# Where do the soldiers fall.....



## Old SF Guy

So if the SHTF and it comes down to the suspension of posse comitatus and American soldiers are asked or rather directed to conduct actions within the US...where do you think most will land? On the constitutional side where we believe that we have no rights to interfere and most won't..to include the leadership? or will the congressionally appointed generals push for action...and knowledge less soldiers violate our constitution? In the past we have had about an 80/20 split along republican/democratic lines. 
My thoughts are...most senior generals are democratic and will uphold presidential decrees as lawful irrespective of the constitution. However most of the middles NCO leadership are constitution focused folks and will rebel against it. The leadership will quickly intimidate through court marshals and squash independent thought unless the colonels take sides...which they may unless they are politically minded as about 75% are. Lower enlisted and junior officers will be influenced by the most the dominant personalities among them which is very diverse and equally divided among the sects. 
My supposition... 1/3rd will support the Government, 1/3 will sit idle, 1/4 of 1/3 will openly support opposition to the government and 2/3rd of 1/3 will fight amongst itself. At best we can count on 1/12th of the military, How bad is my math? so 1 out of 12 directly fighting 1/3 equals a 4 or 5 to 1 internal battle supporting the people. With logistic control by the greater miltary forces. At best we can hope for state by state declarations...but I don't expect that at all.

Just thinking outloud.


----------



## Old SF Guy

Me...I support and defend the constitution against all enemies...foreign and domestic....so help me God.


----------



## jro1

We have a charter of rights and freedoms....that none of the kids even knows exists!!! God be with us!

View attachment 4936


----------



## paraquack

On 13 June, 1968 I took an oath. I don't remember untaking it. I will defend the constitution, so help me God!


----------



## Seneca

First off the constitution will be marginalized. Yes we have a constitution but...the situation will be spun up to be so grave that people are absolutely convinced the government needs to act to act right now! to save lives...to save the children!
When they spring it, it will be so strong and motivating that nobody will argue with it. Well maybe some folks here...yet the point I'm wanting to maker is that they are not going to leave the door open to question when or if they do such a thing. It will be full on balls to the wall. You gonna argure with it?


----------



## Conundrum99

I took an oath and will keep it. I have already discussed this with my family just in case. I am a patriot and a oath keeper. Hooray


----------



## Smokin04

You could of just called and asked. LOL!


----------



## Smitty901

Have you noticed the Military has been undergoing a major change? The type of person that both served and leads is being changed.
The mind set of the service member is being altered.
The real threat will be the new Government agency's
They were not after drugs
'Proliferation' of armed units seen in federal agencies | Fox News

Under attack: Depth of federal arms race should surprise, shock citizenry « Watchdog.org

While America was sleeping they changed all the rules. We now live in Holder and Obama's kingdome


----------



## Old Soldier

Us old farts took a binding oath that we continue to live each day. I'm not so sure of the newer soldiers however. The dumbing down of education has worked exceedingly well and most of the younger set have zero knowledge of the constitution and what it really says and means. As a result, it says and means whatever they're told it does. I'm not optimistic.


----------



## rice paddy daddy

Enlisted military men and women are not Constitutional scholars. However, most would recognize an illegal order and would perhaps refuse to obey.
But what is an illegal order? That is the rub. "Corporal, these men are suspected of being terrorists. Shoot them". That would be pretty obvious and would most likely be disobeyed.
But how about this one? "Corporal, these men are suspected of being terrorists. Disarm and detain them."

Or, how about a small unit being ordered to set up a road block and search vehicles coming through. Heck, cops do that now, why wouldn't soldiers? And if I was a squad leader tasked with this and someone took a shot at my guys, I know what I would do.


----------



## Chipper

All I have to do is watch the news and watch the cops. Throw a soccer mom to the ground for a traffic offense. Shoot a 76 year old man with a dangerous weapon, or a walking stick to you and me. Beat and kick a downed suspect in hand cuffs. Seems like every day another cop does something stupid and abuses his authority. Doing their dirty deeds in front of a dash cam without worry. Drunk with their power and authority over the people. 

How many of those are prior service?? How many will actually stand up and risk their life and liberty to disobey an order in time of a emergency?? What will a group young guys with their new found authority without cameras around actually do?? I'm not liking our chances.

Yeah I took an oath also. Doesn't mean @hit. Watch our fearless leader lie through his teeth day after day. He took an oath.


----------



## MrsInor

I worry more about cops after tshtf. I think most military will opt to go home. Armchair generals will be ignored. Cops though will have all of this sudden power and they already are home. And I am not saying ALL cops, some will be decent.


----------



## paraquack

While I share your concerns, I think only a few LEOs or military personnel will hang around to "protect and serve". I feel most will want to take care of their families.


----------



## Charles Martel

I don't think it really matters what the military does or doesn't do. Allow me to explain why.

I have a childhood friend that is currently one of the top scientific/mathematical minds on the planet (seriously...this guy was doing complex integrals and derivatives in his head...while he was still in highschool). 

Naturally, he was recruited heavily by several government agencies out of college, and after much deliberation he finally took a job with the Department of Defense. He was picked up by the NSA a couple years later and is currently working out how to construct quantum computers. 

Earlier in his career, though, he helped develop a massive computer program that allows the DOD, Joint Cheifs, NSA, CIA, etc. to pit any combination of military entities against any other combination of military entities (for instance, they could pit China and North Korea against Japan and Australia...or The U.S. and the E.U. against Russia, China and Iran). They would spend weeks, even months just setting up the parameters for each simulation. They would then run each simulation hundreds of times, tweaking the parameters a little each time. When they were done, my friend used complex algorithms to determine the most likely single outcome of the conflict. The Joint Chiefs, etc. use these simulations to guide policy and formulate global strategies.

I asked my friend if he had ever simulated a conflict between US military forces and the American people. He candidly admitted that it was the simulation they ran most often. I asked him what the most probable outcome was and he stated that a full blown conflagration between the US government and its people would be over in as little as 12 weeks. 

Obviously, I was a little shocked. I asked him how an army of barely 2.2 million (only 1.4 million active duty ) could overwhelm an army of over 100 million armed people so quickly. He looked surprised and said that the government didn't win in his simulations. The people overwhelmed the government's forces in as little as 12 weeks. 

I was a little shocked by this as well, but he explained that of the 1.4 million active duty military personnel, nearly 200,000 are deployed overseas. These forces represent the bulk of the combat ready troops and equipment in the US arsenal. He said that the military, as currently deployed, could not win a war against the American people. Period. 

This is why the government is so desperate to get our guns. This is also why they are militarizing our local and state police forces. They see the 800,000+ Law Enforcement Officers in this country as frontline troops in the upcoming war against liberty and the American people. They believe the police will tip the balance in their favor. They believe that local police forces who have intimate knowledge of each community will be the key to winning a war against the American people. This is what Obama meant when he said he was creating a "civilian national security force". The military is designed to project American might overseas. Our local, state and national police forces are designed to intimidate and oppress American citizens who don't want to go along with the program here at home.

The American military is incredibly scary, because at the highest levels they are very smart. The police are incredibly scary because they are not. Together, they are a free America's worst nightmare.


----------



## Denton

The chief of our PD isn't on board with the whole tyranny thing. Yes, he is no student of the constitution and is as ignorant of it as is most of our society, but he inherently understands where the line that can't be crossed is.

I hope most places are more like here and not like New York City.

As far as the soldiers....

The last few years of events, such as Katrina, has indicated that the soldiers will obey orders and feel remorse, later. Between peer pressure, the unwillingness to stand against the chain of command and the fact that the chain of command will give intense briefings of propaganda under quarantined environments before missions will also increase the chances of majority participation. Couple this with the fact that the average soldier is as ignorant of our constitutionally protected rights as is the society at whole, and I think it won't be pleasant. 

You might think that you can reason with the soldiers when they roll into the neighborhood or farm. After all, they are us, right? Don't expect that to happen. They are following orders given by those they know, and they don't know who you are. Group mentality and group training will trump all. They won't be there for a political debate, and every moment spent talking to you will only increase their feeling of anxiety, vulnerability and time wasted. This won't end well for the citizen.

Our people are returning home with serious mental issues from what they've seen and done in other places. Service member suicide is through the roof. Can you imagine what will happen to these people if they are ever turned on us? After all is said and done, their minds will retrace what had happened and what they had done. There isn't enough booze and pills to suppress those memories.

How can anyone not despise those jackasses who are controlling our government?


----------



## Denton

By the way, as I was typing that last post, I was listening to the 58Ds flying over the house, returning from morning training. There'll be no discussing rights with a .50 cal, 2.75" rocket or Hellfire missile launched from a platform so far away that you don't hear or see it.


----------



## Charles Martel

Denton said:


> The chief of our PD isn't on board with the whole tyranny thing. Yes, he is no student of the constitution and is as ignorant of it as is most of our society, but he inherently understands where the line that can't be crossed is.
> 
> I hope most places are more like here and not like New York City.
> 
> As far as the soldiers....
> 
> The last few years of events, such as Katrina, has indicated that the soldiers will obey orders and feel remorse, later. Between peer pressure, the unwillingness to stand against the chain of command and the fact that the chain of command will give intense briefings of propaganda under quarantined environments before missions will also increase the chances of majority participation. Couple this with the fact that the average soldier is as ignorant of our constitutionally protected rights as is the society at whole, and I think it won't be pleasant.
> 
> You might think that you can reason with the soldiers when they roll into the neighborhood or farm. After all, they are us, right? Don't expect that to happen. They are following orders given by those they know, and they don't know who you are. Group mentality and group training will trump all. They won't be there for a political debate, and every moment spent talking to you will only increase their feeling of anxiety, vulnerability and time wasted. This won't end well for the citizen.
> 
> Our people are returning home with serious mental issues from what they've seen and done in other places. Service member suicide is through the roof. Can you imagine what will happen to these people if they are ever turned on us? After all is said and done, their minds will retrace what had happened and what they had done. There isn't enough booze and pills to suppress those memories.
> 
> How can anyone not despise those jackasses who are controlling our government?


It's true. The vast majority of military and law enforcement personnel will simply follow orders. They are selected, trained and conditioned to do precisely that. It would be folly to expect any different. They have been made into human drones. Its that simple.

We will need to fight for the future of all humanity when the time comes, but it will be pointless to fight the drones. We will need to take the fight directly to those who control the automatons. We will need to eliminate those who have designed, built and control the construct.


----------



## csi-tech

I am a Navy veteran and a career cop. I would never do anything to further the cause of a tyrannical government. I once read that collectively we actually have an obligation to throw off such government. Seems pretty straight forward to me.


----------



## Denton

csi-tech said:


> I am a Navy veteran and a career cop. I would never do anything to further the cause of a tyrannical government. I once read that collectively we actually have an obligation to throw off such government. Seems pretty straight forward to me.


Problem is, we have already figured you to be above average. You don't count.

Furthermore, you are considerably older, set in your ways, and are probably the type who would do more than bristle if told to act against your set ways.


----------



## Smitty901

You need to adjust your point of view on both Military and LE.
You can not compare yesterdays Military or LEO to the one we have now. The Military is being changed from with in by policy, a different breed is being recruit now one loyal to a political party rather than the American people. 
LEO of today is not the serve and protect officer of yesterday ,Chances are good his current job is a stepping stone to a better deal at DHS or some other agency. In many places they would not even have the job if they did not pass a test to see they had the right political thinking.
Very hard to say what these types will do.


