When the Time Comes, Will the Military be With The People, or Against Them?

The Generals and Officers I think will fall into the fifty fifty range as the higher they go the more politicized they must be. There are thankfully still some patriots among them.

INHO a General Clark would have no compunction whereas a General Honore would. Many would stick a finger up to see which way the wind blows.

NCO's who really run the army day to day and make or break battles would as a majority side with the people as well as those ranking below them.

If the hypothetical rebellion or takeover whichever it may be is small scale then the government gets an automatic win - the bigger the event the more that come to the side of the people is my opinion.

I have to mention that the military is super reliant on a massively civilian operated and supported logistic trains that if interupted would soon bring most if not all high tech weaponry to a halt or make its use very limited. In widespread rebellion its hard for one to imagine fuel, food, ammuniton, missiles or just plain maintenance required on the systems all to continue unabated. Especially when one considers a split in military structure occuring. If several of the specialized depots went over to the people then what? I can see where a major portion of federals would be tied down just convoying supplies back and forth just to keep a few units in battle. What a nightmare - one I hope never needs to come to pass.

The introduction of any foreign troops is an automatic lose for the government as the people would show no restraint at all.

The Ruby Ridge situation had a lot of moving parts and I bet you can find things both sides did 100% wrong including the overwhelmingly unnecessary number of people on the Govt side.
en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by opethPA


Yes it is my perception of events. However I dont want the thread to stray into the philosophical realm of abstract vs tangible rights (which is important, but kind of a major sidetrack onto an enormous subject (rights)).

Yes I know if the gubmint wanted someone dead before NDAA 2012, theyd do it without consideration to what citizenship they were.

I hope things are continually revised positively as well... but with those in office who are able to make the proposals of what to revise and what to not, I have little hope of any positive change.

reply to post by CaticusMaximus

this will be a joint operation...my opinion is simple yes they will

1st off
military operations and how they are conducted
there is a pre-op briefing (psy-ops)
anyone who knows about cia mk-ultra ops knows this is perfect time to implement this
all forces will be programmed

the joint operation...DHS will be in "lead command" overall one could decipher DHS to mean
"Das Homeland Schutzstaffel"

NorthCommand will be us military spearhead...used for taking out civilian militia's or strongholds

general civilian population will be United Nations which has ISAF and NATO...these foreigners have zero problem in regard to us citizens

DHS has local/state/fed law enforcement as well as it's own force including fema youth corps

i'm sure this will be played out in some fashion of this
the UN forces will bear the most of dirty work

The default-mode of a soldier is to follow orders.

When in a high-stress situation, we most often defer to behaving in our default-mode. There are few exceptions.

If you know that a soldier of your government is ordered to hold you captive, gun you down, or feed you Frosted Flakes, get ready. Because that soldier isn't stopping to think how much you remind him of himself.

reply to post by AwakeinNM


That might help but then again it didn't help either side in the Civil War...they fought each other anyway...

And in most cases it didn't stop the Nazi's from effectively detaining and controlling their fellow Germans.

Do not hold your breath the Government has never had a shortage of soldiers willing to do their bidding. If you think otherwise look into the Whiskey Rebellion, and what happened to the Bonus Army.

Here's a milpub that should help shed some light on the subject.
Perhaps it will ease some of the concern .

Defense Support of Civil Authorities

December 28, 2012 in U.S. Army

Providing support for domestic civilian law enforcement applies to the restricted use of military assets to support civilian law enforcement personnel within the United States and its territories. These operations are significantly different from operations outside the United States. Army forces support domestic civilian law enforcement agencies under constitutional and statutory restrictions, as prescribed by corresponding directives and regulations.
ADP 3-28

Look how military is minding afghan people , it will be the same to American people while they just follow orders.

Here you will find an insight into the mids of the TOP BRASS and MILITARY THEORISTS for the next decade or so.....up to 20 28 i believe......
PLEASE READ THIS document before getting too cocky.....
Brillaint minds are workig for the dark side without realising how much they compromise the people.

smallwarsjournal.com...

The scenario contained within is just one possibility.....but it is very enlightening ...
heres an important snippet

"Department of Justice as the Lead Federal Agency, LFA. The Attorney General may designate a Senior Civilian Representative of the Attorney General (SCRAG) to coordinate the efforts of all Federal agencies. The SCRAG has the authority to assign missions to federal military forces. The Attorney General may also appoint a Senior Federal Law Enforcement Officer (SFLEO) to coordinate all Federal law enforcement activities. "

Any insurrection will be met with the FULL SPECTRUM of the US military, commanded by the sociopaths at DOJ and DHS.




The machine gunning of a Miners Strike camp in the thirties, by US troops killed a woman and two children , perhaps others.memory fails....
What i DO recall is te refusal of US troops to do any further battle with the stirkers after the results of their attack were known to them.......this act of refusal to obey orders, still in this late date, gives me some hope that the American Soldier......(not its commanders) has not entirely most his humanity or his sanity.

