Would US Military Fire Upon US Military? Is Perhaps A More Pertinent Question!

page: 4
5
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 08:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


I know all about oathkeepers. And if they had any real balls, they'd go arrest all those responsible for the disarming in Katrina. But they don't. They just sit back and do nothing, like all the other sheeple. While in the meantime, the federal government, even after knowing KILLING its own military during the gulf war with depleted uranium and biotoxins, still gets away with murder.

I am SICK of honoring the troops. I am SICK of the supposed "do gooder" oathkeepers. And I am SICK of the excuses. BS!

I don't expect this to be a palatable topic, for any involved. But I am SICK of keeping the gloves on. They're coming off.


Just because other people do not feel that something is a crime or that something warrents systemic change rather than a firefight does not mean that they are complacent. Remember: soapbox then ballot box then cartrige box.

I notice that you've not picked up a gun and stormed the halls of the mighty yourself whilst calling other people sheeple for not acting in the rage you want them to.




posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 08:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Dustytoad
 


You keep referring to this document, which I did read, but you still haven't shown me a physical camp exists.
You can't because they DON'T EXIST.
You can write anything down, but until its implemented, it's just 'plans', and they've been saying this for YEARS, I've been reading about this crap long before I came to ATS, so sorry, your alleged camps only exist on paper.
Nothing more.



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 08:28 AM
link   
reply to post by LennayTheUndead
 


Don't tell me what I do and don't know . . . First, it was the military, then it's the people, then it's the variables. I know full well about all those things. Maybe you don't really understand what steps are taken to employ group think against the outgroup. They won't be your neighbors or countrymen . . . just like they weren't any other time in history when leaders have used the standing army against their own people. Individually we will all deny it, we have to, or we label ourselves despicible.

Five steps to Tyranny:
Step 1: "Us" vs "Them"
Step 2: Obey Orders
Step 3: Do Harm to "Them"
Step 4: Stand up or Stand by
Step 5: Exterminate

We've been ramping up step 1, since 9/11, we could be seeing the beginning of step 2 (if guns are also pushed through, like health care, patriot, ndaa, etc). Let's hope if it gets to step 3, you and all your buddies are ready for step 4 because that's where the battle is won or lost. By step 5 it's too late.

And while WWII and the goings on may seem ancient and irrelevant to you, some on here actually are in this country because of what their families went through in Europe during those times . . .so, maybe you lack perspective. But I'm sure with your stated service and vast knowledge on this subject, you would know better than anyone. Really moot point anyway . . . as you say. I'll leave you to the camps . . .



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 08:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by HomerinNC
reply to post by Dustytoad
 


You keep referring to this document, which I did read, but you still haven't shown me a physical camp exists.
You can't because they DON'T EXIST.


I gave you a picture silly man..

And you did not read the document as you can't read that fast..

Liar.

How many pages? what's it about?

You obviously forget your military training. Tell me how the Army makes a plan without a reality in place to support said plan?

Again though, I don't think it's wrong or evil.. They have camps for a reason.. It's to not kill people who may wish to become enemies of the State. IF WW3 pops off you can bet they're ready to lock up muslims and russians...

Or do you expect them to build camps overnight>?
edit on 1/30/2013 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 08:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dustytoad

Originally posted by HomerinNC
reply to post by Dustytoad
 


You keep referring to this document, which I did read, but you still haven't shown me a physical camp exists.
You can't because they DON'T EXIST.


I gave you a picture silly man..

And you did not read the document as you can't read that fast..

Liar.

How many pages? what's it about?

You obviously forget your military training. Tell me how the Army makes a plan without a reality in place to support said plan?
edit on 1/30/2013 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)


Didn't read the document yet, but I noticed that that picture looked very old--like from the 1940's. A picture of a detention camp we all know that was used in the 1940's is not exactly supportive of there being such camps in existence or use now.

ETA:
Oh, you mean the Rex and FECOG stuff. Yeah, I've read those before and not new news.
edit on 30-1-2013 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 08:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Dustytoad
 


World war 2dude, show me one that exists now



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 08:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by HomerinNC
reply to post by Dustytoad
 


World war 2dude, show me one that exists now


It's a lost technology.. The US Government always steps back it's power. You're right.

The Camps are needed and they are there..

Is reality too painful to see?

Imagine you lead this nation and you know in a major war a lot of enemies will spring up in the homeland..
Imagine you have rules in place to detain them indefinitely..
Imagine... Where do you put them..

yes?