----------



## Charles Martel

csi-tech said:


> I am a Navy veteran and a career cop. I would never do anything to further the cause of a tyrannical government. I once read that collectively we actually have an obligation to throw off such government. Seems pretty straight forward to me.


Damn, I wish all military and police were like you. You are a credit to both professions.


----------



## Spooky110

And people wonder why I refuse to reenlist.


----------



## oldmurph58

When I was in, I dont think I knew the difference between a lawful and unlawful order. I knew being ordered to do something like mie lie was illeagal, but generaly if the first sgt, or sgt maj. said jump I jumped. Man roadblocks, disarm and detain people, if they told me too, ship, i'd just do it. The same today, only I think a tad worse. A lot of kids would get off on the sudden power, and uncle sugars a master manipulator. We may be forked. Hopefully if it came to that, I could leave the wife with my brother and his family, and do what I think I'd have to.


----------



## Rigged for Quiet

I think many here are overlooking something/someone very significant in this debate, the NCO. Our NCO's are the back bone of our military and they came in before the current administration. After them I would include 0-4 and 0-5 with a nice helping of 0-6's who know they have gone as far as they going to go due to political beliefs.

I'm talking about the actual working leadership who will know and understand what they are being ordered to do and that if they are being ordered to act against civilians then that means somewhere else, back home, someone else is being ordered to act against family and friends.

There have been surveys circulated asking several veiled questions, all with similar intent, asking military members if they would engage American citizens on US soil.  Not surprisingly, there are some disturbing responses, but there are some key communities where the responses were along the lines of if someone ordered them to fire on civilians the person issuing the order would only ever issue it once.


----------



## Old Soldier

Rigged for Quiet said:


> I think many here are overlooking something/someone very significant in this debate, the NCO. Our NCO's are the back bone of our military and they came in before the current administration. After them I would include 0-4 and 0-5 with a nice helping of 0-6's who know they have gone as far as they going to go due to political beliefs.
> 
> I'm talking about the actual working leadership who will know and understand what they are being ordered to do and that if they are being ordered to act against civilians then that means somewhere else, back home, someone else is being ordered to act against family and friends.
> 
> There have been surveys circulated asking several veiled questions, all with similar intent, asking military members if they would engage American citizens on US soil. Not surprisingly, there are some disturbing responses, but there are some key communities where the responses were along the lines of if someone ordered them to fire on civilians the person issuing the order would only ever issue it once.


I agree, if there is to be a rebellion, a Colonel will lead it. Colonel is the highest rank that still has daily face-to-face contact with soldiers and still inspires personal loyalty.


----------



## Spooky110

Old Soldier said:


> I agree, if there is to be a rebellion, a Colonel will lead it. Colonel is the highest rank that still has daily face-to-face contact with soldiers and still inspires personal loyalty.


I hope you're right.


----------



## Smitty901

We spent a fair amount of time war gaming what was and was not a lawful order. Some were easy calls others not so easy. The problem becomes hard as our society has a wider and wider gray line in most things.


----------



## Rigged for Quiet

Old Soldier said:


> I agree, if there is to be a rebellion, a Colonel will lead it. Colonel is the highest rank that still has daily face-to-face contact with soldiers and still inspires personal loyalty.


You are most likely correct.

I once met up with a wet behind the ears O-1 on a connecting flight to the West coast when I was an E-4 when we were both moved to first class because it was a Red Eye flight. We each became pleasantly sloshed thanks to an attentive flight attendant and soon discovered we were reporting to the same command and each were being prudent by arriving a couple of days early.

Over the next 3 1/2 years we forged a solid friendship, which was not uncommon in my community. That Butter Bar was just selected for his first star a couple of days ago. I can assure you not all senior leadership are against us.


----------



## rice paddy daddy

Let me remind y'all that the final assault on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco had elements of active duty US Army personnel operating US Army tracked vehicles. You remember the men, women and kids being burned to death, don't you? Posse Comitatus? Yeah, right!
Ironically enough, these assets came from Fort Hood.
The C.O. of Ft Hood at that time was Gen Wesley Clark. A less than sterling example of the US Officer Corps.


----------



## Smokin04

Pretty sure that military members are being called stupid in a few different ways here...

Normally I don't take offense to things, but really guys? If you can read, you can comprehend the Constitution. 

I think the people who haven't had military affiliation in 20+ years, or that folks are completely clueless, are jumping to statements that are beyond the scope of their own comprehension. 

I work with people who's IQ's are well beyond average. This is not meant to offend, but just to say that military members (ESPECIALLY IN THE FACE OF EXTREME CUTS!) today are far more intelligent and capable than previous generations. More with less is the current motto. That will not change any time soon.

The dissention (and downright ignorance of the current state of mindset in the MILITARY AS A WHOLE...not just some political figure heads) displayed from the members here make me really wonder why I still bother trying to contribute anything here. It's almost downright hatred against the PEOPLE THAT DEFEND your rights to speak in such hurtful ways. Its like that obligation means nothing to you people...or you think the military members are too stupid to even know what the oath means anymore. Really?

You guys make it seem like some random troop will just shoot a random American just because some Colonel said to. To this I say you really to enlist and find out how full of shit your thoughts really are. Evaluate your words before you press enter, will ya?


----------



## Titan6

Old SF Guy said:


> Me...I support and defend the constitution against all enemies...foreign and domestic....so help me God.


Agreed!!


----------



## Maine-Marine

I retired with 21 years.... My son just went in last year... His mind set is based on what I thought him....both by action and word.... He will walk away before he acts illegally or against the constitution....

Not sure if I agree with the 1/3, 1/3, 1/4 of 1/3 idea... I think the Marines and Navy will lean towards Constitution, Air Force more toward following orders regardless, Army will be a free for all and I think we will see some infighting and break down in units before things even out and sides are taken...

national guard....man of man.... i think that will be unit by unit...


----------



## Reptilicus

That is a question that only time can answer. I shall know that answer by whether his sights are facing toward me OR are pointed in the same direction as mine!!!!


----------



## Inor

Smokin04 said:


> Pretty sure that military members are being called stupid in a few different ways here...


No offense intended, but I did not get that impression that from the last several posts.



Smokin04 said:


> Normally I don't take offense to things, but really guys? If you can read, you can comprehend the Constitution.


Absolutely! The Constitution was not written to be interpreted by the high priests on Capitol Hill. It was written to be understood by dummies like me. Unfortunately, the career pols on both side of the aisle seem to have decided that it was written only for them. And for the last 30+ years, the American population seems to agree with them.



Smokin04 said:


> I think the people who haven't had military affiliation in 20+ years, or that folks are completely clueless, are jumping to statements that are beyond the scope of their own comprehension.


Be careful there sport. The technology has certainly changed over the years, but human nature has been the same since the beginning of time. These "old ****ers" who haven't had a military affiliation in 20+ years have probably forgotten more about human nature than you and I will ever know. Just remember, they did not get where they are (20+ years beyond service) by being stupid.



Smokin04 said:


> I work with people who's IQ's are well beyond average.


Really... Hitler's IQ was well above average as well. That is not to compare you or your coworkers with Hitler, just to point out the stupidity of your argument. The world has been destroyed many times by people who's IQ was well above average.



Smokin04 said:


> This is not meant to offend, but just to say that military members (ESPECIALLY IN THE FACE OF EXTREME CUTS!) today are far more intelligent and capable than previous generations.


Really?!? What have you accomplished compared to previous generations of military men? Have you stormed Normandy? Did you fight in Argonne in WW I? How about Gettysburg, Vicksburg, the Wilderness? How about the boys fighting against the Tet Offensive? Really? You are comparing yourselves ABOVE those men?

This is not to minimize the sacrifices of you or your fellow soldiers. But to put yourself above the great men that have gone before you is offensive to me.



Smokin04 said:


> More with less is the current motto. That will not change any time soon.


Yeah, welcome to the real world. I deal with that every day in business and have since I got my first job.

I apologize as this response probably came out more offensive than I meant it. I DO appreciate your service and the service off ALL of your fellow warriors. But I do not subscribe to the notion that our current generation of warriors (or citizens like me) is somehow better than previous generations. In fact, I think it is quite the opposite on both accounts.


----------



## jro1

Smitty901 said:


> Have you noticed the Military has been undergoing a major change? The type of person that both served and leads is being changed.
> The mind set of the service member is being altered.
> The real threat will be the new Government agency's
> They were not after drugs
> 'Proliferation' of armed units seen in federal agencies | Fox News
> 
> Under attack: Depth of federal arms race should surprise, shock citizenry « Watchdog.org
> 
> While America was sleeping they changed all the rules. *We now live in Holder and Obama's kingdome*




And you thought Fast and Furious was just a movie!


----------



## PrepperLite

Smokin04 said:


> Pretty sure that military members are being called stupid in a few different ways here...
> 
> Normally I don't take offense to things, but really guys? If you can read, you can comprehend the Constitution.
> 
> I think the people who haven't had military affiliation in 20+ years, or that folks are completely clueless, are jumping to statements that are beyond the scope of their own comprehension.
> 
> I work with people who's IQ's are well beyond average. This is not meant to offend, but just to say that military members (ESPECIALLY IN THE FACE OF EXTREME CUTS!) today are far more intelligent and capable than previous generations. More with less is the current motto. That will not change any time soon.
> 
> The dissention (and downright ignorance of the current state of mindset in the MILITARY AS A WHOLE...not just some political figure heads) displayed from the members here make me really wonder why I still bother trying to contribute anything here. It's almost downright hatred against the PEOPLE THAT DEFEND your rights to speak in such hurtful ways. Its like that obligation means nothing to you people...or you think the military members are too stupid to even know what the oath means anymore. Really?
> 
> You guys make it seem like some random troop will just shoot a random American just because some Colonel said to. To this I say you really to enlist and find out how full of shit your thoughts really are. Evaluate your words before you press enter, will ya?


Smokin04,

Sometimes there is no point to debate certain topics on this forum. Sometimes, after you provide solid and irrefutable evidence, some people will not even acknowledge your argument. To these people i just say, if you are stuck on a point so much that you don't even acknowledge the counterpoint who is really wearing the blinders?


----------



## Smokin04

Inor said:


> No offense intended, but I did not get that impression that from the last several posts.


I did. Won't apologize.



Inor said:


> Absolutely! The Constitution was not written to be interpreted by the high priests on Capitol Hill. It was written to be understood by dummies like me. Unfortunately, the career pols on both side of the aisle seem to have decided that it was written only for them. And for the last 30+ years, the American population seems to agree with them.


I posted it...I agree.



Inor said:


> Be careful there sport. The technology has certainly changed over the years, but human nature has been the same since the beginning of time. These "old ****ers" who haven't had a military affiliation in 20+ years have probably forgotten more about human nature than you and I will ever know. Just remember, they did not get where they are (20+ years beyond service) by being stupid.


Don't twist my words. I was not the one eluding to military being stupid, past or present...others were. I was merely referring to the point that they are eager to say that current military seems to be "lacking" in intellect. A point that I whole-heartedly disagree with. You can't "forget" human nature. We're born with a small piece of it. Our upbringing and the way we live our life finish the sentiment.



Inor said:


> Really... Hitler's IQ was well above average as well. That is not to compare you or your coworkers with Hitler, just to point out the stupidity of your argument. The world has been destroyed many times by people who's IQ was well above average.


