[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

This Is How People Actually Use ChatGPT, According To New Research

Texas Man Arrested for Threatening NYC's Mamdani

Man puts down ABC's The View on air

Strong 7.8 quake hits Russia's Kamchatka

My Answer To a Liberal Professor. We both See Collapse But..

Cash Jordan: “Set Them Free”... Mob STORMS ICE HQ, Gets CRUSHED By ‘Deportation Battalion’’

Call The Exterminator: Signs Demanding Violence Against Republicans Posted In DC

Crazy Conspiracy Theorist Asks Questions About Vaccines

New owner of CBS coordinated with former Israeli military chief to counter the country's critics,

BEST VIDEO - Questions Concerning Charlie Kirk,

Douglas Macgregor - IT'S BEGUN - The People Are Rising Up!

Marine Sniper: They're Lying About Charlie Kirk's Death and They Know It!

Mike Johnson Holds 'Private Meeting' With Jewish Leaders, Pledges to Screen Out Anti-Israel GOP Candidates

Jimmy Kimmel’s career over after ‘disgusting’ lies about Charlie Kirk shooter [Plus America's Homosexual-In-Chief checks-In, Clot-Shots, Iryna Zarutska and More!]

1200 Electric School Busses pulled from service due to fires.

Is the Deep State Covering Up Charlie Kirk’s Murder? The FBI’s Bizarre Inconsistencies Exposed

Local Governments Can Be Ignorant Pissers!!

Cash Jordan: Gangs PLUNDER LA Mall... as California’s “NO JAILS” Strategy IMPLODES

Margin Debt Tops Historic $1 Trillion, Your House Will Be Taken Blindly Warns Dohmen

Tucker Carlson LIVE: America After Charlie Kirk

Charlie Kirk allegedly recently refused $150 million from Israel to take more pro Israel stances

"NATO just declared War on Russia!"Co; Douglas Macgregor

If You're Trying To Lose Weight But Gaining Belly Fat, Watch Insulin

Arabica Coffee Prices Soar As Analyst Warns of "Weather Disasters" Risk Denting Global Production

Candace Owens: : I Know What Happened at the Hamptons (Ackman confronted Charlie Kirk)

Illegal Alien Drunk Driver Mows Down, Kills 16-Year-Old Girl Who Rejected His Lewd Advances

STOP Drinking These 5 Coffees – They’re Quietly DESTROYING Your Gut & Hormones

This Works Better Than Ozempic for Belly Fat

Cinnamon reduces fat

How long do health influencers live? Episode 1 of 3.


Dead Constitution
See other Dead Constitution Articles

Title: The Pentagon Wants Authority to Post Almost 400,000 Military Personnel in U.S.
Source: http://www.progressive.org/wx081209b.html
URL Source: [None]
Published: Aug 15, 2009
Author: Matthew Rothschild
Post Date: 2009-08-15 16:50:02 by Freedomsnotfree
Keywords: None
Views: 1898
Comments: 68

The Pentagon Wants Authority to Post Almost 400,000 Military Personnel in U.S. By Matthew Rothschild, August 12, 2009

The Pentagon has approached Congress to grant the Secretary of Defense the authority to post almost 400,000 military personnel throughout the United States in times of emergency or a major disaster.

This request has already occasioned a dispute with the nation’s governors. And it raises the prospect of U.S. military personnel patrolling the streets of the United States, in conflict with the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878.

In June, the U.S. Northern Command distributed a “Congressional Fact Sheet” entitled “Legislative Proposal for Activation of Federal Reserve Forces for Disasters.” That proposal would amend current law, thereby “authorizing the Secretary of Defense to order any unit or member of the Army Reserve, Air Force Reserve, Navy Reserve, and the Marine Corps Reserve, to active duty for a major disaster or emergency.”

Taken together, these reserve units would amount to “more than 379,000 military personnel in thousands of communities across the United States,” explained

Paul Stockton, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and America’s Security Affairs, in a letter to the National Governors Association, dated July 20.

The governors were not happy about this proposal, since they want to maintain control of their own National Guard forces, as well as military personnel acting in a domestic capacity in their states.

