reserve Units were sent to Iraq and Afghanistan.

National Guard Personnel and Deployments: Fact Sheet
www.fas.org...



The Posse Comitatus Act is an often misunderstood and misquoted United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385) passed on June 18, 1878, after the end of Reconstruction. Its intent (in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807) was to limit the powers of local governments and law enforcement agencies from using federal military personnel to enforce the laws of the land. Contrary to popular belief, the Act does not prohibit members of the Army from exercising nominally state law enforcement, police, or peace officer powers that maintain "law and order"; it simply requires that any orders to do so must orginate with the President of the United States (and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces) or Congress.

The statute only directly addresses the US Army (and is understood to equally apply to the US Air Force as a derivative of the US Army); it does not reference, and thus does not implicitly apply to nor restrict units of the National Guard under federal authority from acting in a law enforcement capacity within the United States. The Navy and Marine Corps are prohibited by a Department of Defense directive, not by the Act itself. The Coast Guard, under the Department of Homeland Security, is exempt from the Act.


Anyways the Posse Comitatus Act wouldn't supercede the Constitution.

And this exactly why you would want to relocate troops from a warzone directly into another warzone. Instead of relocating troops from a peaceful place like Okinowa into a war zone.



posted on Oct, 20 2011 @ 03:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by InformationAccount

Originally posted by beautyndissonance

Okinawa, Japan.


Fine, but not freshly combat trained

Think out of the kettle into the fire
edit on 19-10-2011 by InformationAccount because: (no reason given)


Not freshly combat trained. I spent a lot of time in Oki when I was in the marines, and I can tell you for a fact that the majority of the marines and navy on that base are freshly combat trained. The entire purpose of establishing a permanent base on Oki was if SHTF with any country in Asia, we can have QRF teams ready to deploy at any given notice. This also includes supporting the continental united states and surrounding territories.



posted on Oct, 20 2011 @ 03:31 AM
link   
9/11, Afghanistan and Iraq all designed to flank and "quickly react" to the invasion of Iran. Read between the lines.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join