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 08:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Dustytoad
 


Your argument fails because you state these camps exist now, they don't, then you provide a pic of an internment camp from ww2, which in all likelihood has probably been demolished for a factory or something.

If you can show me just ONE camp TODAY, I take back everything I've said
edit on 1/30/2013 by HomerinNC because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 08:39 AM
link   
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


you're right it's not new news..
Put yourself in their shoes..
It eliminates most conspiracies..
I'm not so conspiratorial so it's weird I'm getting all this flak pointing out a basic need in war times..
It happens over and over and over in every war.. Otherwise you get too many "insurgents"



President Franklin D. Roosevelt authorized the internment with Executive Order 9066, issued February 19, 1942, which allowed local military commanders to designate "military areas" as "exclusion zones," from which "any or all persons may be excluded."


It's like you guys are arguing that I am speaking on unicorns.. When it's happened already.. Come on now. History is your friend, until your lack of information blinds you to repeat it.



Operation Garden Plot, also known as The Department of Defense Civil Disturbance Plan (18 USC 1385 Posse Comitatus Act) is a general US Army and National Guard plan to respond to major domestic civil disturbances within the United States.[citation needed] The plan was developed in response to the civil disorders of the 1960s and is now under the control of the U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM). It provides Federal military and law enforcement assistance to local governments during times of major civil disturbances.

"The Garden Plot plan-–drafted after the Watts, Newark, and Detroit riots–-captures the acrimonious times when the document was drawn up. The section outlining the Army's perception of the "situation" in America certainly insinuates an establishment that was afraid of the disenfranchised. The Plot warns against "racial unrest," as well as "anti-draft" and "anti-Vietnam" elements." [1]

Garden Plot was last activated (as Noble Eagle)[citation needed] to provide military assistance to civil authorities following the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States. The Pentagon also activated it to restore order during the 1992 Los Angeles Riots.[2] Under Homeland Security restructuring, it has been suggested that similar models be followed.

Link
edit on 1/30/2013 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 08:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Dustytoad
 


Excellent comment!

2nd for Mcmuffins!



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 09:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Dustytoad
 


Yes it has happened already: what heppened to Japanese Americans is a very shameful part of our history.

Yes, it could happen again which is why we should alwways watch what the government does and keep their feet to the fire and never give up freedoms such as the second amendment.

However, those are contingency plans and, believe it or not, there are plans in the DOD for responding from everything from super volcanos to invasions by Canadians to alien contact.

Although I agree, I find large portions of those pland disturbing, unsettling, and unlawful if they were implemented, they really are not evidence that there are camps active today and people actively getting ready to put us all into camps. I must have missed that meeting.



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 09:41 AM
link   
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


No you disagree. I don't find it disturbing. I find it prudent and needed.

You mention plans as just plans but how would they be implemented? By imaginary things?? Or by things already put in place just in case? Much like the hopefully un-needed plan to nuke russians is backed up by REAL nukes, the hopefully non needed plan to lock up terrorists in America won't become needed, but is backed up by real spots to put them..

If it does become needed I would support it in 90% of the situations..

You didn't need to be at the meeting. Are you in the Navy? If so you are not involved in detainment on land, especially as a doctor.. You seem to think I didn't have ONE MOS.. Other people have other MOS's and this isn't a military thing..

It's a Federal thing.. Different rules for different fools..


AND

FEMA camps are Legal 100%.. They were already used during Katrina.. I think you still think I think something different.. Word associations show more about your psychology than what I.. What I.. What I... THINK.
edit on 1/30/2013 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)





SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘National Emergency Centers Establishment Act’.

SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIONAL EMERGENCY CENTERS.

(a) In General- In accordance with the requirements of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish not fewer than 6 national emergency centers on military installations.

(b) Purpose of National Emergency Centers- The purpose of a national emergency center shall be to use existing infrastructure--

(1) to provide temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster;

HR 645



SEC. 3. DESIGNATION OF MILITARY INSTALLATIONS AS NATIONAL EMERGENCY CENTERS.

(a) In General- Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall designate not fewer than 6 military installations as sites for the establishment of national emergency centers.