“We are concerned that the legislative proposal you discuss in your letter would invite confusion on critical command and control issues,” Governor James H. Douglas of Vermont and Governor Joe Manchin III of West Virginia, the president and vice president of the governors’ association, wrote in a letter back to Stockton on August 7. The governors asserted that they “must have tactical control over all . . . active duty and reserve military forces engaged in domestic operations within the governor’s state or territory.”

According to Pentagon public affairs officer Lt. Col. Almarah K. Belk, Stockton has not responded formally to the governors but understands their concerns.

“There is a rub there,” she said. “If the Secretary calls up the reserve personnel to provide support in a state and retains command and control of those forces, the governors are concerned about if I have command and control of the Guard, how do we ensure unity of effort and everyone is communicating and not running over each other.”

more at link

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Comments (1-27) not displayed.
      .
      .
      .

#28. To: PSUSA (#23)

I agree...this country is HUGE, I've traveled from coast to coast and top to bottom...I think you also might be right about the vaccine...i don't put anything past these folks.

Freedomsnotfree  posted on  2009-08-17   9:28:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#29. To: PSUSA (#23)

It's uncontrollable. In order to lock this country down by some kind of invasion would be the ultimate logistical nightmare. They couldn't do it. It is physically impossible.

I agree, it would be difficult.

Why go to all that trouble?

lucysmom  posted on  2009-08-17   9:31:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: PSUSA (#25)

Agreed. That is true for those that have prepared, or those that will eat Bear Grylls style.

We've started storing food long term the last few months. Incrementally, little bit at a time so it's not a huge painful bite at once. Figure a year's supply in air evacuated sealed mylar bags (stored in 5 gallon heavy plastic buckets) does the trick, with proper rotation once the full supply is in.

THEN...buying Heirloom seeds, not "hybrids", and we're set. Since we have the heirloom seeds now, we're cooking with gas for food over 1 year.

But for those that depend on the local supermarket for food, it is a problem.

Well, what can you do though? I guess in a hypothetical breakdown you help the neighbors as much as you can, while teaching them to be self sufficient. It's not that hard, we all used to be mostly self sufficient just 100 years ago and prior. Other than that, lay low, guard the garden is the new "work" and get on with life.

I'll get food and water one way or another. But not everyone can do that.

I think that they can, but have forgotten how.

I will miss my White Castles though ;)

Heh.

SonOfLiberty  posted on  2009-08-17   9:34:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#31. To: SonOfLiberty (#27)

I can easily supply my home's current and undiminished full water needs and then some just by a roof catchment system (which, as it happens, I have installed but am using for gardening and yard only right now). Simple as pie.

If you were allowed to keep it.

lucysmom  posted on  2009-08-17   9:35:14 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#32. To: lucysmom (#31)

We have to stop living in distopia lucysmom. Defeatism has to be done away with.

They couldn't lock down the small Iraqi resistance, in Baghdad alone even, with hundreds of thousands of troops that were once there. They certainly can't lock down a nation our size, with rifles behind every blade of grass pointing at them.

Stop living in a position of fear. We have the clear advantage on all points. They can no more control us if we don't want to be controlled, than they can control the temperature of Pluto. The attitude of the liberty minded folks needs to change. We hold the cards, ultimately, not them. Stop with the submissive and slave like attitudes and learn to have confidence again.

SonOfLiberty  posted on  2009-08-17   9:39:46 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: SonOfLiberty (#32)

Stop with the submissive and slave like attitudes and learn to have confidence again.

Frankly, I think the notion that there is a plot to control the US by force is absurd. I can't imagine what end would make the effort/cost worth while.

lucysmom  posted on  2009-08-17   9:53:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#34. To: lucysmom (#33)

I agree.

I'm just trying to get the whole "if they let us" type of submissiveness thrown into the rubbish bin of history. :)

SonOfLiberty  posted on  2009-08-17   9:58:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#35. To: SonOfLiberty (#27) (Edited)

I can easily supply my home's current and undiminished full water needs and then some just by a roof catchment system (which, as it happens, I have installed but am using for gardening and yard only right now). Simple as pie.

