If You Think American Troops Will Not Attack Americans, History Shows You Are Wrong

reply to post by DarthMuerte


so you wouldn't fire on unarmed civilians protesting at a college. got it. thats great. but you would fire on armed citizens who were shooting in your general direction because they're "probably" a criminal element, but you have no way of knowing that until you actually make contact with them and do some research, right? so in effect, you're saying that if citizens were shooting at you, you'd absolutely return fire. but in the same breath you paint the military as being a bunch of rabid animals who'd never hesitate to fire on citizens. seriously? and you're trying to make this point to somebody who was actually IN THE SITUATION AND DIDN'T RETURN FIRE? holy eff balls man, this has moved into the absurd.

why are you still debating the fact that there was no standing army? you're actually arguing with yourself, because I never said there was. a militia was raised....in response to a militia being raised.....every example you've cited of US TROOPS attacking citizens is nothing more than STATE MILITIA attacking civilians. sorry dude, fail. hard fail. across the board, fail. we're done here.

Troops will fire.

It seems like those saying it wont happen think you will just get an order one day to go wipe out a bunch of soccer moms and kids. It isn't going to go down like that.

If TPTB want you to fire, you will. If you won't a situation will be created in which you have no choice. Propaganda will rule the day .... on both sides.

You WILL be told about 'fringe' groups, anti government groups, crazy survivalists, etc .. It will be made out to seem they are everywhere. Every shadow hides a potential threat, every basement a potential arsenal, every window a potential sniper, every person a potential terrorist. This has already begun. You're a veteran .. potential terrorist. You support the constitution .. potential terrorist. Believe in freedom and individual liberty .. potential terrorist. "Gun nuts" with their assault rifles are everywhere .. potential terrorists. You see it on these boards all the time where the anti gun folks claim gun owners are blood thirsty animals just waiting for the opportunity to go shoot someone. Propaganda. It will be the reason you fire.

All that it is going to take is one or two 'incidents' to set things off. Once tensions are high and trust is lost it will be game on. Some overzealous soldier or some scared citizen is going to fire a shot. The news will spread that shots are fired. Now tensions get even higher, people will be suspicious of the troops, the troops will be suspicious of the people ... etc ... It's easy to say you wont fire from behind a keyboard. When you're walking a dark street and word has spread that 'some people' are shooting and you see a shadow dart off into the darkness ... are you going to think it's just some scared person or someone trying to hide something? Is he just going away to hide or to "report" to someone. When you chase him down and all the neighbors see, what will they think? What kind of talk will be going on about how soldiers are chasing down citizens?

All this without anyone really doing anything. What if a large percentage of troops do side with the people? What if the government sees itself losing power? Do you put it past them to send out a few operatives to mix in with the people and start taking shots at troops from within crowds? To keep power, do you think for one second they wouldn't do ANYTHING to gain support of the military back, including killing a few soldiers and blaming regular citizens? They and their families will be safe while they watch America burn ... so long as when the flames die and the smoke clears they are still in power.

If TSHTF and people are angry with the government to the point of actually getting off their asses and paying them a visit, where do you think the troops will be. They will be placed between our 'representatives' and the people. Will you allow the people through for redress of grievance? Will you push back when the people want a word with those who have ruined our country? That will be the choice to be made. Where are your loyalties. You can SAY it's with the people, and you may be telling the truth, but when you are placed in a position where your Commander in Chief expects you to suppress those people, and those people view you as protectors of those who have ruined the country, well, you will be in a serious predicament.

If they want you to fire you will. If you won't, your hand will be forced one way or another.

Originally posted by intrptr
In your first video the "soldiers" apparently come to every door in a neighborhood to "strongly persuade" any residents to vacate. If the door is locked they knock. If no answer they break it down. If anyone there is armed they confiscate their guns and leave them to the night. Now these people trying to survive from the trauma of Katrina have a broken front door and zero ability to defend themselves from the "other (criminal) militia" that may come after the military sweep ends. Why not? The residents are defenseless and the door is open.

At the end the "soldier" says, "Its scary. You never know who's going to pop around a corner with a gun."

Like you?