Agreed about Hilter's IQ. Except the world as we live in has never been "destroyed". We're still here. Having a world war does not automatically infer destruction of the world. Cynical people have a way of correlating deaths (civilian and military) as a causal factor of "destruction." Bad time, yes. My grandfather was on the USS Arizona when bombed at Pearl. He survived. War sucks. Always will...but life (and the world) go on even after the tyrants (Hitler, Polpot, Hussein, etc) are gone.



Inor said:


> Really?!? What have you accomplished compared to previous generations of military men? Have you stormed Normandy? Did you fight in Argonne in WW I? How about Gettysburg, Vicksburg, the Wilderness? How about the boys fighting against the Tet Offensive? Really? You are comparing yourselves ABOVE those men?.


What do you define as accomplishment? Have my men and I survived onslaughts of indirect rocket, mortar, IED attacks? Yes. Did we kill our "enemies?" Yes. Were these WW2, Civil war, and Vietnam era threats? Of course not. To compare blood shed from different historical battles is NOT fair. Were the prior war era soldiers less brave men? Of course not! Warfare has changed into something that the men of previous era wouldn't recognize. Our enemies today are pussies! The fact that you don't see that offends ME! You think for one minute I wouldn't storm Normady? You think for one second I wouldn't return fire on Charlie coming through my wire? Think again! Blood is blood...whether it's 1940 or 2014. War and tech has evolved to the point where fewer soldiers die...sure. But that does NOT make THEIR or OUR wounds, deaths, or sacrifices any less heroic.



Inor said:


> This is not to minimize the sacrifices of you or your fellow soldiers. But to put yourself above the great men that have gone before you is offensive to me..


I do not have any complex. I am NO better than any soldier that has died for his country. I never will be while I have a breath in my lungs. I was simply saying that tech and war have changed. We are cutting our military at an exponential and alarming rate, which means the troops that remain have to pick up the work load for those that leave. This in NO WAY belittles the sacrifices of previous generations. Hopefully you will understand my context after re-reading.



Inor said:


> Yeah, welcome to the real world. I deal with that every day in business and have since I got my first job.
> 
> I apologize as this response probably came out more offensive than I meant it. I DO appreciate your service and the service off ALL of your fellow warriors. But I do not subscribe to the notion that our current generation of warriors (or citizens like me) is somehow better than previous generations. In fact, I think it is quite the opposite on both accounts.


I don't get offended easily...if I do, I express it.

"Better" is a state of mind. You can disagree all you want. But I know that you are not CURRENTLY active duty. You do NOT understand the mindset of the MODERN military. Sure back in your day you did...but just like technology and wars of the past, the chapters in the book have moved on. Hell, we're in a completely different book now. Don't think for one second that CURRENT military doesn't discuss these issues brought up on forums such as this one...it's almost a daily occurance in my shop. We are not "better" than the military of the past. We are "evolved" by assimilating the lessons learned from the blood shed of our predecessors. We try not repeat previous losses of life. But the notion that the modern military will blindly or ignorantly follow unlawful orders due to nothing more than ignorance of the verbage of the constitution is HIGHLY offensive to me. That was my point.


----------



## Smokin04

PrepperLite said:


> Smokin04,
> 
> Sometimes there is no point to debate certain topics on this forum. Sometimes, after you provide solid and irrefutable evidence, some people will not even acknowledge your argument. To these people i just say, if you are stuck on a point so much that you don't even acknowledge the counterpoint who is really wearing the blinders?


Touche. I do it because I do like the people here. Even though we seem to be differing lately...I need this type of input. If I can't understand where the people are coming from, how can I call myself one of the people? I love all Americans equally...even if we disagree. That freedom to have a heated conversation...that freedom to cordially disagree, and have a beer afterwards...that freedom to not fear death for speaking my mind...

That is what separates us from the communists. Those are the things that I will give my life to defend.


----------



## PrepperLite

Smokin04 said:


> Touche. I do it because I do like the people here. Even though we seem to be differing lately...I need this type of input. If I can't understand where the people are coming from, how can I call myself one of the people? I love all Americans equally...even if we disagree. That freedom to have a heated conversation...that freedom to cordially disagree, and have a beer afterwards...that freedom to not fear death for speaking my mind...
> 
> That is what separates us from the communists. Those are the things that I will give my life to defend.


I agree, Debates are good. They keep your mind fit and active.


----------



## Inor

Smokin04 said:


> I did. Won't apologize.
> 
> I posted it...I agree.
> 
> Don't twist my words. I was not the one eluding to military being stupid, past or present...others were. I was merely referring to the point that they are eager to say that current military seems to be "lacking" in intellect. A point that I whole-heartedly disagree with. You can't "forget" human nature. We're born with a small piece of it. Our upbringing and the way we live our life finish the sentiment.
> 
> Agreed about Hilter's IQ. Except the world as we live in has never been "destroyed". We're still here. Having a world war does not automatically infer destruction of the world. Cynical people have a way of correlating deaths (civilian and military) as a causal factor of "destruction." Bad time, yes. My grandfather was on the USS Arizona when bombed at Pearl. He survived. War sucks. Always will...but life (and the world) go on even after the tyrants (Hitler, Polpot, Hussein, etc) are gone.
> 
> What do you define as accomplishment? Have my men and I survived onslaughts of indirect rocket, mortar, IED attacks? Yes. Did we kill our "enemies?" Yes. Were these WW2, Civil war, and Vietnam era threats? Of course not. To compare blood shed from different historical battles is NOT fair. Were the prior war era soldiers less brave men? Of course not! Warfare has changed into something that the men of previous era wouldn't recognize. Our enemies today are pussies! The fact that you don't see that offends ME! You think for one minute I wouldn't storm Normady? You think for one second I wouldn't return fire on Charlie coming through my wire? Think again! Blood is blood...whether it's 1940 or 2014. War and tech has evolved to the point where fewer soldiers die...sure. But that does NOT make THEIR or OUR wounds, deaths, or sacrifices any less heroic.
> 
> I do not have any complex. I am NO better than any soldier that has died for his country. I never will be while I have a breath in my lungs. I was simply saying that tech and war have changed. We are cutting our military at an exponential and alarming rate, which means the troops that remain have to pick up the work load for those that leave. This in NO WAY belittles the sacrifices of previous generations. Hopefully you will understand my context after re-reading.
> 
> I don't get offended easily...if I do, I express it.
> 
> "Better" is a state of mind. You can disagree all you want. But I know that you are not CURRENTLY active duty. You do NOT understand the mindset of the MODERN military. Sure back in your day you did...but just like technology and wars of the past, the chapters in the book have moved on. Hell, we're in a completely different book now. Don't think for one second that CURRENT military doesn't discuss these issues brought up on forums such as this one...it's almost a daily occurance in my shop. We are not "better" than the military of the past. We are "evolved" by assimilating the lessons learned from the blood shed of our predecessors. We try not repeat previous losses of life. But the notion that the modern military will blindly or ignorantly follow unlawful orders due to nothing more than ignorance of the verbage of the constitution is HIGHLY offensive to me. That was my point.


You are A-OK. You answered my challenge directly and with thought.

My biggest problem with your post was that it seemed to not be giving credit to those who went before you. Your comment about current military members being "more intelligent and more capable" was a big problem for me. The US Military has been the most "intelligent and capable" since at least the Spanish-American War.


----------



## Seneca

I honestly don't think the US military will move against it's own people. Nobody wants to see a tank parked on Grandmas lawn. The only way that could possibly happen, is that grandma is made made out to be an enemy of the state. I'm being a bit nonsensical here yet you get the point. Before you have military intervention within the borders you first have to have a plausible bad guy. On the other hand. It wouldn't take the military very long figured out that they'd been had if it were a red flag operation. 

Yet that brief span of time may be all it would take to set a more sinister scheme into motion. Perhaps a scheme that is geared towards disarming the American people. Who knows? it doesn't take the full Monte to achieve a political victory, you just have to look better than the other guy.


----------



## inceptor

Smokin04 said:


> Touche. I do it because I do like the people here. Even though we seem to be differing lately...I need this type of input. If I can't understand where the people are coming from, how can I call myself one of the people? I love all Americans equally...even if we disagree. That freedom to have a heated conversation...that freedom to cordially disagree, and have a beer afterwards...that freedom to not fear death for speaking my mind...
> 
> That is what separates us from the communists. Those are the things that I will give my life to defend.


So you believe the military and police are better than the one's that came before. They will protect us from all enemies foreign and domestic. We can feel safe and secure.

I am having trouble understanding you and why you are here. So, what do prep for? If all is well and good, what's the point? You don't need a place like this to prep for a snow storm or hurricane.


----------



## Maine-Marine

Inor said:


> The Constitution was not written to be interpreted by the high priests on Capitol Hill. It was written to be understood by dummies like me.


There is much much wisdom in this....I actually reposted this on my facebook page but changed it to say "It was written to be understood by the common man"

Thanks for the post... I think all americans need to understand that...


----------



## sparkyprep

inceptor said:


> So you believe the military and police are better than the one's that came before. They will protect us from all enemies foreign and domestic. We can feel safe and secure.
> 
> I am having trouble understanding you and why you are here. So, what do prep for? If all is well and good, what's the point? You don't need a place like this to prep for a snow storm or hurricane.


This a prepper forum. It is for prepper's of all types. It is not a political forum, as much as you would like it to be. If he preps for hurricanes, snow storms, or nuclear fallout from alien attack, he should be welcome here. Most agree with your political views, but many do not.

In the end, Smoking will survive, as will you, as will I, and take comfort in the fact that we will all be around to continue the arguments.


----------



## inceptor

sparkyprep said:


> This a prepper forum. It is for prepper's of all types. It is not a political forum, as much as you would like it to be. If he preps for hurricanes, snow storms, or nuclear fallout from alien attack, he should be welcome here. Most agree with your political views, but many do not.
> 
> In the end, Smoking will survive, as will you, as will I, and take comfort in the fact that we will all be around to continue the arguments.


This was not an attack, I am trying to understand where he is coming from.

To prep for natural disasters doesn't take much work. The govt suggests a 72 hour kit Basic Disaster Supplies Kit | Ready.gov. That does not require much effort.

If you think everything is fine in this country and we have few worries, what's the point? This has nothing to do with politics. If we are that strong, terrorists are no longer a threat. We have been assured that by POTUS. Russia and China are not threats, we have been assured that too.

Along those lines, per govt decree, the only threat facing this country now is right wing Christian conservatives and ex-military personnel. So if the govt has these groups under control, what do we face?


----------



## Smitty901

72 hour kit would not even be a start for me. I can go 72 hours with nothing.


----------



## Smokin04

inceptor said:


> So you believe the military and police are better than the one's that came before. They will protect us from all enemies foreign and domestic. We can feel safe and secure.
> 
> I am having trouble understanding you and why you are here. So, what do prep for? If all is well and good, what's the point? You don't need a place like this to prep for a snow storm or hurricane.


It's what we swore to do, so yes, I do. I know I will.

Why am I here? Actually, I wake up every morning thinking of ways to confuse or piss you off Inceptor. You're my favorite keyboard cowboy now that Survivalist left.

