service men and women will fire upon civilians if ordered

It has been a topic discussed at great length here on ATS with many former service men speaking out and stating it would not happen. They are correct in saying that they would not fire on CIVILIANS however, this requires the thought that the people are being called civilians which they most certainaly would not. Instead they would be labeled traitors, rebels, terrorists or any noun that fits the bill to demonise them and show them to be an opposing force or threat. It happened with the hippies and the national guard, it happend with the Japanese during ww2. The military is no different than us civilians in the matter of propaganda and deceit if a threat is presented the natural reaction is to eliminate it.

In iraq and afganistan people were rarly seen as civilians but as ##snipped##. They were painted as threats and eliminated as such though few really were a threat to our troops. Fear is powerfull and the need to protect ones life from threats real or perceived will more often than not overide common sense. All it takes is a well thought out and implemented propaganda campaign to distort the veiws of right and wrong.

I offer you proof of this by utelising 9/11 and our collective response to it. Any one american or foreign national who sympathized with the taliban or al-Qaida is a terrorist and is hunted down even if they have yet to cause any damage. We allowed our constitution to be trampled to prevent terrorist activity even though it is used primarily against americans with no ties to terrorism but rather those fed up with the system.

All I'm sayiing is that when the time comes I expect the military and police agencies to attack the civilian populace but at that time we will not be civilians by decree.

reply to post by oasisjack


Actually they were thought of as Hadji's... But yea.. Sand monkeys.. Other mean negative racist phrases..

It's harder when you are against your own homeland's people.. Cops still shoot criminals..

I guess it all comes down to belief.. If they fall for it, they will go through with it..

Thing is it will break down.. When all the death is all neighbors and Americans it will start to break through..

"What am I doing?"

It's happened in Iraq and Afghanistan... It would happen quicker in America..

I'm not in contact with any military friends as I don't want them to get in trouble just being my friend.. I say awkward things for a current Army guy to read.. Trust that there are those that would not go through with it.. the ratio is even something like 40-60 as far as my experience goes.. This is after the first month... Before that about 99% will follow through.. It would start VERY bad, and how it continues is based on how peaceful and helpless the American (terrorists) look... If it becomes shooting puppies, then it will stop soon after..

They have before and they will again, count on it.

Even if half the military doesn't go along with it they leadership will use drones and get rid of us that way.

There are 21.5 million veterans in America. A lot of those have grandchildren. They are not on the internet, they are not in the media. Any threat of violence that would effect their children would be met with unbridled fury. The military is made up of Constitution loving citizens. While in the beginning it may well be that they would be misinformed, it would not stay that way.

reply to post by Dustytoad


I was trying to use the least racist terms possible. Its amazing how well propaganda works and more so on military and police as they are indoctrinated into the system by "break them down and build them up" effectivly wiring them to react in a certain and predictable way to certain scenarios.

Im certain many would defect but it would take some time.

Originally posted by oasisjack
reply to post by Dustytoad

 

I was trying to use the least racist terms possible. Its amazing how well propaganda works and more so on military and police as they are indoctrinated into the system by "break them down and build them up" effectivly wiring them to react in a certain and predictable way to certain scenarios.

Well, I wanted to make it more realistic as to the terms I heard in the Army..

You may find that many in the Army pretend to be conditioned.. It's easy when they stare in your eyes and you can tell they want them blank, so you hide..

It didn't work on me.. It didn't work on many un-named friends in Psy Ops... They can't just come out yet.. But if things go down we have more allies than you could imagine..

You are right, all that is needed is the correct story to tell the soldiers.

"Men, we are going to take out a communist group that is planning to overthrow the government"

"Men, these people have been working with the Chinese to start a revolution inside the United States to set up a Chinese invasion."

"Men, the members of this "militia" are responsible for the kidnapping and raping of hundreds of little kids"


If people really think the military won't shoot their own citizens, I just laugh at them. I'm sorry folks, but grunts aren't known for their intelligence.

And all I am saying is that zionism is at the center of this zit.
Right or left, Democrat or republican. 911 and the false flags.
I hope it doesn't turn around and bite them.
Let's see their news outlets spin that.
While in flames.

We did not get to this state by accident, you know.
I expect they're busy keeping us on the ropes, hoping we'll forget.
Flies swarming around, landing on shill potus. flag falling at the 'zion' games. pope's jew dove attacked...just coincidences, I know. But there's more to come. They can't prevent payback, when it comes from God.