These people haven't enough trouble on their hands, they gotta be "served" by the likes of you.
You are the ones coming round, breaking down doors and pointing weapons at law abiding citizens inside their homes.



You... not some phantom menace that you fear "around the next corner".

You are the menace, American "soldier".

Except it was police, not NG doing the knocking down doors, confiscation, and so forth not the national guard. The video shows NG patrolling the streets, but only the cops actually entering dwellings.

reply to post by xedocodex


Great. now you're comparing the ENTIRE military to a broken individual,brilliant.
Not a perfect example AT ALL.
I hope they got rid of all of their combat people who disagree, then we'll just have more on our side to kick their butts.The best talent is already out of service because THEY HAVE THE SKILLS.Less DELTA in service than out SEALs, special forces,spooks and excellent field officers trained in MOUT ops.
WAY more than under federal command.Most like me who love their country and have American pride.
What will the attackers be proud of? What will they believe in? A paycheck? Just to survive? Then they are reduced to hostages,that won't work for a warrior mindset to win. You have to believe to create the will to drive.
As a side note I hear marksmanship is suffering in the ranks these days.

reply to post by Zcustosmorum

There are a lot of serious problems everywhere and it's a gradual descent, especially for the U.S.

***WARNING, THERE ARE SCENES OF DEATH IN THE VIDEO***

Interesting video…I’ve never seen that before. I'm going to continue watching.

As to your point about a “gradual decent,” I must point out that at the time that movie was released, crime was rising to all time highs. The rate of violent crime in the US has since been on a steady decline for decades.



If you’re trying to use this as evidence that US troops would fire on US citizens I don’t see the correlation. As other members such as Superman pointed out, I think some will and some won’t. I actually believe the vast majority won’t. I think it will be very hard for TPTB to find people to do their dirty work on US soil.

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
If "Katrina" happens again anywhere in these United States, I fricken DARE any bunch of cockroach cops or pussy National Guard to come and take guns. Cause this time it will be from their OWN cold dead hands that citizens will take them, after their brains are splattered all over the pavement. Sick of this crap.

edit on Sun Feb 10th 2013 by TrueAmerican because: (no reason given)

Wow that's strong.

But I agree...if you make that mistake, the punishment is going to be harsh and news about it will proliferate.
You definitely dont want to fire on Citizens. There is more ex military in the civilian world with far more experience than the current active military could ever handle.

If you take a step in that direction you become the enemy. Just dont do it. It's the wrong thing to do, and you can't go home!!!

If we are going through the last change of government evolution, the proccess could take a few decades. When government became national from fuedal, starting about 1500A.D., the transition took centuries before everywhere was national. Germany and Italy were the last voluntary agglomerative counties. They formed in the 1800's. Since 1900 nations have ruled everywhere.

A slow change could use a small force over and over, and wouldn't need the large force that would be required to do everything all at once.

Kind of like the Spanish Inquisition, or the methods of the Catholic Church from Constantine 300A.D. to Luther and Henry VIII 1500 A.D.

Basically, TPTB use a small force so solve a small problem, over and over.

Originally posted by cavtrooper7
reply to post by xedocodex

 

Great. now you're comparing the ENTIRE military to a broken individual,brilliant.
Not a perfect example AT ALL.
I hope they got rid of all of their combat people who disagree, then we'll just have more on our side to kick their butts.The best talent is already out of service because THEY HAVE THE SKILLS.Less DELTA in service than out SEALs, special forces,spooks and excellent field officers trained in MOUT ops.
WAY more than under federal command.Most like me who love their country and have American pride.
What will the attackers be proud of? What will they believe in? A paycheck? Just to survive? Then they are reduced to hostages,that won't work for a warrior mindset to win. You have to believe to create the will to drive.
As a side note I hear marksmanship is suffering in the ranks these days.

Yeah, you completly missed the point.

Not comparing the Military to Dorner...more like comparing the LAPD to the Military and how the public supports them going after him.

Just like if a group of "patriots" decided to take the law in their own hands and start killing politicians because they weren't abiding by the Constitution, the Military would be all over that group and the public would support them.