Disclaimer: I really hope that revolution and civil war are avoided, as these are generally very catastrophic events that rarely turn out well for most people.

But if things do get to that point and the military is tasked with quelling rebellion or unrest within the USA, the question in the OP will be one of the major deciding points of how things go. If the military takes up arms against the people, any rebellion is not likely to go well for the people rebelling.

The collapse of the Soviet Union is one of the best examples in modern history. Hardliners in the Soviet Union staged a coup against Mikhail Gorbachev. The KGB, Gorbachev's Vice President, and more supported the coup. When a small group of leaders and many of the people rose up against the new leaders, the hardliners called out the military. One of the moments that I will never forget is Boris Yeltsin climbing up on a tank and imploring the military to support the people. And they did.

I never thought I would see the end of the Soviet Union within my lifetime. Were it not for the military siding with the people, history would have almost certainly turned out very differently.

For those who did not live through that moment in history or who were too young to remember, here's the best YouTube video I could find which somewhat captured that moment. I was surprised I couldn't find better:

if a civic war did happen and lets say that military sided with people... who do you put in charge and how do you reset everything to how it should be? and how do you do this without evil people ending up within 10-15 years back in charge..

How you do you continue with normal jobs, pay bills, ect.. or do you wipe all debt and start over, give everyone a home?

If military are fighting for us, how to they get paid to keep their bills paid, do you close all banks?

I think more then anything this would be the questions to answer.

Originally posted by ADVISOR
Here's a milpub that should help shed some light on the subject.
Perhaps it will ease some of the concern .

Defense Support of Civil Authorities

December 28, 2012 in U.S. Army

Providing support for domestic civilian law enforcement applies to the restricted use of military assets to support civilian law enforcement personnel within the United States and its territories. These operations are significantly different from operations outside the United States. Army forces support domestic civilian law enforcement agencies under constitutional and statutory restrictions, as prescribed by corresponding directives and regulations.
ADP 3-28

this is where DHS comes into play...they are free to operate around these restrictions
NorthCommand is the military homeland defense unit...more so a mil-dhs

mind you it's if "you bear an arm...you will be met with an arm"...this force has a will to live...count on it...until full disarmament is achieved

Originally posted by dc4lifeskater
if a civic war did happen and lets say that military sided with people... who do you put in charge and how do you reset everything to how it should be? and how do you do this without evil people ending up within 10-15 years back in charge..

How you do you continue with normal jobs, pay bills, ect.. or do you wipe all debt and start over, give everyone a home?

If military are fighting for us, how to they get paid to keep their bills paid, do you close all banks?

I think more then anything this would be the questions to answer.

this new govt is already in charge awaiting take over is all...it's the United Nations

other outcome as you present here...i do not see happening

There is an interesting rumor that the recent replacement of top military personnel and General Petraeus as head of the CIA were because of an alleged plan for a coup by some members at high levels of the military if Obama was reelected.

I have no idea whether there is any truth to the rumor, but it certainly would explain things better than the excuses we have been fed.

reply to post by CaticusMaximus


Most will be with the people. The powers that be will use thousands of foreign troops to circumvent that contingency.

The question is a moot point.
The Government will never allow it to reach critical mass where the military would have to make that decision.

The first question to ask is:
Would the government launch a smear campaign about those type of people in the worst possible light, via lies, half truths and and misdirections in order to divide and conquer the people against each other.

Case in Point, Occupy Wall Street was smeared making it look like everyone was a commie, was violent and was crapping on cop cars, wanted free stuff, college loans etc, when digging down deep, it was about ending the corrupting influence between Wall Street and the Government being in bed together.

The hilarious part is Romney they win, Obama they still win since he is their old boy they put in power last time.
And Ron Paul is "Crazy", or at least the message he was giving out was, because the way I see it, the meme about "Personal Responsibility", "Living within your means", "Protecting our freedoms" etc was a bunch of garbage.

The status quo on both sides of the house in Washington do not believe in any of these things.

Nuff said.

reply to post by CaticusMaximus

I have this to say to those who are dealing with the dilemma of obedience to orders vs obedience to conscience: You are the warriors for freedom and if you rationalize evil under the appearance of the law (orders) then I suggest you study the Nuremberg trials. And if that is not enough then study and interpret the Denver Airport murals.

reply to post by CaticusMaximus


If by "be with us" you mean by way of England, Japan, Spain, Italy, Germany, and the other 33 countries and
662 foreign bases, then I guess maybe...

www.occasionalplanet.org...

if a million armed protestors descended on washington d.c. and tried to kill the president, the military would let the bullets fly.

but since there are term limits, you don't like the president you don't vote for him.

that's the whole point of democracy, to avoid bloodsheds and coups.

the problem is, the keys to the presidency in the united states is held by the two political parties who are doing nothing illegal.