On American Soil ?, page 9

reply to post by Danbones

My post was about Subtitle D, Sections 1031 and 1032, of S.1867... the Defense Appropriations Bill that you brought up. Everything you just rebutted me with had to do with other legislation and regulations.

There are concerns about sections of the Patriot Act (definitely unconstitutional IMO) that would change the dynamic of a citizen response (or ability to respond) to a foreign threat on domestic soil; I think it is no secret Obama and quite a few other 'leaders' would like nothing more than to leave the USA citizenry defenseless. The recent actions by the TSA are a good indication of how much disarming we will accept as a society.

But nothing in S.1867 does. And if there is a sure way to guarantee that no one in mainstream society will listen to you, it is to cry wolf over bills that have nothing to do with wolves.

That's why I pretty much ignore Alex Jones.

TheRedneck

WOLVERINES!!!

I don't know about a large scale invasion, but I certainly would not rule out small scale open border skirmishes to our South and larger scale covert border penetration directed to larger cities.

Obama wants to further decrease National Guard deployments on our Southern border and wants to use border kiosks for entry. Every attempt has been made to keep that border loose for a reason that still has me baffled. This administration continues to demonize every state that wants to secure its own border with Mexico for no reason other than Political Correctness.

Iranian Qods have been building up in Latin America for years and they have been greasing the palms of the drug cartels along the way as they establish an underground railroad of sorts that leads them right to the US border.

We've seen the increased sophistication of "drug smuggling" tunnels very recently. Tunnels that are large enough to move hundreds of people and equipment at a time. By the time these tunnels are discovered just imagine what has traveled through them prior to discovery and also imagine the other undiscovered tunnels just like them.

Why does Obama want to reduce boots on our Southern border?

President Barack Obama will reduce the 1,200 federally paid National Guard troops deployed along the U.S.-Mexico border amid questions about the cost and fading impact of a marquee operation to back the U.S. Border Patrol, the Houston Chronicle has learned.

The Obama administration will revamp the way it deploys military personnel along the boundary, shifting from “boots on the ground” to stop people from crossing illegally to a broader mission that relies on aerial detection and additional border intelligence analysis.

blog.chron.com...

I know its a numbers game but you still need boots on the ground to intercept border incursions detected from the air. I am not sold on this idea yet. Bring all troops home and station them to the north and the south.

reply to post by ProudBird

---

I'm sorry, but this just isn't the case. a ground invasion is completely plausible and it would mean a LOT of people would die. China has 100 million soldiers and the majority of the transport ships come from China. They could load up artillery and troops in the 100's of thousands on just a few of those tankers and start by setting up and taking control of the ports.

Also, they could team up with Mexico and bring an auxillary invasion force through Mexico. If you combine that with one or more atmospherically detonated nukes creating EMPs and you have the mix for a potentially (not really, but they could believe it to be) invasion force.

Jaden

reply to post by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep

---

One thing to consider is that those "rednecks in the sticks" may very well have prior military training and it does not take a large force to overcome a large force. That is the basis of our Special Ops teams that are more than capable of taking out forces that sometimes outnumber them 20, 30, or sometimes even 50 to 1.

I am prior military and was in a Special Ops group and during DS1 and several other Mid-East campaigns we obliterated forces that outnumbered us many times over. You have to also take into account the fact that these "rednecks in the sticks" have the home-court advantage, and that really does mean a lot when engaged in ground combat. Knowing your terrain and the places where you can bottleneck forces or weaken their supply routes goes a long way in a ground war. Look at the casualities that were brought upon us by small bands of Viet-Cong groups in 'Nam as well as the battles won by the resistance fighters during WWII.

Now I'm not saying that every civilian in America has these skills, but you can bet your ass that there is a very large number of us out here that do and while we may not win the war, we will definately do our part to win the many battles. That is, afterall how wars are won, one battle at a time.

reply to post by RedGod

---

You're underestimating how many ex-military there are out there.

reply to post by Masterjaden

---

Well said. My thought was to use cargo ships with containers of troops. Many will claim they could never have the logistics to bring in heavy items such as planes, tanks, ships. No need to do so really, as we have plenty here that just needs a strong enough armed force to take them.