Why do I prep? Because I won't be military forever. Believe me, I do worry that if SHTF while I'm still active duty, all my prepping becomes irrelevant because I will have to support the mission of Uncle Sam. What I prep for is life AFTER the military. I saw that I could have a 5-7 year head start on prepping and I jumped on the opportunty. Plus, what set it off was in 2012 when we lost power for 6 days because of a brutal snow storm. Ran out of firewood on day 4 (only source of heat and cooking ability) and ran out of food on day 5. It was the worst feeling of desparation I had ever experienced. I vowed...never again. Some day our grid, our water supply may turn off and never come back on. I love my family and won't let us die because we weren't prepared. Simple as that.



sparkyprep said:


> This a prepper forum. It is for prepper's of all types. It is not a political forum, as much as you would like it to be. If he preps for hurricanes, snow storms, or nuclear fallout from alien attack, he should be welcome here. Most agree with your political views, but many do not.
> 
> In the end, Smoking will survive, as will you, as will I, and take comfort in the fact that we will all be around to continue the arguments.


Thank you.



Inor said:


> You are A-OK. You answered my challenge directly and with thought.
> 
> My biggest problem with your post was that it seemed to not be giving credit to those who went before you. Your comment about current military members being "more intelligent and more capable" was a big problem for me. The US Military has been the most "intelligent and capable" since at least the Spanish-American War.


I agree that we've always been a superpower when compared to our enemies. But you have to give me that because of those men and women before us paid the ultimate price, we have evolved into a far superior military than previous generations. This is due to TECH, INNOVATION, and TACTICS learned from those sacrifices. Do you think if we had the assets we do now in WW2 or Nam that would would lose nearly as many people? No. If you don't learn from mistakes, you're doomed to repeat them right?

I often tell my girl that I admire the shit out of WW2 and Nam vets. That had balls of solid rock going into some of the battles they did. Our current forces do not display that level of fortitude, not because we don't have it....but more because our tech has evolved to a point where we don't have to. Lose our tech and we'll find out real quick who the real men are. That's my opinion.


----------



## inceptor

Smokin04 said:


> It's what we swore to do, so yes, I do. I know I will.
> 
> Why am I here? Actually, I wake up every morning thinking of ways to confuse or piss you off Inceptor. You're my favorite keyboard cowboy now that Survivalist left.


Cool, I'm glad I give you a purpose. That makes me feel warm and fuzzy. :lol:



Smokin04 said:


> Why do I prep? Because I won't be military forever. Believe me, I do worry that if SHTF while I'm still active duty, all my prepping becomes irrelevant because I will have to support the mission of Uncle Sam. What I prep for is life AFTER the military. I saw that I could have a 5-7 year head start on prepping and I jumped on the opportunty. Plus, what set it off was in 2012 when we lost power for 6 days because of a brutal snow storm. Ran out of firewood on day 4 (only source of heat and cooking ability) and ran out of food on day 5. It was the worst feeling of desparation I had ever experienced. I vowed...never again. Some day our grid, our water supply may turn off and never come back on. I love my family and won't let us die because we weren't prepared. Simple as that.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> I agree that we've always been a superpower when compared to our enemies. But you have to give me that because of those men and women before us paid the ultimate price, we have evolved into a far superior military than previous generations. This is due to TECH, INNOVATION, and TACTICS learned from those sacrifices. Do you think if we had the assets we do now in WW2 or Nam that would would lose nearly as many people? No. If you don't learn from mistakes, you're doomed to repeat them right?


Ok, so we have no real threat foreign or domestic. That is other than blizzards, hurricanes and tornado's. So you really see no threat other than that, correct? So 2 weeks worth of preps max should be ok then.


----------



## PrepperLite

This is what i mean Smokin, this was the point i was referring to. Some people are so delusional/unyielding in their point they don't even read:



Smokin04 said:


> Some day our grid, our water supply may turn off and never come back on.


So this is obviously more than 2 weeks worth of food and supplies, i would hope a hurricane wouldn't knock out the power forever.........



inceptor said:


> Ok, so we have no real threat foreign or domestic. That is other than blizzards, hurricanes and tornado's. So you really see no threat other than that, correct? So 2 weeks worth of preps max should be ok then.


----------



## Smokin04

inceptor said:


> Cool, I'm glad I give you a purpose. That makes me feel warm and fuzzy. :lol:
> 
> Ok, so we have no real threat foreign or domestic. That is other than blizzards, hurricanes and tornado's. So you really see no threat other than that, correct? So 2 weeks worth of preps max should be ok then.


Naw, two weeks isn't enough IMO. My ideal prepping situation would be at least 2 years worth of power, food, fuel, water, etc. The reason I pick 2 years? I figure two things are going to happen after a major LAWKI event occurs. Either society recovers, and I will continue prepping for the next one and replenish lost/consumed prepps; or society doesn't recover and we are on our own for the long haul. I figure I could see the latter coming at about the 18 month mark in which I would break out the long term agriculture and farming supplies. It's a bad realization, and it makes me think that I will never be fully prepared. Prepping can be daunting when you evaluate what you dont have...so I try to keep adding and adding hoping that when i retire from the service, I can take my efforts to full scale.


----------



## Denton

Smokin04 said:


> Pretty sure that military members are being called stupid in a few different ways here...
> 
> Normally I don't take offense to things, but really guys? If you can read, you can comprehend the Constitution.
> 
> I think the people who haven't had military affiliation in 20+ years, or that folks are completely clueless, are jumping to statements that are beyond the scope of their own comprehension.
> 
> I work with people who's IQ's are well beyond average. This is not meant to offend, but just to say that military members (ESPECIALLY IN THE FACE OF EXTREME CUTS!) today are far more intelligent and capable than previous generations. More with less is the current motto. That will not change any time soon.
> 
> The dissention (and downright ignorance of the current state of mindset in the MILITARY AS A WHOLE...not just some political figure heads) displayed from the members here make me really wonder why I still bother trying to contribute anything here. It's almost downright hatred against the PEOPLE THAT DEFEND your rights to speak in such hurtful ways. Its like that obligation means nothing to you people...or you think the military members are too stupid to even know what the oath means anymore. Really?
> 
> You guys make it seem like some random troop will just shoot a random American just because some Colonel said to. To this I say you really to enlist and find out how full of shit your thoughts really are. Evaluate your words before you press enter, will ya?


Brother, we know they will. Do you remember General Pershing's orders and the soldiers's actions against a particular incident against veterans? That is one example.

I have had military contact within the time frame you mentioned. As a matter of fact, I have a CAC in my pocket, right now. I am appalled by the things I have heard uttered by some of these kids. I am not the only one, as there are a handful of us "retreads" who look at each other when we hear some of the things said.

On that note, are all of them that way? My son, a 23 year old son who has a sticker on his truck cap that states, "Ron Paul Was Right," serves in the Air Guard. I am certain he isn't the only one who has a dad like me.

IQ isn't the answer, by the way. I know a lot of people with higher IQs than mine who have little knowledge of the reason for the oath they have taken in the past. We perish for lack of knowledge, not intelligence.


----------



## StarPD45

If the Big O and his Krew pull off a big enough black flag "thing", there is no telling which way people/troops would go.
This is not to demean current or former military, but human nature is a strange thing at times.


----------



## Mike45

I was a soldier for a long time, and I know it only takes one to stand up and say something isn’t right. Its not the individual soldier that would cause the problems, its the generals or the boot lickers that would blindly follow orders. Having said that, I think he has successfully replaced any general that may say no to him. I do not believe the entire military would back a play like that, all it would take is for someone to be told to arrest one of their family and the dissent would start.


----------



## inceptor

Smokin04 said:


> Naw, two weeks isn't enough IMO. My ideal prepping situation would be at least 2 years worth of power, food, fuel, water, etc. The reason I pick 2 years? I figure two things are going to happen after a major LAWKI event occurs. Either society recovers, and I will continue prepping for the next one and replenish lost/consumed prepps; or society doesn't recover and we are on our own for the long haul. I figure I could see the latter coming at about the 18 month mark in which I would break out the long term agriculture and farming supplies. It's a bad realization, and it makes me think that I will never be fully prepared. Prepping can be daunting when you evaluate what you dont have...so I try to keep adding and adding hoping that when i retire from the service, I can take my efforts to full scale.


So you believe in a possible major LAWKI event. I really wasn't sure if you did or not. The way you talk, one would think Katrina was a fluke and the next time something along those lines would happen, the govt will be your friend. The police being polite and helpful, the military doing the same.

I don't disagree with your assessment, I disagree with your faith in humanity.

Now you and prepperlite can have some fun.


----------



## Smokin04

inceptor said:


> So you believe in a possible major LAWKI event. I really wasn't sure if you did or not. The way you talk, one would think Katrina was a fluke and the next time something along those lines would happen, the govt will be your friend. The police being polite and helpful, the military doing the same.
> 
> I don't disagree with your assessment, I disagree with your faith in humanity.
> 
> Now you and prepperlite can have some fun.


atrina was an eye opener for me too. I was pretty upset by some of the events unfolding the way they did. But such a large scale event, what do people expect? The GOV can only do so much to restore order...same with state agencies. Katrina was so bad because when it hit...NOBODY was ready for it. So many people chose to stay behind and ride the storm out.

I have an optimistic outlook on humans...for the most part. The individuality of our nature suggests that no matter what someone does for a living, who they work for, etc...when faced with extreme circumstances, humans are capable of doing extreme things for survival. To save your own life, or the lives of loved ones is what contributes to our human nature.

Then there are the negative ones. The cancers of the species that take advantage of the weak during times of vulnerability. Rapists, murderers, thieves, etc. They are why I carry guns. They are what ruins a positive perception of human nature IMO.

Political views, demagraphics, etc...do not express individualism. They are views shared by many...


----------



## inceptor

Smokin04 said:


> atrina was an eye opener for me too. I was pretty upset by some of the events unfolding the way they did. But such a large scale event, what do people expect? The GOV can only do so much to restore order...same with state agencies. Katrina was so bad because when it hit...NOBODY was ready for it. So many people chose to stay behind and ride the storm out.


I don't expect a whole lot from the govt. Starting at the city level all the way through to the feds, it was a cluster f**k. I'm not talking about that. What I AM talking about is the incompetence that was rampant. I'm talking about an 80 yr old woman being beaten up because she had a handgun for protection. I'm talking about gun confiscation. I'm talking about the Danziger Bridge incident. I'm talking about the authorities looting and pillaging. I could go on. Law and order could have been restored but no attempt was even made to stop the scumbags.



Smokin04 said:


> I have an optimistic outlook on humans...for the most part. The individuality of our nature suggests that no matter what someone does for a living, who they work for, etc...when faced with extreme circumstances, humans are capable of doing extreme things for survival. To save your own life, or the lives of loved ones is what contributes to our human nature.


Here I can agree but I don't think this is the majority.



Smokin04 said:


> Then there are the negative ones. The cancers of the species that take advantage of the weak during times of vulnerability. Rapists, murderers, thieves, etc. They are why I carry guns. They are what ruins a positive perception of human nature IMO.


Here is the majority, like it or not. I truly hope I'm wrong, but I don't think so.



Smokin04 said:


> Political views, demagraphics, etc...do not express individualism. They are views shared by many...


Do you honestly see individualism? There is very little of that going around. Whether in the hood or an upscale neighborhood, most don't want to be seen as individuals, they want to be part of the crowd and will go out of their way to fit in. That's not individualism.


----------



## Charles Martel

Smokin04 said:


> Pretty sure that military members are being called stupid in a few different ways here...


Most of us are sophisticated enough to understand that the military is highly stratified with regards to cognitive ability. The average enlisted man has an IQ of about 100. This places him on par with most service people (waiters, bus drivers, heavy machinery operators, etc.). The average IQ of officers is about 5 points higher than that. Let's be honest, man...until you get into the very upper echelon of military hierarchy (where the average IQ is probably over 120), the military is not known for its "intelligence".