The Military will shoot Americans...they will shoot whatever and whoever they are told to shoot (or allowed to shoot, since many of them are trigger happy).

reply to post by xedocodex


clearly you've never served a day in your life, and if you did (which I strongly doubt), you were an REMF to the extreme. perhaps get off the MSM bandwagon that all military are borderline psychotics who love nothing more than dropping napalm on babies and putting rounds into bodies.

Originally posted by Shamrock6
reply to post by xedocodex

 

clearly you've never served a day in your life, and if you did (which I strongly doubt), you were an REMF to the extreme. perhaps get off the MSM bandwagon that all military are borderline psychotics who love nothing more than dropping napalm on babies and putting rounds into bodies.

No, I never served, I had other options in life.

And sorry, but US soldiers don't have a good reputation for a reason. If you don't like it, work to change it.

reply to post by Shamrock6


There is a point that I think some are trying to make which is coming across the wrong way. As a soldier you do have the ability to refuse an order upon moral grounds, correct? If so then there is a process that must be followed once that is done. That process can, and sometimes in combat does include having to follow through on the order regardless - but it is recorded that you did so under contest.

Am I close?

Even if I am wrong about the second part, in regard to the UCMJ - the fact remains... a percentage of soldiers would not dispute an order to fire upon American citizens. Especially if those citizens were perceived as a threat to the Nation.

Just here on ATS we've got Conservative ex military members who openly brag that they wouldn't hesitate to shoot Liberals and vice versa. So there is a percentage who would follow a direct order to open fire domestically.

FTR I don't see a wide scale theater of military operations opening up domestically. But I can see a situation happening where, for example, a large protest of some kind leads a Governor or even the mayor of DC to raise the National Guard. History ( Kent State as an example ) does show that this group has fired upon unarmed Americans in the past.

My point is that any statement that servicemen might open fire is not a slight upon all soldiers in general - rather a discussion of that percentage who would not refuse the order upon moral grounds.

~Heff

Originally posted by xedocodex

Originally posted by Shamrock6
reply to post by xedocodex

 

clearly you've never served a day in your life, and if you did (which I strongly doubt), you were an REMF to the extreme. perhaps get off the MSM bandwagon that all military are borderline psychotics who love nothing more than dropping napalm on babies and putting rounds into bodies.

No, I never served, I had other options in life.

And sorry, but US soldiers don't have a good reputation for a reason. If you don't like it, work to change it.

What reason? Overall, the US military has the reputation of professionalism and honor, believe it or not. We talk about Katrina but forget that it was the military ( see USNS Comfort in New Orleans) that provided healthcare, shelter, and food. It is the US military that rushes to provide healthcare and food and support all over the world due to natural disasters from tsunami to earthquakes Haiti, Indonesia, Thailand, Philippines, etc.

We have very strict rules of war and do much better at policing our own than anyone else in government. Marines piss on a dead body? Courtsmartial. Rape? Courtsmartial. DUI? Article 15. If you haven't been in, you don't understand just how picky the military is about following the rules of war.

reply to post by Skagnetty


Well spoken and I believe you to be more accurate than than the fruit loops pondering every sunrise as an invasion of the lizard people,

reply to post by NavyDoc

Overall, the US military has the reputation of professionalism and honor, believe it or not.

To whom?

Most of the time the bad apples will taint your reputation...and when I see soldiers pissing on bodies, killing puppies, shooting a civilians just for the hell of it, ex-soldiers on facebook posting videos of themselves shooting at cars in Iraq because they didn't move fast enough, bragging about how many towel heads they killed, lamenting that they miss killing people....no sir, you don't have a very good reputation to many people.

Mindless killing machines...that is your reputation...like it or not. That is why I have zero doubt that the US Military would attack and destroy any target given to them.

Originally posted by xedocodex
reply to post by NavyDoc

 

Overall, the US military has the reputation of professionalism and honor, believe it or not.

To whom?

Most of the time the bad apples will taint your reputation...and when I see soldiers pissing on bodies, killing puppies, shooting a civilians just for the hell of it, ex-soldiers on facebook posting videos of themselves shooting at cars in Iraq because they didn't move fast enough, bragging about how many towel heads they killed, lamenting that they miss killing people....no sir, you don't have a very good reputation to many people.

