Theory re generals being removed from thier positions.

page: 1
5

log in

join

posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 07:08 PM
link   
I was wondering, if it is true that millitary leaders are being removed from thier positions based on whether they will fire on civillians, then which ones are being removed? The ones who will or the ones who wont? If it is the first, then maybe Obama is forming a private army as the rumours are saying.




posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Cinrad
 
There are a lot of rumors by what I've been reading. Mattis getting news of his retirement by a note from an aide? I mean it's getting a little twilight zone for how out of any kind of norm it's getting.

Something is going on. I don't know what and obviously the Mayan and Dec 22nd stuff was nothing to do with anything. Real money has been spent at staggering amounts though. Real shelters and real tunnels, documented and verifiable by the owners own statements have been created and dug by nations around the world.

I hope we start getting some straight answers about whats going on because the rumors are not happy sounding to say the least.



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 07:28 PM
link   
He doesn't need a private army with drones. Get a room full of a couple hundred hypnotized maniacs and they could police the whole country.



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 07:45 PM
link   
Ah I have been out of the loop too long do you mind posting some sources? I wish I had time to research all of this stuff I had never heard of this before now



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 10:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by lobotomizemecapin
Ah I have been out of the loop too long do you mind posting some sources? I wish I had time to research all of this stuff I had never heard of this before now


There are a few posts further down the forum regarding the dismissing of millitary leaders. As to the source of my theory, it is just me and a rumour I saw on another post. This is the skunk works forum, it is for highly speculative and unsubstantiated conspiracy theories.
edit on 27/1/13 by Cinrad because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 10:53 PM
link   
The only issue I have with this is generals don't pull the triggers.

So you can have the most blood-thirsty general(s) in charge, who ultimately pulls the trigger are the ground-pounders.

And while there may be a few who would, they would be in the minority.



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 02:48 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 

I read some of the "Mattisisms" as I'd call them, earlier. WoW, talk about a General that never got his P.C. class, let alone sensitivity training.


Of course, the man is a Marine and was the head of Marines in combat. What do we want? Mr Rogers? I don't know quite what the real reasons are for cashiering him like this after a distinguished career but it's wrong the way it's happened.

The more I've read about him the more he strikes me as a butt kicker of the Chosin Reservoir school of thinking. Just the man we really do need in charge of those men.....but hell, this is the new Amerika where even Soldiers need to be touchy, feely and carry band-aids and aid kits to patch 'em up after cutting them in half with machine guns.

It's one hell of a way to run a war. (and I do wonder about the rumors of these Generals and Admirals being dumped because they flat won't back first strike war against Iran? If that's true...we'll know soon...and we're in for a nightmare by that indication)





new topics
top topics
 
5

log in

join