That's not to say that some who make their careers in the military are not indeed very bright. A reasonable number of very smart people use the military (and the GI bill, etc.) as a stepping stone to better things. Old Murph appears to be one of these smart, opportunistic ex-soldiers. It would appear we have several of this type on this board.



Smokin04 said:


> Normally I don't take offense to things, but really guys? If you can read, you can comprehend the Constitution.


I'm fairly certain the guardsmen and LEO's that confiscated firearms in the wake of Hurricane Katrina were perfectly capable of reading and understanding the Bill of Rights and The Constitution. This didn't stop them from violating the civil liberties of hundreds of individuals living in the greater New Orleans area. This didn't stop men, who no doubt considered themselves good and noble in nearly every regard, from from simply obeying orders.

Alfred Lord Tennyson summed up the mindset of most soldiers brilliantly and succinctly when he said "Ours is not to reason why. Ours is but to do and die". You (and those like you) have already demonstrated that this is precisely your mindset. Your overlords tell you to "jump" and you ask them "how high". They tell you to participate in the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan (a sovereign nation that was in no way involved in the 9/11 attacks on our country) and you say "YES, SIR!" Your commanders tell you to engage in the dismantling of an entire country (Iraq) that posed no threat whatsoever to the American homeland and you gladly report for duty. You've clearly never bothered to question the morality of what you do in the name of "duty".

History tells us precisely what YOU will do when your gods, your overlords tell you to violate the civil liberties of your fellow Americans.



Smokin04 said:


> I think the people who haven't had military affiliation in 20+ years, or that folks are completely clueless, are jumping to statements that are beyond the scope of their own comprehension.
> 
> I work with people who's IQ's are well beyond average. This is not meant to offend, but just to say that military members (ESPECIALLY IN THE FACE OF EXTREME CUTS!) today are far more intelligent and capable than previous generations. More with less is the current motto. That will not change any time soon.


If you truly work with individuals with IQ's well above the normal range, then you are absolutely the exception. The average enlisted person's IQ is about three points below the mean for individuals of western/northern European descent. The average IQ of military officers is a couple points higher than the mean. In short, the military is comprised largely of individuals possessing below average to average intelligence (again, for individuals of western and northern European descent).

Motto's mean absolutely nothing. The quality of individuals joining today's military is, in fact, lower than it was even 20 years ago. Only morons, sociopaths or the incredibly desperate sign up to serve in today's military...under this Commander-in-Chief...knowing that they will almost certainly be deployed for extended periods of time to god forsaken and incredibly dangerous places. The military had to lower its standards in 2007 to continue to fill its ranks. If it weren't for a continuing poor economy, the military would truly be scraping the bottom of the barrel for recruits.



Smokin04 said:


> The dissention (and downright ignorance of the current state of mindset in the MILITARY AS A WHOLE...not just some political figure heads) displayed from the members here make me really wonder why I still bother trying to contribute anything here. It's almost downright hatred against the PEOPLE THAT DEFEND your rights to speak in such hurtful ways. Its like that obligation means nothing to you people...or you think the military members are too stupid to even know what the oath means anymore. Really?


What a complete load of shit. You call what you do in places like Iraq and Afghanistan defending OUR rights? What, precisely, did the people of Iraq and Afghanistan do to you, or to me, or to anybody else on this board to justify what people like you have done over there (Of the 19 9/11 hijackers, 15 were from Saudi Arabia, 2 were from the United Arab Emirates, 1 was from Lebanon, and 1 was from Egypt...NONE were from Iraq or Afghanistan)? Surely, you must realize that YOU are no better than the Hessian soldiers that the British used to oppress and brutalize the American Colonies during the Revolutionary war period. Surely you must at least sense that you are a hired gun...a mercenary...a thug doing the bidding of a despotic empire for pay. Don't pretend to do what you do for me, or for any one of us. You weren't drafted like the heroes that fought and died in WW1, WWII, Korea, or Vietnam. You aren't defending my family. Your false moral superiority sickens me.



Smokin04 said:


> You guys make it seem like some random troop will just shoot a random American just because some Colonel said to. To this I say you really to enlist and find out how full of shit your thoughts really are.


None of us claim that what standing armies have done (and continue to do) to their own people is random. Genocide and Democide is ALWAYS incredibly well organized and methodical.



Smokin04 said:


> Evaluate your words before you press enter, will ya?


I would give you the same advice.


----------



## MrsInor

Turtle.


----------



## rice paddy daddy

MrsInor said:


> Turtle.


I'm staying well clear here.
I stand with my Brothers, who seem to have been maligned by both sides in this thread.
Think I'll go get some grits (aka Georgia Ice cream).


----------



## Smitty901

Katrina was an example of what LE is being trained to do in todays world. They will do just as they did and far worst when give an opening.
Katrina was just an excuse.
Our LE officers are not being decked out in combat gear to deal with drug dealers , They don't really do much of that they are being indoctrinated for other uses.


----------



## csi-tech

I was pondering this topic. We had our annual, massive celebration yesterday that literally doubles our population once a year. All of our Officers were given specific assignments and "strategically deployed" to different events. Where I was, there were 500 or so bikers, loud music, a little weed, plenty of alcohol in discreet Solo cups etc. I had spoken to ride captains and vendors at the outset and made it plain what was not acceptable. No reckless driving (wheel stands, burnouts) and keep the liquor and beer in cups (City ordinance). It was all going smoothly...........Until TEAM BADASS showed up. These 5 Officers walked around like they were re-enacting the end of Tombstone. They promptly started running their mouths and stirring the seeds of discontent. I overheard them say things like "Are we just going to tolerate this S#$%?!" and "We need to put an end to this B*&^%$#@ right now!". As I'm sure you could imagine everyone heard this and the tension became palpable. 

Make no mistake about it these types are out there. They have no concept that citizens are granted with certain inalienable rights and a constitutional right to peaceably assemble. (among others) They believe their job, 24/7 is to enforce the law and be "tactical". They don't realize we need to concern ourselves more with the safety of the citizens rather than the intimidation of same. It is much easier to maintain control through cooperation, selective enforcement and high visibility. With a little effort you can actually convince the leaders of the clubs to do your job for you while you mingle and generally goof off.

I have no authority whatsoever, but would that I were Chief. Next year, Team Bad-ass would be assigned to the landfill.


----------



## Rigged for Quiet

rice paddy daddy said:


> I'm staying well clear here.
> I stand with my Brothers, who seem to have been maligned by both sides in this thread.
> Think I'll go get some grits (aka Georgia Ice cream).


Amazing, isn't it?

Guess I'll go do some naval gazing.


----------



## csi-tech

Are you going to stare at ships or belly buttons?


----------



## SARGE7402

rice paddy daddy said:


> Or, how about a small unit being ordered to set up a road block and search vehicles coming through. Heck, cops do that now, why wouldn't soldiers? And if I was a squad leader tasked with this and someone took a shot at my guys, I know what I would do.


No offense RPD but they are doing this every single day of the year around the country. Just look at the gates as you enter a military installation or a national guard facility.

However, I'd like to hope that this current generation is just about as irresponsible as ours was. You probably remember the FTA acronym. And we didn't turn out all that bad did we


----------



## Rigged for Quiet

csi-tech said:


> Are you going to stare at ships or belly buttons?


Noted.


----------



## inceptor

csi-tech said:


> Are you going to stare at ships or belly buttons?


Hint: We are about 500 miles from the coast.


----------



## rice paddy daddy

SARGE7402 said:


> No offense RPD but they are doing this every single day of the year around the country. Just look at the gates as you enter a military installation or a national guard facility.
> 
> However, I'd like to hope that this current generation is just about as irresponsible as ours was. You probably remember the FTA acronym. And we didn't turn out all that bad did we


I had forgotten about FTA and how we chalked it everywhere, our own war's version of Kilroy Was Here.::clapping::


----------



## csi-tech

No help Inceptor. Beaches, bikinis and ships all seem to hang out in the same places. It's why I was a sailor.


----------



## Smokin04

MrsInor said:


> Turtle.





rice paddy daddy said:


> I'm staying well clear here.
> I stand with my Brothers, who seem to have been maligned by both sides in this thread.
> Think I'll go get some grits (aka Georgia Ice cream).


I wouldn't worry too much. I'm not even going to bother responding to Martel. He's clueless about the military (although he thinks he knows all about it) and loves to spout of random, made up statistics. I have no time for people like him.



Smitty901 said:


> Katrina was an example of what LE is being trained to do in todays world. They will do just as they did and far worst when give an opening.
> Katrina was just an excuse.
> Our LE officers are not being decked out in combat gear to deal with drug dealers , They don't really do much of that they are being indoctrinated for other uses.


Indoc'd for what in your opinion? Gear is just gear. I know hunters in my neighborhood that have the same gear as the police. Hell, I have BETTER gear than the local PD. How do you think the gear expresses an intent? I'm asking honestly. It's just PPE.



csi-tech said:


> I was pondering this topic. We had our annual, massive celebration yesterday that literally doubles our population once a year. All of our Officers were given specific assignments and "strategically deployed" to different events. Where I was, there were 500 or so bikers, loud music, a little weed, plenty of alcohol in discreet Solo cups etc. I had spoken to ride captains and vendors at the outset and made it plain what was not acceptable. No reckless driving (wheel stands, burnouts) and keep the liquor and beer in cups (City ordinance). It was all going smoothly...........Until TEAM BADASS showed up. These 5 Officers walked around like they were re-enacting the end of Tombstone. They promptly started running their mouths and stirring the seeds of discontent. I overheard them say things like "Are we just going to tolerate this S#$%?!" and "We need to put an end to this B*&^%$#@ right now!". As I'm sure you could imagine everyone heard this and the tension became palpable.
> 
> Make no mistake about it these types are out there. They have no concept that citizens are granted with certain inalienable rights and a constitutional right to peaceably assemble. (among others) They believe their job, 24/7 is to enforce the law and be "tactical". They don't realize we need to concern ourselves more with the safety of the citizens rather than the intimidation of same. It is much easier to maintain control through cooperation, selective enforcement and high visibility. With a little effort you can actually convince the leaders of the clubs to do your job for you while you mingle and generally goof off.
> 
> I have no authority whatsoever, but would that I were Chief. Next year, Team Bad-ass would be assigned to the landfill.


And you would be right to do so. Cops are only human. But if what you say was true, there is no place at a major event for them to "start shit." This is a bad attitude for a cop to have, and paints a negative picture for police. That "bravado" needs to be available ONLY when the situation calls for it...not in plain view on stand-by. I remember working the riot line during a protest at a prior base. We were sporting full riot gear and equipped accordingly. However, we did not set up or wait where the protesters could see us. We did this to keep the protest peaceful. Once protesters turned it unpeaceful, that's when we responded. We had our own "press" so to speak that recorded the event beginning to end so the regular press couldn't spin anything to make the military look bad. Mission accomplished, nobody hurt, very few people arrested.



SARGE7402 said:


> No offense RPD but they are doing this every single day of the year around the country. Just look at the gates as you enter a military installation or a national guard facility.
> 
> However, I'd like to hope that this current generation is just about as irresponsible as ours was. You probably remember the FTA acronym. And we didn't turn out all that bad did we


100% ID check is there so no "unauthorized people" enter the installation. You have to have a reason to enter a base...gate guards are there to ensure that integrity is maintained. I'm only stating the obvious because I'm not quite sure what you were eluding to.