I was just thinking about that.

WE're getting rain coming in, and we got wet yesterday. I noticed that there is a lot of water in the downspouts just pouring onto the ground.

Trim the downspout and channel that water into garbage cans and any other containers you have and you're set for some time.

Add a plastic sheet / tarp or 3 to catch the rain coming down into the yard for some good drinking water.

Those that have sump pumps in the basement have another source of water.

.


Click for Privacy and Preparedness files

Pretend inferiority and encourage his arrogance. -Sun Tzu

PSUSA  posted on  2009-08-17   9:59:00 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#36. To: PSUSA (#35)

WE're getting rain coming in, and we got wet yesterday. I noticed that there is a lot of water in the downspouts just pouring onto the ground.

I believe that the estimate is, for an average roof, that you're going to get about 600+ gallons per inch of rain off of the roof.

Trim the downspout and channel that water into garbage cans and you're set for some time.

If I can offer a suggestion? Instead of garbage cans, try 55 gallon food grade plastic barrels. You can get them off of craigslist sometimes for $5 or less a barrel, with lids (make sure it's black or blue, not white, to retard algae growth). Cut a hole in the bottom and install a spigot. Grab a rain catcher closed system downspout diverter (about $25.00 off of eBay, I can get a brand name when I get home tonight, it's all over the place though), plug it into the top of the barrel, and you don't have to worry about mosquitoes. The diverter stops filling the barrel when it's full and pushes the water back down the normal downspout when it happens. Neat system, cheap and very easy to install.

You can hook together barrels with standard pvc if you've got a few hours and make the system as big as you want. I'm expanding my system next year, keeping the barrels under the deck, hooked on their collective bottoms by pvc joins with one spigot out the end of my deck, so it's all invisible to the neighbors.

You can get more elaborate, make a roof-wash system for about $20.00 that diverts the first few gallons from the roof off so it doesn't collect in the system, which removes a lot of pollutants right from the get go.

Those that have sump pumps in the basement have another source of water.

There are mostly automatic purification systems you can get for the home out there, fwiw. Rain water straight off the roof does need a bit of work, if you don't have a roof washer, or have an "open" system (the plastic over top of a simple barrel where mosquitoes can infiltrate).

SonOfLiberty  posted on  2009-08-17   10:07:14 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#37. To: SonOfLiberty (#36)

There are mostly automatic purification systems you can get for the home out there, fwiw. Rain water straight off the roof does need a bit of work, if you don't have a roof washer, or have an "open" system (the plastic over top of a simple barrel where mosquitoes can infiltrate).

Good info there!

What I was thinking of was some kind of solar still. Not the useless ones you see in every survival manual out there, but something along the lines of a solar oven. Something like this: www.builditsolar.com/Proj...g/cooking.htm#SolarStills

Water can also be pasteurized instead of boiled. www.solarcooking.org/pasteurization/default.htm That technology can save a lot of lives.

Good idea about the food grade barrels! My brother manages a restaurant. He might have access to some.


Click for Privacy and Preparedness files

Pretend inferiority and encourage his arrogance. -Sun Tzu

PSUSA  posted on  2009-08-17   11:17:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#38. To: PSUSA (#37)

Solar stills and pasteurization are good calls, but keep in mind that if you live where water is by and large plentiful, you probably don't get full sun all the time. Just something to keep in mind.

There's lots of info out there on water catchment. Sounds like you're off to a good start, builditsolar, is a great site for practical ideas.

SonOfLiberty  posted on  2009-08-17   11:26:27 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: Freedomsnotfree (#0)

400,000 troops would not be enough to control the U.S. through martial law.

Though, it would be enough to seize control of the government in the form of a coup.

PaulCJ  posted on  2009-08-17   12:39:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#40. To: PaulCJ (#39)

True...but with the agreements and laws that have been passed, it's now legal to also use foreign troops as support...still, it would take a massive force and I don't see them being successful.

Freedomsnotfree  posted on  2009-08-17   13:08:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#41. To: Freedomsnotfree (#40)

True...but with the agreements and laws that have been passed, it's now legal to also use foreign troops as support...still, it would take a massive force and I don't see them being successful.