(b) Minimum Requirements- A site designated as a national emergency center shall be--

(1) capable of meeting for an extended period of time the housing, health, transportation, education, public works, humanitarian and other transition needs of a large number of individuals affected by an emergency or major disaster;




(3) capable of being scaled up or down to accommodate major disaster preparedness and response drills, operations, and procedures;

(4) capable of housing existing permanent structures necessary to meet training and first responders coordination requirements during nondisaster periods;

(5) capable of hosting the infrastructure necessary to rapidly adjust to temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance needs;






(c) Location of National Emergency Centers- There shall be established not fewer than one national emergency center in each of the following areas:

(1) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions I, II, and III.

(2) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IV.

(3) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions V and VII.

(4) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region VI.

(5) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions VIII and X.

(6) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IX.



FEMA Camps
edit on 1/30/2013 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 10:39 AM
link   
Originally posted by Dustytoad
reply to post by NavyDoc
 




No you disagree. I don't find it disturbing. I find it prudent and needed.



Oh, I'm sorry. I must have misinterpeted the underlying impetus of your posts.



You mention plans as just plans but how would they be implemented? By imaginary things?? Or by things already put in place just in case? Much like the hopefully un-needed plan to nuke russians is backed up by REAL nukes, the hopefully non needed plan to lock up terrorists in America won't become needed, but is backed up by real spots to put them..

However, a plan or point paper is not in and of itself proof that physical things exist. Our War Plan Orange, for example, involved ships, bases, and divisions that did not exist.



If it does become needed I would support it in 90% of the situations..

Depends on the situation. I'd like to think that we would not have a repeat of our WWII internment of American Citizens.



You didn't need to be at the meeting. Are you in the Navy? If so you are not involved in detainment on land, especially as a doctor.. You seem to think I didn't have ONE MOS.. Other people have other MOS's and this isn't a military thing..

Firstly it was a bit of a joke, secondly, it is clear you don't know what the Navy does. Who do you think detains all of those people at Guantanamo Naval Base? I did several Iraq and Afghanistan deployments and did not see a single drop of water outside the Euphrates River. I dealt with EPW and detainees quite often there too. Also wroked with the Army quite extensively, so I don't understand why you imagine that someone in the Navy would not be involved with detaining people "on land."

Of course a doctor (I won't get involved with some of the other things I did for the military before I went back to school and got my MD) would be involved in detention. You honestly think that any number of people are going to be detained without basic medical care and sanitation as part of the plan? Every EPW that the Marines and Army brought in for detention ahd medical exams before incarceration and before reelase. Medicine is a very important part of any detention or evacuation plan.

With all due respect, I don't think you had an MOS because you don't seem to understand how the military works.


It's a Federal thing.. Different rules for different fools..


This may come as a shock, but the DOD is part of the Federal Government.






FEMA camps are Legal 100%.. They were already used during Katrina.. I think you still think I think something different.. Word associations show more about your psychology than what I.. What I.. What I... THINK.

edit on 1/30/2013 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)



Of course they are. Nothing wrong with, nor unConstitutional, with setting aside food and shelter to help your citizens in time of natural disaster. I was down in Katrina on the Comfort and set up and manned aid stations in the city. That is what we are here for: to help citizens in need.

As for the last bit, I don't follow. Some sort of psychobabble?
edit on 30-1-2013 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)
edit on 30-1-2013 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)
edit on 30-1-2013 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)
edit on 30-1-2013 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)
edit on 30-1-2013 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 10:41 AM
link   
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


You respond to my words but not FEMA or USA...

good luck chuck, I was in the Military too.. You'd be surprised what the Army does..

What you call psychobabble as a concept is that You Don't know me, but assume things.. We agree on a lot, but you miss reality. There are Fema Camps as Needed and Implemented by the USA.

The rest of my post (90% of it) was government Docs... These are not my thoughts.. It's just reality.

Read the last post of mine again as it clearly points out FEMA camps, your specific understanding of "FEMA camp" not withstanding.

Hint: It's highlighted.

You don't think I had an MOS.. HAhaha.. Which Contract you want to see? Attack me, but can't read.. Comprehension is important.

FEMA isn't military and you have no Need to Know..
edit on 1/30/2013 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dustytoad
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


You respond to my words but not FEMA or USA...

good luck chuck, I was in the Military too.. You'd be surprised what the Army does..

What you call psychobabble as a concept is that You Don't know me, but assume things.. We agree on a lot, but you miss reality. There are Fema Camps as Needed and Implemented by the USA.

The rest of my post (90% of it) was government Docs... These are not my thoughts.. It's just reality.