----------



## Denton

csi-tech said:


> I was pondering this topic. We had our annual, massive celebration yesterday that literally doubles our population once a year. All of our Officers were given specific assignments and "strategically deployed" to different events. Where I was, there were 500 or so bikers, loud music, a little weed, plenty of alcohol in discreet Solo cups etc. I had spoken to ride captains and vendors at the outset and made it plain what was not acceptable. No reckless driving (wheel stands, burnouts) and keep the liquor and beer in cups (City ordinance). It was all going smoothly...........Until TEAM BADASS showed up. These 5 Officers walked around like they were re-enacting the end of Tombstone. They promptly started running their mouths and stirring the seeds of discontent. I overheard them say things like "Are we just going to tolerate this S#$%?!" and "We need to put an end to this B*&^%$#@ right now!". As I'm sure you could imagine everyone heard this and the tension became palpable.
> 
> Make no mistake about it these types are out there. They have no concept that citizens are granted with certain inalienable rights and a constitutional right to peaceably assemble. (among others) They believe their job, 24/7 is to enforce the law and be "tactical". They don't realize we need to concern ourselves more with the safety of the citizens rather than the intimidation of same. It is much easier to maintain control through cooperation, selective enforcement and high visibility. With a little effort you can actually convince the leaders of the clubs to do your job for you while you mingle and generally goof off.
> 
> I have no authority whatsoever, but would that I were Chief. Next year, Team Bad-ass would be assigned to the landfill.


Team Bad-ass. That's funny; I like your assessment.

Sounds like your way of handling things is better.

One of the leads at work is also former C.J. folk. He approached me about the Albuquerque story, yesterday. For some reason, he thought I would be against the protests. He kept pressing the notion that the camper was at fault as he broke the "law" and that law enforcement's job was to uphold the law. After some discussion, he was finally able to contemplate the notion that the founders didn't want a police state where "law enforcement" officers ran around ensuring the citizenry were obeying all things written. I found it remarkable how training seems to trump those things that should be inherently understood by free people, as they were by the founders and our forefathers.

"So, if I witness someone jaywalking, I can't stop him?"

"Is jaywalking a felony?"

"The jaywalker doesn't use a crosswalk but makes it across, there is no injured party. Now, let's assume I jaywalk and a car strikes me. Is there an injured party, and if so, who is it?"

"The jaywalker is the injured party."

(I thought I was making headway until that response, I have to admit.)

"No, the traveler who struck me, as I was committing a misdemeanor. The traveler will write and sign a statement (affidavit), be sworn to it, the judge will issue an arrest warrant, I'll be picked up, charged, found guilty, pay the fine and be obligated to make amends with the injured party."

Here's where I argue with myself, though. Have we foregone the responsibilities that go along with rights and have actually become to reliant upon municipal, state and federal "law enforcement" officers as well as the oppressive, controlling nanny state that we are more like rebellious children than heirs to what our forefathers built?

I mentioned before that we perish for lack of knowledge, but are we really falling into tyranny due to ignoring that knowledge?

What do you, a current member of a police department and someone who makes contact with people in that capacity every day, think?


----------



## rice paddy daddy

It was 1968. I was at Fort Carson, Colorado in a Field Artillery battery.
1968 was a year of riots in over 100 American cities, violent protests, deaths, injuries, cities burning, MLK assasinated, Robert Kennedy assasinated, just all around bad mojo.

The Democratic National Convention was going to be held in Chicago, and major disruptions were planned by The Weather Underground and Students For A Democratic Society (SDS) among other violent groups.
My Battery was one of several units on base that had been mobilized for a quick reaction force. For a few days we were confined to the company area, our rifles (M-14's) had been issued to us from the Arms Room, and we were on stand-by to load up on aircraft and depart for Chicago on a moments notice.

In the end, while Chicago did riot and burn we did not deploy. But units of the 101st Airborne from another base did. They backed up cops and National Guard troops who used water cannons to knock down protestors, tear gas was used, cops busted heads with night sticks. Many casualties were incured. It was very ugly. VERY ugly. Those who don't know about this part of American history should at least go to wikipedia and type in 1968 Democratic National Convention. 
The 1960's was a very turbulent time in our country. Probably the most turbulent times in the history of America. Those acronyms that are thrown about such as SHTF were really happening.

I doubt if it ever occured to any soldiers that to be used to help out in a national emergency would be somehow wrong. After all, it sure seemed like we would be protecting life and property from violent anarchists.
And I do not doubt that any soldier who refused a direct order to saddle up and move out would be sent to the stockade.

Theoretical arguing back and forth between people who have never been out where the rubber meets the road about how they would act in certain situations are really simply academic excersizes. Real life sometimes intrudes.

Just the musings of an old soldier.


----------



## inceptor

rice paddy daddy said:


> It was 1968. I was at Fort Carson, Colorado in a Field Artillery battery.
> 1968 was a year of riots in over 100 American cities, violent protests, deaths, injuries, cities burning, MLK assasinated, Robert Kennedy assasinated, just all around bad mojo.
> 
> The Democratic National Convention was going to be held in Chicago, and major disruptions were planned by The Weather Underground and Students For A Democratic Society (SDS) among other violent groups.
> My Battery was one of several units on base that had been mobilized for a quick reaction force. For a few days we were confined to the company area, our rifles (M-14's) had been issued to us from the Arms Room, and we were on stand-by to load up on aircraft and depart for Chicago on a moments notice.
> 
> In the end, while Chicago did riot and burn we did not deploy. But units of the 101st Airborne from another base did. They backed up cops and National Guard troops who used water cannons to knock down protestors, tear gas was used, cops busted heads with night sticks. Many casualties were incured. It was very ugly. VERY ugly. Those who don't know about this part of American history should at least go to wikipedia and type in 1968 Democratic National Convention.
> The 1960's was a very turbulent time in our country. Probably the most turbulent times in the history of America. Those acronyms that are thrown about such as SHTF were really happening.
> 
> I doubt if it ever occured to any soldiers that to be used to help out in a national emergency would be somehow wrong. After all, it sure seemed like we would be protecting life and property from violent anarchists.
> And I do not doubt that any soldier who refused a direct order to saddle up and move out would be sent to the stockade.
> 
> Theoretical arguing back and forth between people who have never been out where the rubber meets the road about how they would act in certain situations are really simply academic excersizes. Real life sometimes intrudes.
> 
> Just the musings of an old soldier.


Well stated my friend, well stated. ::clapping::

Someday I have stories to tell about that time too. FWIW, I wasn't in Chicago at the time.

I was however at Kent State a year after the shooting. It was still talked about.


----------



## PaulS

Raw recruits will likely follow their leadership. A good, well seasoned Sargent could let them know when orders conflicted with their vows. Officers are used to playing the political games and will likely pass the orders on as they received them - not taking the time to take their oath into consideration - after all it is just another step on the way up.

I could be wrong - and I hope I am - but it will take thinking men and women to decide to follow their vows rather than an unlawful order.


----------



## Montana Rancher

Old SF Guy said:


> So if the SHTF and it comes down to the suspension of posse comitatus and American soldiers are asked or rather directed to conduct actions within the US...where do you think most will land? On the constitutional side where we believe that we have no rights to interfere and most won't..to include the leadership? or will the congressionally appointed generals push for action...and knowledge less soldiers violate our constitution? In the past we have had about an 80/20 split along republican/democratic lines.
> My thoughts are...most senior generals are democratic and will uphold presidential decrees as lawful irrespective of the constitution. However most of the middles NCO leadership are constitution focused folks and will rebel against it. The leadership will quickly intimidate through court marshals and squash independent thought unless the colonels take sides...which they may unless they are politically minded as about 75% are. Lower enlisted and junior officers will be influenced by the most the dominant personalities among them which is very diverse and equally divided among the sects.
> My supposition... 1/3rd will support the Government, 1/3 will sit idle, 1/4 of 1/3 will openly support opposition to the government and 2/3rd of 1/3 will fight amongst itself. At best we can count on 1/12th of the military, How bad is my math? so 1 out of 12 directly fighting 1/3 equals a 4 or 5 to 1 internal battle supporting the people. With logistic control by the greater miltary forces. At best we can hope for state by state declarations...but I don't expect that at all.
> 
> Just thinking outloud.


Bajeasus

I would guess they will protect and defend the constitution, like I swore to do.


----------



## Inor

PaulS said:


> Raw recruits will likely follow their leadership. A good, well seasoned Sargent could let them know when orders conflicted with their vows. Officers are used to playing the political games and will likely pass the orders on as they received them - not taking the time to take their oath into consideration - after all it is just another step on the way up.
> 
> I could be wrong - and I hope I am - but it will take thinking men and women to decide to follow their vows rather than an unlawful order.


No offense intended, but I do not think it is that simple. I think RPD explained it best in his forth paragraph:



rice paddy daddy said:


> I doubt if it ever occured to any soldiers that to be used to help out in a national emergency would be somehow wrong. After all, it sure seemed like we would be protecting life and property from violent anarchists.
> And I do not doubt that any soldier who refused a direct order to saddle up and move out would be sent to the stockade.


It is not a black and white situation. Our military and our public servants are being turned against us in a very slow roiling boil that even they do not understand.

Paul, I am sure you DO wake up every morning and consider how your actions of the day will affect the Constitution. I admire that. But, I do not have the time to consider every action I take in business or in my personal life through that lens. I wish I did. But the simple reality is that I read and study the Constitution when I can and act as best I can in accordance to it. But at the end of the day, my primary responsibility is to feed myself and my wife, make sure I put a few bucks aside for my kids and my grandkid(s) and somehow figure out how to cover the $70K per year that my mom requires for her care. I do not have time to worry about philosophical perfection. If you do, God bless ya.


----------



## Charles Martel

Smokin04 said:


> I wouldn't worry too much. I'm not even going to bother responding to Martel. He's clueless about the military (although he thinks he knows all about it) and loves to spout of random, made up statistics. I have no time for people like him.


I'm clueless about a lot of things, but the military isn't one of them. My father was an AFA bombardier during the Korean War, and my grandfather was a Navy SeaBee that was wounded twice in the Pacific Theatre during WWII. I have several active-duty and retired members of the military (mostly officers, but some enlisted) in my fairly immediate family. My family has a long and proud record of distinguished military service to this country.

You may not like the statistics I shared, but I didn't make them up.

I really don't mean to offend active duty members of the military...and I certainly don't want to offend those who have bravely served our great nation in the past (especially those who were drafted). But, as somebody who has studied both political and military history, I can't help but mistrust and dislike standing armies. I cant help but dislike the fact that our military has become a tool for global empire building, and unwitting pawns for the military/industrial complex. I really don't mean to single you out, you just happen to be the most outspoken in your support for the status quo. I really don't mean for any of this to be personal. I don't think you get the bigger picture, though. I think you are a product of your training and your indoctrination. I think you will view the world much differently when you finally leave the employ of Uncle Sam/Big Brother.


----------



## rice paddy daddy

Charles Martel said:


> I'm clueless about a lot of things, but the military isn't one of them. My father was an AFA bombardier during the Korean War, and my grandfather was a Navy SeaBee that was wounded twice in the Pacific Theatre during WWII. I have several active-duty and retired members of the military (mostly officers, but some enlisted) in my fairly immediate family. My family has a long and proud record of distinguished military service to this country.
> 
> You may not like the statistics I shared, but I didn't make them up.
> 
> I really don't mean to offend active duty members of the military...and I certainly don't want to offend those who have bravely served our great nation in the past (especially those who were drafted). But, as somebody who has studied both political and military history, I can't help but mistrust and dislike standing armies. I cant help but dislike the fact that our military has become a tool for global empire building, and unwitting pawns for the military/industrial complex. I really don't mean to single you out, you just happen to be the most outspoken in your support for the status quo. I really don't mean for any of this to be personal. I don't think you get the bigger picture, though. I think you are a product of your training and your indoctrination. I think you will view the world much differently when you finally leave the employ of Uncle Sam/Big Brother.