SpecOP team to penetrate the base full of Apaches, open a way for a main attack force to enter, pilot come in at the end to fly the Apaches out.

So the same for tanks, jets...ships are harder to take, but with air support, they could nab a few ships along the way. Key is to hit fast and at multiple places. Solves the tech gag pretty quickly as well as the logistics of bringing in equipment.

Even good fighters go down quick if you kick them hard enough in the knees... everything has a weak point. Heck they don't even need to bother with EMP's at that point.

As for the pesky well armed private citizen. Just hope they can't organize into effective units.

Originally posted by Danbones
You folks may mostly have it COMPLETELY WRONG
The US is already OCCUPIED right under your noses and gun sites

The US Senate's Defense Authorization Bill redefines America as a "battlefield" and authorizes US troops to conduct military arrests of civilians on US soil, and to indefinitely detain citizens without charge or trial. The ACLU wants you to write to your senator and demand that this insanity not pass.

boingboing.net...

the US is the battleground, freedom is the target, and the banksters who represent tyranny are the agressors NOT NATIONAL agressors GLOBALIST agressors

the TSA and the fema etc are indications that you are ALREADY UNDER OCCUPATION...according to defence departement proceedures for controlling an occupied state

The main point is foreign occupation, not government agencies searching you for weapons before you get on a plane. Also, "battleground" Bill isn't going to affect you, so relax.

reply to post by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep

---

would never come to that, DHS TSA and FEMA, with the aid of Sate and Local leo's would come get there guns one by one, The "legal citizen" does not stand a chance of defending them self's nor would defend them selves against the FEDS TPTB. The use and term of "Battlefield" has long reaching use, laws and, power. to understand more here is one link usmilitary.about.com... here is the better one www.au.af.mil... think you defend your self from the FED read this www.au.af.mil... page 22 sub text 49 to to end is really good reading

reply to post by SeventhSeal

---

well that depends if your a Constitutionalists, a supremacist or a terrorist to the Gov there is no difference so is a survivalist is now on the same list, so says FBI and DHS, and there watch list.

Originally posted by bekod
reply to post by SeventhSeal

---

well that depends if your a Constitutionalists, a supremacist or a terrorist to the Gov there is no difference so is a survivalist is now on the same list, so says FBI and DHS, and there watch list.

edit on 14-12-2011 by bekod because: editting

Pretty sure this was already installed under Bush with the Patriot Act.

Originally posted by rigel4
Who knows, the Chinese might be digging a tunnel right across the Pacific, they are a very patient and determined people.

One day in the future,"Tunnel break Out", just may happen.

Very very long shot though.

a tunnel? as i said previously china has already aimed for idaho air space - presently they are proposing to build a city - endoftheamericandream.com...

cwick.praeclarus.net...

www.sinodefenceforum.com...




they are already here!

well meibe you should check out this trailer from a game called "Home Front".
North and South Korea reunite, launch an EMP and invade the U.S...

reply to post by Azekual

---

That's a nightmare scenario.

Seems all too likely though, doesn't it? Or at least something similar...

But for all their resources, they can not match the resources of the global superpower. Yes, we're having issues, that's obvious... but issues tend to disappear when the chips truly are down. An open war with the US is a no win scenario for any nation state, or organization.

Israel and the Upcoming Nuclear War - The "Unthinkable" is Now Inevitable
  Posted 11 days ago with 28 member flags

Ahmadinejad speaking at the UN - Is he going to declare war?
  Posted 1 days ago with 21 member flags

Turkey says it is prepared for possibility of war with Israel
  Posted 10 days ago with 15 member flags

IDF general: Likelihood of regional war growing
  Posted 18 days ago with 14 member flags

Full-scale Middle East war is \'imminent\', warns Israeli general
  Posted 17 days ago with 10 member flags

I can see a scenario taking place which is fulfulling biblical prophecy.
  Posted 12 days ago with 9 member flags

Netanyahu: Palestinian Statehood Bid \'Doomed\'
  Posted 4 days ago with 9 member flags

US Boots on the Ground in Libya, Pentagon Confirms
  Posted 11 days ago with 8 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: