Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Waitone on December 01, 2008, 10:15:44 PM
-
Lots of flapping around on the right and left. I've read media reports which indicate the deployment is specialty capability units-CBW, nuke sniffers, and such. Not being one who confuses media reports with reality I would like to see some original documents.
Current and ex-military/governmental types--what kind of government documents would I have to review to get a picture of what is really going on?
-
I dunno.
You could always do a Freedom of Information Act request.
I will add, however, that nuke-sniffers have been traversing and monitoring the skies over CONUS since 1947 or thereabouts.
Y'all just didn't know it. ;)
-
Maybe time to raise the citizen militia issue...?
-
From what I have seen here and there on the 'net, it is simply a commnad & control issue that is tasking one of the Brigades from Ft. Carson to be at Northcom's disposal in the event they are needed for support or disaster relief operations inside the Continental United States. BTW, a Brigade is about 3,000 folks, attachments adn force structrue depedant. A 20,000 man force would be about the size of the 101st Airborne with supporting Corps level units.
I don't think it is anything to be alarmed about. Besides, the military is not what you need to worry about. They know what the Constitution is about. Its the various federal "law enforcement" agencies that have and continue to ride roughshod over the Constitution.
Jeff B.
-
Besides, the military is not what you need to worry about.
I'm not sure the Founders would agree.
-
So what is the National Guards role then?
-
It's nice to know that our Government has accepted the inevitability of nuclear attack by terrorists. I feel much better now.
-
It's nice to know that our Government has accepted the inevitability of nuclear attack by terrorists. I feel much better now.
They consider a nuke attack a reasonable trade-off to keep border & port security lax so as to allow illegal aliens to enter our country.
-
They consider a nuke attack a reasonable trade-off to keep border & port security lax so as to allow illegal aliens to enter our country.
I believe you've nailed it; good thing we have our national priorities straight.
-
Anyone have a source for this? I've not seen anything about it.
Wouldn't this conflict with the whole Posse Comitatus thing?
-
ianal but i believe there is a conflict only if they perform law enforcement functions
-
I have no problem with this as long as all 20,000 are stationed on the Mexican border. Of course, that will never happen.
-
ianal but i believe there is a conflict only if they perform law enforcement functions
As far as I understand, the PCA only bars the US military from performing as a LE agency. There are ways around it, and it is only a law - in the sense that Congress can repeal or amend it, and has done so in the past.
-
Prevents them from doing LE duties?
Not a problem.
They'll only be used to deal with them evil terrorists.
Y'all wouldn't be terrorists now, would ya?
-
Rumor has it DoD et al issue a large report detail what/where/when/why. No luck in finding it.
-
Response 1: Wait, I thought Iraq had our military stretched to the breaking point. How could this be true?
Response 2: Haven't we been saying that we needed to move our troops out of Germany/Japan/Korea/wherever?
=)
-
It's nice to know that our Government has accepted the inevitability of nuclear attack by terrorists. I feel much better now.
Huh?
Who said they accepted the inevitability of that particular type of attack?
Sources, please.
I'm one of the guys who was tasked with flying those nuclear debris collection and analysis sorties over the CONUS. There are Army units tasked to do something similar, albeit at ground level, and we've been training for that possibility for over 50 years.
There was no defeatist "accepting" of anything. We were (are) a DoD capability ready to assist if the S quite literally HTF, and proceed to blow with the winds towards heavily populated areas. Were we not ready to do our thing at the drop of a hat, the American people would be some sort of pissed off because we couldn't protect the populace against a domestic incident of terrorism. Jeebus. You're damned if you do, and damned if you don't. ;/
-
I'm not sure the Founders would agree.
Well, I'm not sure the founders would agree with having a literal Federal Army made up of FBI, ATF, HSA, IRS and various and sundry other federal leo's that operate quite freely and with little or no responsibility or accountability for their actions.
Additionally, the US Military is not a monolithic force that is loyal to a leader or party. If ordered to react to "internal disturbances", I feel the military would respond as ordered. If/when it became apparent to the force structure (PVT to GEN) that they were being told to engage in either unconstitutional or illegal acts against the American public, at the very least you would see them sit on theri hands. Not to go back to a weak arguement, but if you've not served in our military, you don't understand. We really do have a "citizens" military with many, many very sophisticed folks from top to bottom that can think and analyze situations independently.
I stand by my statement that the US Military is not what is to be feared, but the Federal "law enforcement" agencies are.
Jeff B.
-
Huh?
Who said they accepted the inevitability of that particular type of attack?
Sources, please.
Maybe you weren't listening to Ridge and Skeletor? We have been in a reactive mode for years when it comes to WMDs employed here. We have been told again and again to prepare for the worst--not told how to prepare for it, just to prepare. Some of us would have like some public pronouncements aimed at possible perpetrators of catastrophe, warning them of dire consequences, even at the expense of political correctness.