While some may distrust and dislike standing armies, without a standing army we would be slaves to another country right now. Another country that did have a standing army. Who? Take your pick.


----------



## remcbride

you guys talk about taking an oath to defend or up hold the constitution, but our present POTUS swore the same oath and look where that's going.. and the public servants we have to day will fight on the side on the UNION that represents them.. when the SHTF the enlisted military will go home.. and ciaos will ensue.. IE the reason for this forum and others like it.. EMFHS


----------



## Charles Martel

rice paddy daddy said:


> While some may distrust and dislike standing armies, without a standing army we would be slaves to another country right now. Another country that did have a standing army. Who? Take your pick.


Not necessarily. History is replete with examples of societies who have preserved their sovereignty with nothing more than a well regulated citizen army. A properly funded, equipped and trained civilian army would be all we ever needed to defend our own borders. It isn't because of the might of our professional armed forces that that foreign invaders have been kept at bay (there have been times in this country's history that our armed forces were incredibly weak)...it's because we have always had an armed populace. I would much rather take my chances with the unlikely possibility of falling to a foreign invader than face the certainty of a despotic government/admnistration turning our standing army against us.

James Madison once said:

"A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty."

He also stated:

"The means of defence against foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people."

The founders were unanimous in their dislike of standing armies for very good reason. Every government WILL, in time, attempt to use its standing army to enslave its people. It's as certain as gravity. Standing armies will always pose a greater threat to a free nation than foreign invaders.


----------



## Smokin04

Charles Martel said:


> I'm clueless about a lot of things, but the military isn't one of them. My father was an AFA bombardier during the Korean War, and my grandfather was a Navy SeaBee that was wounded twice in the Pacific Theatre during WWII. I have several active-duty and retired members of the military (mostly officers, but some enlisted) in my fairly immediate family. My family has a long and proud record of distinguished military service to this country.
> 
> You may not like the statistics I shared, but I didn't make them up.
> 
> I really don't mean to offend active duty members of the military...and I certainly don't want to offend those who have bravely served our great nation in the past (especially those who were drafted). But, as somebody who has studied both political and military history, I can't help but mistrust and dislike standing armies. I cant help but dislike the fact that our military has become a tool for global empire building, and unwitting pawns for the military/industrial complex. I really don't mean to single you out, you just happen to be the most outspoken in your support for the status quo. I really don't mean for any of this to be personal. I don't think you get the bigger picture, though. I think you are a product of your training and your indoctrination. I think you will view the world much differently when you finally leave the employ of Uncle Sam/Big Brother.


I appreciate the neutral response. For that I will respond. I doubt very seriously that my view of standing army will change after my well deserved retirement. Even though massive standing armies have brought ruin to previous civilizations, times have changed. We have no need for massive armies, which is why the military (as a whole) is being downsized by almost 40%. I know the number 40% is accurate because I not only hear it from every commander, chief, snco i run across....but see it in the number of people on my checklist to outprocess. I can assume reasonably that other units are feeling a similar fate. If I feel the need to confirm, I just pick up the phone and ask them.

The only thing that will change once I depart service will be the amount of free time I have and what recreational activities I choose to pursue.



Charles Martel said:


> Not necessarily. History is replete with examples of societies who have preserved their sovereignty with nothing more than a well regulated citizen army. A properly funded, equipped and trained civilian army would be all we ever needed to defend our own borders. It isn't because of the might of our professional armed forces that that foreign invaders have been kept at bay (there have been times in this country's history that our armed forces were incredibly weak)...it's because we have always had an armed populace. I would much rather take my chances with the unlikely possibility of falling to a foreign invader than face the certainty of a despotic government/admnistration turning our standing army against us.
> 
> James Madison once said:
> 
> "A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty."
> 
> He also stated:
> 
> "The means of defence against foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people."
> 
> The founders were unanimous in their dislike of standing armies for very good reason. Every government WILL, in time, attempt to use its standing military to enslave it people. It's as certain as gravity.


You're quoting people from 300 years ago dude. There was still slavery, some believed the earth was flat, and wars were fought with men standing shoulder to shoulder, absorbing bullets. All warfare (and time) has changed. Hell, using today's forces and equipment, we could've beaten Britain (Revolutionary War) with a 3 airplanes and a tank and about 400 troops.

In your first ridiculous post, you say the military has had to scrape the barrel to fill it's ranks. That they need to be a sociopath to even think about enlisting under the current CIC. Your opinion is about a useful as a screen door on a submarine. You do realize that you offend EVERY service member when speaking in such negative connotations about the military. But, since I actually know the entrance requirements for the service right now, I'm curious as to where you get your information from? Just for gee-whiz, the USAF right now isn't even looking at enlisting someone without a degree. You read that right...ENLISTED requiring a DEGREE to ENLIST. No degree, you'll probably be on delayed enlistment for about 3-4 years. With a degree it's still about a 6 month wait. Ask why an Air Force recruiter only works one day a week...they have filled the quota for the next 5 years. We have raised the standard so high that only the BEST candidates make the cut. Don't believe me? Ask around. Even the Army and USMC (previously jested at because their standards for entry were extremely "light") have made entry about 60% tougher. This is a general number as I called my recruiter buddy and posed this very question, and that was his answer.

What I do see is that current and even prior military still know a hell of a lot more about day to day and current military posture and lifestyle than you. Don't even get me started on the complete crap IQ numbers you were citing. Again, what's your source? And no, your Great Uncle on your moms side from WW2 doesn't exactly register as a credible source of CURRENT military affairs.

You have a VERY opinionated and narrow view of the pol/mil world. I can see by previous responses that trying to educate you to actual facts of current military life only sends you further off the deep end. That's why I (in all but this response) refuse to engage in a conversation with you. You have never proven that you're capable of assimilating relevant data and using it to further enhance/alter/solidify your points of view. Instead, you inject factless statistics, and historical references that hold no weight in the current state of world affairs. Funny thing is, I recognize this, and usually go about my business without even worrying about responding to you. But I'm in a good mood today, so I figured what the hell? Maybe today he'll actually listen.

If you're truly worried about the US military coming to enslave you...I hear Canada is always looking for citizens (not meant to offend Canadiens).


----------



## MrsInor

I wouldn't trust a "citizen army" as far as I could spit. Today's "citizen" is generally overweight and glued to the tube. As far as properly trained we are already seeing that in the police force. How many people have been killed lately by police in circumstances that are suspect? 

"A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty." 
So get rid of the overgrown Executive.


----------



## Notsoyoung

When taking the oath to protect the U.S. Constitution I don't remember there being a time limit to the oath....... Something that worries me is the large numbers of senior officers that have been forced out of the military since Obama has taken office. I have heard rumors that the same is being done to senior NCO's, but I don't know have reliable the source is. Unfortunately many citizens really have no idea what is actually in the U.S. Constitution, so I wouldn't count on them even knowing if something is against the Constitution let alone defend it.


----------



## Smitty901

I will do the right thing . That is all I can say it is all I can do. The right thing to do is seldom the popular course of action.


----------



## Charles Martel

Smokin04 said:


> I appreciate the neutral response. For that I will respond. I doubt very seriously that my view of standing army will change after my well deserved retirement. Even though massive standing armies have brought ruin to previous civilizations, times have changed. We have no need for massive armies, which is why the military (as a whole) is being downsized by almost 40%. I know the number 40% is accurate because I not only hear it from every commander, chief, snco i run across....but see it in the number of people on my checklist to outprocess. I can assume reasonably that other units are feeling a similar fate. If I feel the need to confirm, I just pick up the phone and ask them.


Times haven't changed. Only the names have. Technology has obviously advanced, but the principals of liberty, tyranny and human nature remain fixed. They will, in fact, never change.

I'm not sure where you're coming up with that 40% number. I'm seeing estimates in the 6% range...Hagel's proposed cuts will trim the Army from about 522,000 to 499,000. With regards to budgetary cuts, I'm seeing numbers that amount to less than 10% of the total military budget. Even with these cuts, the US will spend 522 Billion dollars (more than China, Russia, and the entire UK combined).

Pentagon Set to Slash Military to Pre-World War II Levels - NBC News

Our military is still very much the 800 pound gorilla.



Smokin04 said:


> The only thing that will change once I depart service will be the amount of free time I have and what recreational activities I choose to pursue.


This remains to be seen. Every retired military person I have ever known has changed dramatically after leaving the service. They readily admit that their intellectual, social and emotional development was in a state of suspended animation while they were in the military. They describe leaving the military and experiencing an "awakening".



Smokin04 said:


> You're quoting people from 300 years ago dude.


Actually, it's been less than 250 years...and the words of the founders are just as relevant today as they were the day they were uttered. They were incredible students of history, tyranny, the enlightenment, and human nature. They were enlightened in a way that very, very few men currently are. That you seem so eager to dismiss the wisdom of the founders tells me about all I care to know about your position.



Smokin04 said:


> There was still slavery


Slavery is STILL a reality for an unacceptable number of people living on this planet. Big brother is attempting to make us ALL slaves. He would use people like you (members of a standing army loyal to the federal government) to see that this happens.



Smokin04 said:


> some believed the earth was flat


Almost nobody believed the world was flat by the late 1700's. Mankind has been circumnavigating the globe since 1522. Oceanic trade routes stretching from one end of the planet to the other had been established for better than two centuries by the time the American Revolution began to unfold in the 1770's. I find the fact that you don't know this incredibly basic stuff very alarming.



Smokin04 said:


> and wars were fought with men standing shoulder to shoulder, absorbing bullets.


Further proof that military men aren't the sharpest tools in the shed. Civilian soldiers didn't stand in open fields exchanging musket and canon volleys with the red coats. They fired from cover...from behind stone walls, trees, etc. They targeted officers and attacked columns of troops when they were most vulnerable. In short, they revolutionized warfare and beat the best equipped and trained conventional army in the world.



Smokin04 said:


> All warfare (and time) has changed. Hell, using today's forces and equipment, we could've beaten Britain (Revolutionary War) with a 3 airplanes and a tank and about 400 troops.


I have no idea what point you're trying to make. Technology has changed, but human nature hasn't.



Smokin04 said:


> In your first ridiculous post, you say the military has had to scrape the barrel to fill it's ranks. That they need to be a sociopath to even think about enlisting under the current CIC. Your opinion is about a useful as a screen door on a submarine. You do realize that you offend EVERY service member when speaking in such negative connotations about the military.


I don't care who I offend if I think what I say has a chance to wakes people up to a very dangerous truth. And make no mistake...what I sad is true.

I didn't mean to disparage those who have served in our military decades past. Especially those who were drafted. They were unwilling soldiers. They weren't spoiling for a fight...they were compelled to fight. I respect them far more than I respect today's brand of soldier (who amounts to little more than paid mercenaries serving the globalist empire). The attitudes of yesterday's GI's and today's professional soldiers could not be more different. If you had asked my father, or my grandfather, whom they served they would have had no hesitation saying that they served the people of the United States. Most of them considered themselves citizens...not warriors.



