Interesting Article

[Jorge in Oz]

Hi guys,

Saw this article in news.com.au this morning. Wondering if anyone had read anything similar.

http://www.news.com.au/world/conspiracy-us-special-forces-exercise-said-to-be-training-for-martial-law-military-coup/story-fndir2ev-1227274062108


Cheers

Jorge

[gitano]

I haven't read anything about this.

My Dad was 32 years in the Army. I was in the Navy. My brother was in the Navy. My ex-wife was in the Air Force. My son-in-law is in the Air Force. The conspiracy theorists are absurdly wrong. I believe Major Lastoria: “This exercise is routine training to maintain a high level of readiness for Army Special Operations Forces.”

I DO believe the National Guard have been training for the past 3 decades to "deal with" a "civil disturbance". However, the United States would EXPLODE with violence if the US Military perpetrated even the smallest act against US citizens in the US. The country would explode. I don't like Barrack Hussein Obama, but I don't think the people around him are that stupid.

Paul

[Jorge in Oz]

After seeing what the Obama administration is capable of or how incompetent they are, nothing would surprise me, albeit I'm only a distant observer.

[j0e_bl0ggs (deceased)]

Did you not have the military out on the streets conducting illegal property searches after the 'Boson bombing'?

[gitano]

I think it's been a century or more since the US had a president that had any semblance whatsoever of humility. It is my belief that once they get elected, they actually believe it was "destiny" that "put" them there to "fix" the world.

Barrack Hussein Obama shouldn't be president. He is an unqualified incompetent, but he's not politically stupid. Bill Clinton 'floated the balloon' of "voiding" the two-term term limit on the presidency and was, apparently, told by his advisers, "Don't even think about it". I think Barrack Hussein Obama will be entertaining that idea, probably already has. I can't imagine the people around him, including the rest of the American Socialist Party, wouldn't shut that idea down before it has any chance to get public.

The idea that the American Armed Forces would go along with ANY action against the American public is genuinely absurd. I am certain that Barrack Hussein Obama should be more concerned about a military coup. The idea that the basically right-wing American military complex would even entertain an order to act against civilians is unimaginable.

That said, there is NO DOUBT that Barrack Hussein Obama could get some idiot governor to sic their National Guard on their citizens. There is NO DOUBT that the FBI or Homeland Security would follow an order from Barrack Hussein Obama to attack American citizens. In the case of the FBI, that has happened MANY times. I think the next time it happens MANY FBI agents will be killed. But the Armed Forces is just profoundly different. It's an American cultural 'thing'. The streets of the US would flow ankle deep with blood.

Paul

[gitano]

I am certain the "military" that wandered the streets after the Boston bombing were ALL National Guard. MOST of the PARA-miitary that were the REAL goons on the street were COPS. THAT is a real possibility, but it would cause a firestorm that ignite the whole country. This cops in this country have a REAL public relations problem right now. The Boston bombing 'incident' didn't help. That "military-type" action got a LOT of people's attention.

I believe that if the National Guard were to do something stupid - which I firmly believe they are capable of - the ARMED FORCES of the US would squash them like bugs. The armed forced of the US are like no other "army" in the history of the world. They are, for the most part, "citizen soldiers". They REALLY hold no "allegiance" to the Commander in Chief. They are sworn to obey his LEGAL orders, but they hold the Constitution before the presidency. Again, this is a cultural thing that may be difficult for other nationalities to grasp. The People of the US have NO FEAR of their Armed Forces. They DO fear the police, for GOOD REASON. Think of the US military like the Soviet military was when the Soviet Union fell. The just got out of their tanks and walked away. The American Armed Forces would NEVER attack it's own people. NEVER.

I'm not sure everyone, even Americans, know the difference between the National Guard and the national Armed Forces - Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines. The National Guard is the "army" of a given STATE, and take orders from the governor of that state. They do not "belong" to the Army or Navy, or Air Force, or Marines. The NG CAN do some stupid stuff.