And, let me add, there are people who believe that national disaster would be a great opportunity to impose authoritarian control over the nation as a whole. I'm not saying I'm one. Yet.
-
Didn't Washington send the army to put down a tax revolt?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiskey_Rebellion
What was that about the Founding Fathers?
-
Didn't Washington send the army to put down a tax revolt?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiskey_Rebellion
What was that about the Founding Fathers?
For more recent examples, consider the dispersal of the Bonus Army in 1932 and Operation Northwind in/around 1960.
-
I'm one of the guys who was tasked with flying those nuclear debris collection and analysis sorties over the CONUS. There are Army units tasked to do something similar, albeit at ground level, and we've been training for that possibility for over 50 years.
Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams (WMD-CST's) are the primary DoD units for domestic WMD events. On the ground, at least. They're moreso a detection/evaluation/training unit. Basically, they arrive, identify the incident, and then work with normal type units in dealing with whatever the incident requires. During 'down time' (hopefully, all times) they train DoD elements on how to respond to NBC events.
IMHO, I think it's a better approach for ground pounders than to take than full units being tied up with NBC specialization. Let's face it, dealing with WMD's is uncommon for soldiers. They shouldn't be untrained, of course, but overtrained has its downsides too. Limited time/budget.
Nuclear Emergency Support Team is a Department of Energy team of eggheads and engineers that can be deployed anywhere in the world, but strictly for radiological incidents.
-
For more recent examples, consider the dispersal of the Bonus Army in 1932 and Operation Northwind in/around 1960.
So you're telling me the Anti-Federalists were actually right?
-
So you're telling me the Anti-Federalists were actually right?
Of course they were (mostly) right. Pretty much every one of the bad things the anti-federalists said would happen, has happened.
-
They consider a nuke attack a reasonable trade-off to keep border & port security lax so as to allow illegal aliens to enter our country.
....and cheap Chinese goods for the local Wal-Mart...we can handle D.C. being nuked, but not having a Wii under the tree on Christmas morning would be a catastrophe.... :O
-
Yep.
I'm a cynic. If they want to "deter" terrorism they are going to need to have some uncompromised conversations with the A-Team in Saudi Arabia. Right now that prospect appears to make too many people financially uncomfortable. Collateral damage in these here United States is just another variable on the spreadsheets.
-
The chances of forthright and unambiguous conversations with SA are exactly zero, not as long as the kingdom stands on our oil hose pipe and holds huge dollar instruments. SA could collapse our economy with one phone call (as could the Chinese).
-
Ok, Longeyes, I'm trying to figure out where you're coming from, so answer this...
If (Lord forbid) our proactive stance against a potential aggressor like Al Qaeda fails, and they manage to do something more spectacular than 9-11-01 (which is a very real goal of theirs) will you be all bent out of shape if the DoD and/or FedGov doesn't arrive fully trained and ready to do consequence management afterwards?
Should we put all our eggs in the "keep them out" basket, or maybe, just maybe, spend time and training to minimize the effects of said WMD attack?
Is the Boy Scout's motto just so much lip service?
-
There is a giant difference between civilian law enforcement and disaster aid. Plenty of people were happy that my former squadron's helos picked them off rooftops after hurricanes. We've got the people, training, and equipment, we should help.
Any posse comitas action like people on here fear would be pretty messy in the military. I have faith in a great many of the officers I've interacted with to do the right thing. Some would follow orders and take all the guns. Us enlisted scum are prety split, I did meet some that were scared of guns, scared of civilians etc. On the flip side the biggest gun/RKBA nuts I've met, me included, were military. So, if the military gets tasked to take all the guns, don't worry, the resistance will have lots of nice equipment. Maybe a few intact units.
-
Where am I coming from?
There are people in gov't I trust and those I don't.
Isn't it obvious that we often operate at seeming cross-purposes in terms of national security? We get tough in the Middle East and leave the southern border open--why?
Do I want trained personnel available in case of catastrophe? Of course. But I really believe that we need to mobilize as citizens, not as sheep with kindly shepherds.
-
I did mobilize as a citizen, I joined the military! :laugh: Really, they don't take your values and give you an armband when you sign up, most of us believe the oath we take.
-
Don't construe my remarks as anti-military; they are not meant to be. I am saying that in matters of national emergency, and everything else, it comes back to empowered individual citizens working together. Savvy Americans began "mobilizing" after 9/11 whether told to or not by the governmental higher-ups.
-
we can handle D.C. being nuked, but not having a Wii under the tree on Christmas morning would be a catastrophe
Oh, I dunno - I for one would be really sad about the loss of the IRS and the ATF ... =|
-
Oh, I dunno - I for one would be really sad about the loss of the IRS and the ATF ... =|
I would weep at the loss of the Constitution, the Hope Diamond, the Library of Congress, priceless art, the Air and Space Museum and countless other parts of our country's historical treasures. We would need to kill everyone within five degrees of seperation of those responsible, burn their land before salting it, and drink heavily to forget what we've lost.