It would take a force of at least one soldier for every hundred people to loosely control a nation.

Since the population of the U.S. is a around 300 million people, a standing army of at least 3 million soldiers would be needed for control of the U.S.

Even China does not have that large an army.

PaulCJ  posted on  2009-08-17   15:15:13 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#42. To: PaulCJ (#41)

It would take a force of at least one soldier for every hundred people to loosely control a nation.

A largely unarmed nation, agreed.

When you have a large percentage of the population armed? I suspect that the ratio may be a bit larger (from their viewpoint).

No military on earth can fight an 80 million man army. Even if they eliminate half from attrition or gun turn ins, that's still a 40 million man army consisting of folks who look like everybody else and who don't wear uniforms.

Good luck with that occupation! :)

SonOfLiberty  posted on  2009-08-17   15:50:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#43. To: PaulCJ (#41)

I don't think a force of 3 million could no it...look no farther than Iraq, a country the size of California, and Baghdad, a city the size of Atlanta...our military has been bogged down for 6 years and can't get control.

Freedomsnotfree  posted on  2009-08-17   16:56:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#44. To: SonOfLiberty (#42)

amen brother...sing it loud,sing it proud.

Freedomsnotfree  posted on  2009-08-17   16:57:35 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#45. To: PaulCJ (#41)

Well the police would side with the government greatly expanding the government forces. And they'd be the ones a dictator would use. With advanced tracking due the technological advancements we've made, it is probably possible to subdue the United States.

The only hope any resistance would have would be a "blitz". Attack the government in mass, at their source. Tear it down as soon as possible.

Any prolonged conflict is a government win. They'll track you down using electronic surveillance, they'll infiltrate resistance groups, and they'd hunt you down like dogs.

Rhino369  posted on  2009-08-17   17:03:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#46. To: Freedomsnotfree (#43)

I don't think a force of 3 million could no it...look no farther than Iraq, a country the size of California, and Baghdad, a city the size of Atlanta...our military has been bogged down for 6 years and can't get control.

Can't get total control, but they do have control of the cities, and anywhere they want to. The Iraqi resistance will never kick us out. Their hope is to tire us out so we leave. A domestic war, won't have that option.

As soon as a resistance group takes a city or base, it will be wiped out from the sky.

The death ratio of US troops to Iraqi fighters is tiny.

Rhino369  posted on  2009-08-17   17:06:19 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#47. To: Rhino369 (#45)

Well the police would side with the government greatly expanding the government forces

don't count on it...I had a very nice conversation with the local sherrif last week...he's not very pleased with the way things are going either.

Freedomsnotfree  posted on  2009-08-17   17:06:52 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#48. To: SonOfLiberty (#42)

No military on earth can fight an 80 million man army. Even if they eliminate half from attrition or gun turn ins, that's still a 40 million man army consisting of folks who look like everybody else and who don't wear uniforms.

Getting a 40 million man army together is impossible without preparation. Any preparation will lead to infiltration.

Do you really think you are going to find 40 million men ready to face certain death by battling government forces? You could barely find 60 million people total to vote again Obama.

Rhino369  posted on  2009-08-17   17:09:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#49. To: Rhino369 (#46)

are you assuming no one in our military will be on the side on the Constitution...although I never served, I know a number of folks that did, which know a number of folks that currently are...check out oath keepers, last I heard, their numbers were over 100k ACTIVE military and police.

Freedomsnotfree  posted on  2009-08-17   17:11:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#50. To: Rhino369 (#48)

Do you really think you are going to find 40 million men ready to face certain death by battling government forces?

40 million folks fighting for the Constitution would mean certain death all right, but not for those on the side of liberty. No army, and I mean NO ARMY could fight against a force of 40 million guerilla warriors

Freedomsnotfree  posted on  2009-08-17   17:16:21 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#51. To: Freedomsnotfree (#49)

are you assuming no one in our military will be on the side on the Constitution...although I never served, I know a number of folks that did, which know a number of folks that currently are...check out oath keepers, last I heard, their numbers were over 100k ACTIVE military and police.