There is no doubt that the president can "call out" the "National Guard", but it's a funny process legally. He has to ask the governor of a state to "loan" him their NG. That's how Kennedy "called out" the NG in the race riots of the early '60s. And had that not been about "race", Kennedy would have had a firestorm on his hands.

I am not saying that the "government" won't pull another Ruby Ridge or Waco, but I those types of actions are WAY more difficult to get away with nowadays than they were when they took place, and the fascist sons of bachelors in the FBI were smart enough to attack INDIVIDUALS. It is patently absurd to think that the US Armed Forces would move against a STATE or even "part" of a state. It's AGAINST THE LAW for US Military to act against the American People on US SOIL. If the police and FBI were to pull another Ruby Ridge or Waco, MANY police and FBI would die now. Between social media and the armed populace, there would be a LOT of blood spilled.

Read about this event http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_%281946%29 to get an idea about the nature of our "GI" attitude.

Paul

[j0e_bl0ggs (deceased)]

Do you not think that attitudes might have changed in the intervening 70 years?

[sakorick]

Do you not think that attitudes might have changed in the intervening 70 years?

Nope.

[j0e_bl0ggs (deceased)]

I really hope that you are right! Things from the 'outside' do not look good.

[gitano]

I was going to have a two-part response: 1) "Nope", and 2) Get Sakorick to chime in with his opinion.

I don't recall how many years he was in the military, but it was no less than 20. I felt confident that he would agree with my perspective on the military's attitude about "protecting the American People". I have no doubt that that attitude is just as strong today as it was 100 years ago. No socialist president will be able to sic the American Armed Forces (excluding the National Guard), on the American People.

That's not to say we are "safe" from fascist socialists, it's just that the Armed Forces is NOT one of the 'tools' they have at their disposal to oppress the us. In fact, it is likely one of the "things" in the back of their minds that has prevented some of them from being even more fascist.

"Things" as viewed from the "outside" are GROSSLY manipulated by the socialist AND right-wing wacko Press.

Paul

[Jamie.270]

Just a short piece of advice for any/all readers outside of the U.S. that may not be familiar with American political and/or conspiracy blogs,...

If you happen to read something in your press that references Alex Jones, or his conspiracy blog Infowars, take it with the biggest grain of salt you can find.

Not that I don't believe there are persons/factions within the American government and political realm that are capable of an attempt to perpetrate this kind of thing, but you won't read about them at Infowars.
Alex Jones is so busy chasing shadows he's likely to miss it if the CIA and the DHS opened an office across the street from his house.

[Jorge in Oz]

No worries guys.

If you are right Paul and I don't see why you are not, it is admirable the the US armed forces would see things the way you have described. Pity we can't say the same for places like Chile, Burma, Fiji, Spain, Argentina, Peru, Brazil, many nations in Africa and I could keep going on.

Obviously the armed forces generals were in the pocket of the government in these nations or had ambitions of their own to rule themselves.

You know civil unrest is a biblical prophecy for the US and other tribes of Israel descendant nations. It is a bit f a wait and see as there are more signs now of this occurring than in past years.

[gitano]

I have a great deal of concern about the National Guard because it lacks 'adult supervision', is often managed by idiots and petty tyrants, and serves at the whim of idiot governors. However, I am even more concerned about the civil police, and especially state "troopers". I attended "their" school, and was a badge-carrying, sworn Peace Officer for 12 year. I KNOW what and how those fascists think and act. THEY would SLAUGHTER their own kith and kin if their idiot "boss" ordered them to. They are vicious dogs on long leashes. In the US they are full-blown paramilitary units AND THEY LOVE IT. They have adult supervision, but their supervisors would make the SS proud.

And then of course there is the Homeland Security fascists that WORK like the SS, and the FBI fascists. Those groups are EXTREMELY dangerous to American citizens IN AMERICA. (Have a look at this for each state https://www.ij.org/asset-forfeiture-report-alaska. Then look up "asset forfeiture on a national level. The nazis were no more fascists than these sons of bachelors.)