Mindless killing machines...that is your reputation...like it or not. That is why I have zero doubt that the US Military would attack and destroy any target given to them.

And you forget that the guys pissing on bodies are in the process of going to prison.
And you forget that people ahve gone toprison for shooting civilians "just for the hell of it" and you forget that we do everything possible to avoid civilian casualties, even at the risk of ourselves.
You forget the kids that are fedd and cared for and given medical care on the battle field.

You've bought into a sterotype that is, like all sterotypes, having a few supporting examples but, also like all stereo types, unfounded in reality and not applicable to the vast majority.

What you said is like saying African Americans are all thugs because you see the trouble that rappers and inner city gangbangers get into.

Theres a lot of naivety in this thread. People generally dont shoot other people without a cause, no matter how warped that cause is.

Soldiers kill normal people all the time. But they are told that they are the enemy and by killing them, others are saved etc. It works almost every time.

Even if ex military types rise against them, modern warfare is about logistics and communications, men on the ground being the most visible tool of many other tools.

Thinking that such a conflict is winnable by arms owned by 'the patriots' is wishful thinking, naive and reckless.

reply to post by NavyDoc


I don't know what to say to you, it is the reputation the Military has.

And it is not the same as stereotyping African Americans, because that is not an organization that people join, stereotypes against African Americans are solely based on their skin color. But the Military is an organization people join...and they join knowing that the Military kills people...this attracts a certain type of person.


The Military has it's reputation for a reason...I'm sorry you don't like it.

The Ludlow massacre happened near my home. At that time my great-grandpa worked at the Morning Glory mine north of Ludlow.

National guard, company guards/hired thugs killed American miners, women/children. Some of the miners were armed. They tried to defend themselves against the machine gun mounted on a rocky outcrop above their tent city.

The Ludlow Massacre

A lot more than 2,000 miles separated the Rockefeller estate from Southern Colorado when on Monday April 20, 1914, the first shot was fired at Ludlow. One of history's most dramatic confrontations between capital and labor -- the so-called Ludlow Massacre -- took place at the mines of the Rockefeller-owned Colorado Fuel and Iron Company (CF&I).

The face-off raged for 14 hours, during which the miners' tent colony was pelted with machine gun fire and ultimately torched by the state militia. A number of people were killed, among them two women and 11 children who suffocated in a pit they had dug under their tent.

Ludlow Massacre

In retaliation for Ludlow, the miners armed themselves and attacked dozens of mines over the next ten days, destroying property and engaging in several skirmishes with the Colorado National Guard along a 40-mile front from Trinidad to Walsenburg.[1] The entire strike would cost between 69 and 199 lives. Thomas G. Andrews described it as the "deadliest strike in the history of the United States"

The easiest way to get Americans to shoot/kill their countrymen is to first arm them with hate.

The Ludlow miners were mostly immigrants/Mexicans. They were little more than slaves owned by the company. Americans looked down on/hated them to begin with. It was easy for armed thugs to kill people they hated.

Mining companies/the state felt quite justified in killing these beaten down people. In their mind the miners deserved their lot in life and should just STFU or die.

People around here will never forget Ludlow.

Originally posted by xedocodex

The Military has it's reputation for a reason...I'm sorry you don't like it.

The supposedly peaceful left has that reputation as well. Lee Harvet Oswald was a socialist, SirHan SirHan supported the Palestinien cause, I can go on and on. Just look at the OWS movement that lasted about what? Maybe a year, if that?

Jared Loughfner was a leftist as was the guy who flew his plane into the IRS building not to long ago. The list goes on.

You are buying into the divisiveness. Think for yourself please. There are bad elements out there and there are good. And both believe it or not are armed and ready to do battle. Though I hope it never comes down to that.

I know of no US troops that will fire upon anybody unless fired upon first. That's called Rules of Engagement. But once fired upon, they will respond with overwhelming firepower, that is a given.

reply to post by Primordial


They did at the boston massacre or was it the tea party?