Read the last post of mine again as it clearly points out FEMA camps, your specific understanding of "FEMA camp" not withstanding.

Hint: It's highlighted.

You don't think I had an MOS.. HAhaha.. Which Contract you want to see? Attack me, but can't read.. Comprehension is important.

FEMA isn't military and you have no Need to Know..
edit on 1/30/2013 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)


Worked very closely with the Army and been IA'd to Army units (look up "individual augmentation". I've even got some medals from the Army. I'm quite familiar with the Army.

I don't get your beef. Are you for FEMA or against FEMA? What part of FEMA and USA are you saying? The documents support the concept of FEMA providing shelter in camps or regions, but did not mention where they were or if they ahd been made...they just say the concept. Point out where they mention a specific, existing camp. I just may have missed it. When a plan calls for "using airfields" you do not have to have existant airfields to discuss such a plan. When a plan calls for using "Outlying Field of , Whiting Field, NAS" then you have an obviously existing structure.

I'd love to see copies of your contracts. Please send them via PM. I did't attack you,l just doubt what you said because you obviously did not know what roles the Navy plays on land and detention on land even though the lowest PFC in the Army knows that GITMO is a Naval base.

The funny thing is, I now know that you are a poser because anyone who has ever been in the military knows that your contract has nothing to do with what you actually did or were qualified to do. All of that information is contained on your DD214. A person could enlist with a contract for 37F (psy ops) but never even get through bootcamp.

FEMA and FEMA planning work quite closely with the military because of the assets. The USNS Comfort going down to New Orleans was a FEMA coordinated activity and FEMA and JCS do work together on such wide scale contingences. Even the REX and FECOG reference and CC DOD, so I don't get why you would think that FEMA would do some sort of widespread detention without DOD knowlege.
edit on 30-1-2013 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 11:26 AM
link   
With the total, 100% complete hijacking and evisceration of my thread complete, notice how NONE of you vets or oathkeepers want to tackle the hard questions.

Fricken sad. But predictable. You are no better than the sheeple, and you refuse to face it.



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
With the total, 100% complete hijacking and evisceration of my thread complete, notice how NONE of you vets or oathkeepers want to tackle the hard questions.

Fricken sad. But predictable. You are no better than the sheeple, and you refuse to face it.


I thought I gave a pretty good answer earlier. What hard questions? Throw one out to me.
edit on 30-1-2013 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 12:08 PM
link   
I understand frustration.
I'm not moving because there isn't an illegal physical threat.Just politicians as usual.
People will have to die in greater number before we do that very nasty thing and as for plans....I was in the Cav we don't really have plans per say we just go out and adapt to things ,we are masters of chaos.
On a side note:OP you have no idea what it is you are asking for,and if you ever do you will wish you never had.War itself is a failure,civil war is nothing short of a tragedy.



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by cavtrooper7
I understand frustration.
I'm not moving because there isn't an illegal physical threat.Just politicians as usual.
People will have to die in greater number before we do that very nasty thing and as for plans....I was in the Cav we don't really have plans per say we just go out and adapt to things ,we are masters of chaos.
On a side note:OP you have no idea what it is you are asking for,and if you ever do you will wish you never had.War itself is a failure,civil war is nothing short of a tragedy.


The last bit of your post first: you are quite correct. Civil war would be a nasty and brutish thing--see the Balkains for example. It is something to use as the last resort.

First bit: again, well said. A troop reads a newspaper article about CIA rendition, it is not reasonable to then grab his rifle and storm the gates. Heck, most people cannot even agree on what things are or are not unconstitutional. It takes something a bit more blatant, in the here and now, and in your face to inspire shooting.



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by cavtrooper7
 


So you are telling me then that in your opinion there would be civil war if a bunch of vets and/or current military moved on Ray Nagin and the national guard, and everyone who committed that treasonous act during Katrina- and arrested them?

We get examples of government over reach and corruption every single day. Why why WHY can't we get one example of where the military itself stepped in and said no to this BS? Those people were left completely disarmed to deal with bands of armed thugs. And NO ONE has paid for that. The government itself continually throws good men to their deaths needlessly, for political and monetary gain. And what do you people do? Just let them do it some more- bent over, and with no grease.

It's never going to stop people. NEVER. And it's just going to get worse. Cause even the military themselves are clearly not ballsy enough to stop it. It's clear. Very clear. The end folks, the FRICKEN END.





top topics
 
5
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join