There are a lot of things about a draft that I don't like, (not the least of which is that politician's and banker's sons don't get drafted), but one of the "good" things about it is that it forces most young men to SERVE in the Armed Forces. From that experience, they learn what I consider to be the RIGHT ATTITUDE about both the Armed Forces AND the government. They see first hand what petty tyrants can do AND DO. It is difficult to explain, but I would venture to say that military service in the Armed Forces re-enforces the fundamental psychological resistance to any attempt by a political leader to "use" the US military AT HOME.

The "at home" emphasis is to draw a line between what American 'soldiers' are WILLING to do overseas vs what they would be willing to do "at home". The two are as different as night and day.

Also, I don't want my words to be mis-interpreted as suggesting that American 'soldiers' are some sort of military 'angels'. Au contraire! They are just as capable of 'war crimes' as any "developed" nation's military is. However, it simply 'does not compute' to turn their weapons on "home". There just isn't ANY allegiance to a president. NONE. Their allegiance - to the death - is to the nation. It's tough to convey the "impossibility" of US Armed Forces personnel attacking Americans on American soil.

Paul

PS - Something just occurred to me: ANYONE that would suggest that US military personnel would turn on American citizens IN AMERICA has never been in the military or, is simply a fear monger for money.

Paul

[22hornet]

I'm not sure everyone, even Americans, know the difference between the National Guard and the national Armed Forces - Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines. The National Guard is the "army" of a given STATE, and take orders from the governor of that state. They do not "belong" to the Army or Navy, or Air Force, or Marines. The NG CAN do some stupid stuff.

Paul

 So if the National Guard are not part of the Army, Navy or Airforce, how does it "work"? What is their command and control?
 What is the whole basis of having them? Is this like the old "Home Guard"?
 How do they get deployed overseas? I remember watching a doco about a N.G. unit that was deployed to Iraq and was wondering how that happens.

[gitano]

How do they get deployed overseas?

GOOD QUESTION! They should NOT be ALLOWED to.  HOWEVER, the president "asks permission" from the state governors to "use" the NG. This ALWAYS comes with promises of LOTS of federal government MONEY. I have NEVER heard of a governor denying such a request. Of course if they did, the federal government could cut of ALL federal aid to that state.

At the time they are "loaned" to the federal government, they come under the authority of whatever branch of the federal armed forces they are part of: "Army" NG and "Air Guard". There are no "Navy" or "Marine" versions of the NG.

NGs are SUPPOSED to the be "well-regulated militia" that each state can have as their own standing "army" as guaranteed by the US Constitution. What they REALLY are is a step-child extension of the Federal Armed Forces that provides A LOT of money to every state, AND gives governors that want to be "in charge" of military forces, something to be "in charge" of. I really have no time for the NG. They should NEVER be used outside the state they are part of for ANY reason, and they should NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, be used AGAINST the citizens of that, or ANY, state. But politicians have learned how to get around the Constitution and "work" the political system to their wishes.

I REALLY have no time for the NG. They are a military unit comprised in large part of people that don't want to be in the military, but want military benefits. Talking to them and they have NO sense of what I referred to above as allegiance to The People either of their state or the country. They are fundamentally mercenaries, that will do pretty much anything, including attack their own countrymen, for money.

Paul

PS - I forgot another political "wrinkle". ALL personnel that enter the federal military, regardless of branch or whether drafted (not any more), or volunteer, have a SIX YEAR COMMITMENT. MOST "Army" soldiers serve two years of active duty the four years as a "reservist". Navy personnel spend at least FOUR years on active duty and then have two more years as a "reservist". People that are 'rotated' out of active duty can CHOOSE to do their "reserve time" in the NG. This is how the federal government justifies "giving" money to states for their NG. Here's something that should muddy the waters: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Guard_Bureau

Paul