If Obama just declared himself king of America, put on a hitler mustache and started talking about a final solution I bet most would switch sides.

But if conservatives just started attacking government targets, I bet almost none would switch sides. It would come down to how the chain of command would go. If the Generals sided with the government they'd keep most of the ranks in line, and would deal with any units who went rouge.

If if a significant number of the soldiers went over, without command, organization and logistics, they'd be worthless in any strategic capacity.

Rhino369  posted on  2009-08-17   17:21:46 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#52. To: Rhino369 (#45)

Well the police would side with the government greatly expanding the government forces. And they'd be the ones a dictator would use. With advanced tracking due the technological advancements we've made, it is probably possible to subdue the United States.

The only hope any resistance would have would be a "blitz". Attack the government in mass, at their source. Tear it down as soon as possible.

Any prolonged conflict is a government win. They'll track you down using electronic surveillance, they'll infiltrate resistance groups, and they'd hunt you down like dogs.

It cost trillions of U.S. dollars a year to maintain the current government electronic surveillance systems.

If the U.S. dollar hyper-inflates and collapses in value, there will not be enough tax revenue to maintain the current system, let alone add to it.

PaulCJ  posted on  2009-08-17   17:23:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#53. To: Freedomsnotfree (#49)

Also, there is the factor of police groups that will side with the people.

PaulCJ  posted on  2009-08-17   17:24:52 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#54. To: Rhino369 (#48)

Leaderless resistance is a wonderful thing. When you're kids are being shot, it's not hard to convince people to take up arms. And last, we can infiltrate just like they can.

SonOfLiberty  posted on  2009-08-17   17:25:40 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#55. To: Freedomsnotfree (#50)

40 million folks fighting for the Constitution would mean certain death all right, but not for those on the side of liberty. No army, and I mean NO ARMY could fight against a force of 40 million guerilla warriors

My point is that 40 million army would never form. Assuming there that many would ever revolt, its probably more like 1 million which is more than enough for a revolution if done right, all 40 million wouldn't rise up at once without a stimulus. If Obama declared himself king, they might all rise at once, but otherwise a resistance would have to grow.

However when the first guys go to war against the government, they'll get beaten down. Nobody wants to be the first one to rise up because the first will surely die.

The first generation of the VC almost all died.

Rhino369  posted on  2009-08-17   17:25:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#56. To: PaulCJ (#52)

It cost trillions of U.S. dollars a year to maintain the current government electronic surveillance systems.

That's obviously not true.

If the U.S. dollar hyper-inflates and collapses in value, there will not be enough tax revenue to maintain the current system, let alone add to it.

Electronic surveillance is cheap as hell. Human surveillance and infiltration is the expensive part. They are the government, they control the money, don't count on them going bankrupt. They'll just steal to make up for it.

Rhino369  posted on  2009-08-17   17:28:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#57. To: Rhino369 (#51)

But if conservatives just started attacking government targets, I bet almost none would switch sides

I'm seeing some pretty upset democrats also...this isn't about "switching" sides...BOTH parties have sold out to the global elite...this is about standing for the Constitution...that document BOTH parties swore to uphold. This isn't about overthrowing the government...it's about RECLAIMING it from those that have ALREADY over thrown it.

Freedomsnotfree  posted on  2009-08-17   17:31:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#58. To: SonOfLiberty (#54) (Edited)

Leaderless resistance is a wonderful thing.

Do you have any example of the leaderless resistance taking back a country from its own government? I don't doubt a leaderless resistance might tire a foreign invader, but the government forces don't have any home to retreat to. They'd be playing for everything.

When you're kids are being shot, it's not hard to convince people to take up arms.

The government wouldn't be shooting their kids. They'll be on the news playing the victim. They'll lie and say you guys are racists trying to overthrow poor government.

And last, we can infiltrate just like they can.

To an extent but without the resources to exploit it.

The only way a revolution would work, is for it to be quick, bloody and unrelenting. A total decapitation of the government at all levels. It would have to be coordinated across the country at once.

Rhino369  posted on  2009-08-17   17:33:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#59. To: Rhino369 (#55)

but otherwise a resistance would have to grow

and it would...let your love ones get shot, a family member, a friend and they will have just increased their resistance 10X.

