Full Spectrum Operations in the Homeland: A “Vision” of the Future

"The study begins by laying out how the U.S. Army’s Operating Concept 2016-2028 will include military operations throughout the United States. The outrageous report goes on to describe a theoretical situation where the U.S. Army is sent in to a city that has been taken over by Tea Party “insurrectionists”.

Source

In May 2016 an extremist militia motivated by the goals of the “tea party” movement takes over the government of Darlington, South Carolina, occupying City Hall, disbanding the city council, and placing the mayor under house arrest. Activists remove the chief of police and either disarm local police and county sheriff departments or discourage them from interfering. In truth, this is hardly necessary. Many law enforcement officials already are sympathetic to the tea party’s agenda, know many of the people involved, and have made clear they will not challenge the takeover. The militia members are organized and have a relatively well thought-out plan of action.

(Alternative source)
Source

In the plot of the dark knight rises(The Latest Batman movie) it did show a bunch of terrorists taking over Manhattan.

sorry double post

And while all this is going on, let me guess, you'll be deep in the woods, swinging and kickin back in your hamock drinking a cold one and chompin on a porter house steak is that it?

reply to post by r2d246

That's a good one, but not exactly. I'll be going to work everyday as I do now and trying to survive.

So basically, if Americans play colonists, the Government is determined to play the Red Coats and really live up to it in every sense.

Anyone else notice in reading this scenario, it doesn't mention any violence from the event? The mayor isn't killed, he's on House arrest. The police aren't shot down in some night of revolt and terror. They're disarmed and encouraged to help or stay clear. I'm not saying it...they wrote the scenario. Despite all this? It's a *MILITARY* response scenario being planned.

Peaceful, if on the extremes of the end of that word, citizens.

MILITARY response.

We train and we pay our military to do 2 things. ONLY two things. They do them well and everything else is about who is telling them where to do it. We have a military to kill people and break things. That's it.

So which of those two things are they serving the role of in a future they think this training is appropriate for? Are they envisioned to be killing or breaking us? Neither sounds like much fun when *I* *PAID* for their training and they come from my neighbors, family and friends. The politicians are out of control!

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Wrabbit star for you, I didn't notice that at first, but after you mentioned it went back and reread the article. It does not state anything about anything to do with violence on the part of the citizens.

One must remeber though, that it will be seen and potrayed as a hostage situation. So the response will be the obvious one. Also, I am certain the constitution defends the right of the people to instate new .gov when the old .gov no longer serves the peoples ends, and begins to serve its own. However, I am also certain of their response. The civil war comes to mind.

In short, I absolutely hope a peaceful revolution takes place, I also absolutley quarantee the .govs response will be anything but peaceful.