Originally posted by cybro
Even if half the military doesn't go along with it they leadership will use drones and get rid of us that way.

1). You do realize who pilots those drones, right? The same military members who would be split 50/50.
2). Dones are not a magical or mystical superweapon. I've never quite figured out the extraordinary powers that people give them. They are light, underarmed, subject to the weather more than conventional aircraft, carry way less ordinance, and are subject to signal transmission and comuter issues that manned aircraft are not.
3). If soldiers defect with MANPADs, aircraft, helicopters, and AAA, dones would be a joke. They are only scary to insurgents without any weapons beyond their AK's and IEDs.

I have wondered, is it a possibility that if civilians were to rebel against the US government that UN troops could be used to "stifle the terrorist threat"? I mean, it certainly has to be on their minds that US troops might not want to kill other Americans. Especially considering a rebellion likely wouldn't be "region vs region" but strike much closer, in our homes. What soldier is going to shoot his brother for the president?

Just something I've wondered about but speculations as far as i've got.

reply to post by NavyDoc


EXACTLY ^^

People don't know how bad an "insurgency" could be with civilians, but they really don't know how bad it could be when US Army weapons are used on each other.. People have this weird view of the Military as ONE thing, but when it comes down to it there are Ammo Dumps all over the place.. I know where many of these are, and ya know....

To be clear I DO NOT support an armed insurgency..

Every time one of these threads rears its head, I think of Waco, Watts county, the anti 'Nam war protests, any large political summit, and the way the national guard and police react, it really is 'us and them' .

Originally posted by pikestaff
Every time one of these threads rears its head, I think of Waco, Watts county, the anti 'Nam war protests, any large political summit, and the way the national guard and police react, it really is 'us and them' .

Those all had "good" excuses.. And they didn't last long.. In a longer protracted engagement these rules lose power.

Originally posted by Artanis667
I have wondered, is it a possibility that if civilians were to rebel against the US government that UN troops could be used to "stifle the terrorist threat"? I mean, it certainly has to be on their minds that US troops might not want to kill other Americans. Especially considering a rebellion likely wouldn't be "region vs region" but strike much closer, in our homes. What soldier is going to shoot his brother for the president?

Just something I've wondered about but speculations as far as i've got.

"what soldier is going to shoot his brother"??...are you kidding?...there are tens of thousands of guys that relive the civil war each year, with actual muskets, grey and blue uniforms, cannons, etc....in realistic (but, not deadly) battles across the southern and northern states. you don't think southern boys wouldn't want to shoot a few thousand northerners, if they felt threathened?... "revenge is sweet" is a cliche, due to the fact that it happens so much, not so little.

They will fire and have. All it takes is for the one person in charge to order them to do it, and the sheep will do whatever is commanded of them.
If you don't believe me, read up on the jewish ghetto police, Kent State shooting and the Jackson State shooting. All people want is to follow orders and be part of the herd. The last two example I gave, aren't even people that were armed, although, the police claim that there were "snipers" shooting at them, for which there is no evidence.
Anyone still believe this wouldn't/couldn't happen?

reply to post by oasisjack


Were you with us in Al Mansour when we could only sit in a bunker while being mortared? We couldn't fire counter-battery because rounds were coming from a CIVILIAN neighborhood.

Were you with us in Al Hilla when we could only sit in a bunker while being mortared? We couldn't fire counter-battery because rounds were coming from a CIVILIAN neighborhood.

Were you with us in An Najaf when we could only sit in a bunker while being mortared? We couldn't fire counter-battery because rounds were coming from a CIVILIAN neighborhood.

Were you with us in Baghdad, when a "civilian" could empty a magazine on us and drop the weapon and claim to be unarmed?

Contrary to what you think you know, we just don't go around shooting civilians. My soldiers had more "cultural awareness" classes than they had range time prior to some deployments.

Soldiers have a job. We wear a uniform to work. We are not robots that simply accept orders and execute without remorse.

Some soldiers will be willing to fire on civilians and some soldiers will turn their guns on former comrades. Each soldier will make that decision for themselves, just like each civilian will do the same.

most operations have a briefing beforehand
in the service
inoculations aren't a choice nor is food and water...reason i add this is mk-ultra

As long as people take the attitude that it is the evil soldier against the hapless civilian, then bad things may occur.

Instead of dividing, why not try uniting?