Freedomsnotfree  posted on  2009-08-17   17:35:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#60. To: Rhino369 (#58)

The only way a revolution would work, is for it to be quick, bloody and unrelenting. A total decapitation of the government at all levels. It would have to be coordinated across the country at once

...or do what Gandhi did...call for an absolute shut down of the system...NO ONE goes to work period...the government would collapse on it's own weight.

Freedomsnotfree  posted on  2009-08-17   17:38:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#61. To: Freedomsnotfree (#57)

I'm seeing some pretty upset democrats also...this isn't about "switching" sides...BOTH parties have sold out to the global elite...this is about standing for the Constitution...that document BOTH parties swore to uphold. This isn't about overthrowing the government...it's about RECLAIMING it from those that have ALREADY over thrown it.

Good luck convincing more than a handful of people that. You may think its the end of the world but look around you. People still have an amazing high standard of living. They are fat, they are happy, and they safe.

Bush was much more hated than Obama, and no revolution happened. An no revolution would happen until things got extremely bad. They aren't going to revolt over TARP funds, Socialized healthcare, and other things that really only send politically extremists into a frenzy.

Out in real America, the people are fed up, but they are not zealots. You must realize people like you are the absolute fringe. Even if you are right, you aren't Representative of the majority or even a significant minority.

The new amplification of extreme rhetoric is partisan republicans, who hated clintons guts in the 90s screamed about revolution and how Clinton was hitler, and yet from 2000-2008 they spend their time worship Bushes big government. These people are just blowing off partisan steam. They aren't going to revolt.

Rhino369  posted on  2009-08-17   17:39:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#62. To: Freedomsnotfree (#60)

...or do what Gandhi did...call for an absolute shut down of the system...NO ONE goes to work period...the government would collapse on it's own weight.

If you have that sort of popularity you'd be able to win the elections. If they were so bold to not have elections, they'd wait you out. People would fold before government would. The government doesn't have a family to feed.

Rhino369  posted on  2009-08-17   17:42:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#63. To: Rhino369 (#61)

People still have an amazing high standard of living. They are fat, they are happy

agreed...but that is about to change. When this economy finally tanks ie collapses...folks are going to be completely pi**ed off with nothing to lose.

Freedomsnotfree  posted on  2009-08-17   18:02:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#64. To: Rhino369 (#56)

Electronic surveillance is cheap as hell. Human surveillance and infiltration is the expensive part.

You got that reversed.

PaulCJ  posted on  2009-08-17   18:11:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#65. To: Rhino369 (#58)

Who is talking about a revolution?

The government wouldn't be shooting their kids. They'll be on the news playing the victim. They'll lie and say you guys are racists trying to overthrow poor government.

We're talking about two entirely different sets of scenarios I believe. You're talking about some kind of armed uprising/revolution. I'm talking about some kind of military clamp down with millions of troops deployed, as is the gist of the originating article.

SonOfLiberty  posted on  2009-08-18   7:31:52 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#66. To: SonOfLiberty (#65)

I guess I just assumed there is no reason for a military clamp down without revolution first attempting to happen. Why would they clamp down a country they already control?

Rhino369  posted on  2009-08-18   9:18:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#67. To: Rhino369 (#66)

Well, that is a good point of logic question.

I was taking the assumption of the article and running with it. If you go back, you'll see I asked about the whole "aren't they already stationed here" question. :)

SonOfLiberty  posted on  2009-08-18   9:19:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#68. To: SonOfLiberty (#67)

Yes it my own assumption, I shouldn't have made it. At least I shouldn't have made it without explicitly stating it.

The army anyone has to worry about is the local and federal police. Americans know what unadulterated tyranny looks like, and would recognize it. Politicians are much too smart to send in the storm troopers. We'll have a soft tyranny if we get a tyranny. One where social forces keep almost all in line, and government agents swoop in for the occasional trouble maker.

Many Republican party conservatives are so stupid they'd support such a tyrannical system if sold correctly.

Rhino369  posted on  2009-08-18   9:26:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]