Smokin04 said:


> since I actually know the entrance requirements for the service right now, I'm curious as to where you get your information from? Just for gee-whiz, the USAF right now isn't even looking at enlisting someone without a degree. You read that right...ENLISTED requiring a DEGREE to ENLIST. No degree, you'll probably be on delayed enlistment for about 3-4 years.


Bullshit.

Per the Airforce website.

*Do I need college credits to join?*

If you are applying for a commission (as an Air Force officer) you must have a four-year degree as a minimum. No college is required for enlistment. However, you may be qualified for advanced rank with 20 or more semester hours of credit from a degree granting college or university.



Smokin04 said:


> With a degree it's still about a 6 month wait. Ask why an Air Force recruiter only works one day a week...they have filled the quota for the next 5 years. We have raised the standard so high that only the BEST candidates make the cut. Don't believe me? Ask around. Even the Army and USMC (previously jested at because their standards for entry were extremely "light") have made entry about 60% tougher. This is a general number as I called my recruiter buddy and posed this very question, and that was his answer.


Again...bullshit.

From the Air Force Website:

*Can I enlist with a GED?*

The answer is yes. However, there are many additional criteria for enlisting with a GED as opposed to enlisting with a traditional High School diploma.

These are:

•You must obtain a 65 qualifying score on the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB).
•Under normal circumstances, 1% of our enlisted force accessions are GED holders during a one-year period.
•If you are a GED holder, you can gain the same eligibility as a high school graduate by obtaining 15 or more semester hours of qualifying college credit.
•GED applicants must wait on slots to become available, and this can sometimes mean waiting periods of up to one year.
•You must be at least 18 years of age.

For more information on this subject, you can chat with one of our online advisers or click here to contact us and get in touch with your local recruiter.

Dude...quit blowing smoke. I personally know a kid that got into the Air Force about a year ago with a GED.



Smokin04 said:


> What I do see is that current and even prior military still know a hell of a lot more about day to day and current military posture and lifestyle than you. Don't even get me started on the complete crap IQ numbers you were citing.


Here's a quick and dirty link. The DOD doesn't actively record the IQ of new recruits. This is the best data out there.

What is the average IQ of American enlisted soldiers

I've seen studies that placed the average IQ's of enlisted personnel around 105.

Steve Sailer: iSteve: Average IQ of enlisted men

Even if enlisted soldiers have an average IQ of 105 (I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt...I've seen studies that place enlisted IQ's as low as 98), that still places soldiers quite a ways down the list of professions by IQ. Physicians, Physicists, Natural scientists, college professors, Corporate Officers, etc. average well into the 120's, and range into the 200's. At 105, soldiers rank well below professions like elementary school teachers.

I know it hurts your feelings, but, it's the simple truth. Enlisted servicemen are not, and never have been, among the brightest. People with IQ's of 100 to 105 enlist in the military because they do not have the cognitive abilities to pursue undergraduate or advanced degrees in the sciences, engineering, or medical fields. It really is that simple. No society uses its best and brightest as cannon fodder.



Smokin04 said:


> Again, what's your source? And no, your Great Uncle on your moms side from WW2 doesn't exactly register as a credible source of CURRENT military affairs.
> 
> You have a VERY opinionated and narrow view of the pol/mil world. I can see by previous responses that trying to educate you to actual facts of current military life only sends you further off the deep end. That's why I (in all but this response) refuse to engage in a conversation with you. You have never proven that you're capable of assimilating relevant data and using it to further enhance/alter/solidify your points of view. Instead, you inject factless statistics, and historical references that hold no weight in the current state of world affairs. Funny thing is, I recognize this, and usually go about my business without even worrying about responding to you. But I'm in a good mood today, so I figured what the hell? Maybe today he'll actually listen.
> 
> If you're truly worried about the US military coming to enslave you...I hear Canada is always looking for citizens.


I'm not even going to dignify this with a reply. I'm the only one in this conversation that has injected anything even resembling a relevant fact or statistic.


----------



## rice paddy daddy

Deleted.
It is just worth my time to interact with someone who is so full of himself.

have a nice day, bucko.


----------



## Smokin04

rice paddy daddy said:


> Deleted.
> It is just worth my time to interact with someone who is so full of himself.
> 
> have a nice day, bucko.


Agreed. I gave him one response. Martel is hopeless, and clueless...and once again proven he's not worth responding to.


----------



## Smitty901

Can I enlist with a GED? That and many other requirements change from time to time. GED's have been an on again off again thing.
Try promoting to E-8 and above even in the infantry today with out some college behind you ,good luck.
Our Military is being transformed fast right now and few even notice it.


----------



## Smokin04

Smitty901 said:


> Can I enlist with a GED? That and many other requirements change from time to time. GED's have been an on again off again thing.
> Try promoting to E-8 and above even in the infantry today with out some college behind you ,good luck.
> Our Military is being transformed fast right now and few even notice it.


True statement. I can't make E-7 next year without a degree. How bout them apples? You can try to enlist all you want in today's military...on paper the requirements are simple. They do that on purpose to keep kids coming in the doors. When you ACTUALLY try though, kids are in for a rude awakening. You don't just walk into the military anymore. Some people just don't get it though. They believe everything they read on the web to be fact. They refuse to listen to the people that are actually in the position doing it every day.


----------



## rice paddy daddy

This is for those here who understand. Of course, there may be one or two who never will.
No, you don't have to be military to get it, either.
Enjoy!

The Greatest Family I Ever Had | Military.com


----------



## pharmer14

Seneca said:


> First off the constitution will be marginalized.


Will be??? We're there brother...

I'd say we started marginalizing the constitution with the Dred Scott SCOTUS decision in 1857... maybe before...


----------



## MrsInor

RPD - nice video. Thanks


----------



## rice paddy daddy

MrsInor said:


> RPD - nice video. Thanks


You are welcome, ma'am.
If we had a "saluting" icon here I would render a salute to you.

I like to spend time over there at military.com/shock and awe (that's the video section). It reminds me that while it's OK to dream I still need to keep my feet on the ground. A lesson in humbleness, if you will.
I wouldn't take a million dollars for my experience.


----------



## Inor

rice paddy daddy said:


> You are welcome, ma'am.
> If we had a "saluting" icon here I would render a salute to you.
> 
> I like to spend time over there at military.com/shock and awe (that's the video section). It reminds me that while it's OK to dream I still need to keep my feet on the ground. A lesson in humbleness, if you will.
> I wouldn't take a million dollars for my experience.


You are one of those very rare people that come along one guy every few generations. Thank-you for spending some time with us, my friend!


----------



## inceptor

rice paddy daddy said:


> You are welcome, ma'am.
> If we had a "saluting" icon here I would render a salute to you.
> 
> I like to spend time over there at military.com/shock and awe (that's the video section). It reminds me that while it's OK to dream I still need to keep my feet on the ground. A lesson in humbleness, if you will.
> *I wouldn't take a million dollars for my experience.*


Over the years I have revisited things and sometimes I did the what if....... I came the the realization we are what we are by the sum of our experiences. We have each had a tough row to hoe and each one is different. It's what we do or did with it that makes us who we are.

You have shared certain things over time. It's what you've been through and what you've become that I respect. Here I too would use a salute icon if available.



Inor said:


> You are one of those very rare people that come along one guy every few generations. Thank-you for spending some time with us, my friend!


Amen, my friend. Amen. ::clapping::


----------



## Notsoyoung

Smokin04 said:


> Agreed. I gave him one response. Martel is hopeless, and clueless...and once again proven he's not worth responding to.


What Smokin said.


----------



## Charles Martel

Smokin04 said:


> Agreed. I gave him one response. Martel is hopeless, and clueless...and once again proven he's not worth responding to.


You state that I'm clueless without any basis whatsoever. I provided links and quotes supporting my claims about the military. You post worthless hyperbole.

In an attempt to return to the original topic (and to civility)...history has shown us that military personnel will not hesitate to follow unethical orders. Military and police have been the hammer and the anvil of genocide and democide since the dawn of civilization. This hasn't changed. Our military is no different than any other.

Our society blames men like Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, and Mao for the deaths of hundreds of millions of people in he 20th century, but they killed very few people themselves. The blood of the masses is scarlet on the hands of the military and the police who willingly did the unspeakable to their fellow human beings. The great monsters of history would have been toothless without millions of automatons willing to do their bidding.

As a survivalist, I will continue to avoid military and police personnel at nearly all costs. It won't be your neighbor, or a group of illegal immigrants, or local militia raiders that kick in your door post SHTF. History tells us it will almost certainly be the police and/or the military.


----------



## ordnance21xx

I support and defend the constitution against all enemies...foreign and domestic....so help me God. However, the current regime ( I didn't vote for) is not supporting and defending the constitution of the USA. They are also taking away States and peoples rights. There is a problem with them. 


MOLON LABE


----------



## Charles Martel

ordnance21xx said:


> I support and defend the constitution against all enemies...foreign and domestic....so help me God. However, the current regime ( I didn't vote for) is not supporting and defending the constitution of the USA. They are also taking away States and peoples rights. There is a problem with them.
> 
> MOLON LABE


It's soldiers like you that give me hope.


----------



## Denton

You people are killing me.

What, do you think obtaining a degree makes a person "smart?" Really?!? In that case, the smartest, most patriotic people in this country are the ones who are filling our kids' heads full of manure are the professors. 

Some of the insane notions floated in this thread are due to some people's current or former profession being scrutinized. In romantic defense of the profession, a break from reality has been made, and anyone who attempts to push through that break is either ignored or mauled. Great discussion.

I do not hate the serviceman. Why would I? I am not a self-loather. That doesn't mean I am blind, either. 

Young people just out of school are sought out because they are easier to train and brainwash. All who have been in the military knows this.

Although we all took an oath, we all know that most didn't understand what it meant, as none of us had any decent teaching of it. We all know this.

We also know that the military is a community all its own, and that anyone who wants to achieve the next rank has to concentrate on his profession. This concentration doesn't make the professional any more knowledgeable of the true meaning behind the oath. Such things are not taught in primary leadership course, advanced leadership course, senior NCO academy, or in the college courses necessary to compete against other soldiers for the next stripe. This being the case, there is little reason to believe the E-6 is less inclined to enforce the same orders he would have been expected to blindly follow when he was an E-1.

I haven't read one post that suggested the soldier was evil, but I have read many that glorified the soldier beyond reality.

Oh, and those of you who believe all it will take is one soldier to stand against tyranny to cause others to step forward, too, need to remember that medic who refused to put on the U.N. helmet and insignia. He stood alone.

Now, flame me or put me on ignore; I do not care, but I suggest you good folks stop being so defensive and contemplate my points while adding in a good dose of history.


----------



## Charles Martel

Denton said:


> You people are killing me.
> 
> What, do you think obtaining a degree makes a person "smart?" Really?!? In that case, the smartest, most patriotic people in this country are the ones who are filling our kids' heads full of manure are the professors.
> 
> Some of the insane notions floated in this thread are due to some people's current or former profession being scrutinized. In romantic defense of the profession, a break from reality has been made, and anyone who attempts to push through that break is either ignored or mauled. Great discussion.
> 
> I do not hate the serviceman. Why would I? I am not a self-loather. That doesn't mean I am blind, either.
> 
> Young people just out of school are sought out because they are easier to train and brainwash. All who have been in the military knows this.
> 
> Although we all took an oath, we all know that most didn't understand what it meant, as none of us had any decent teaching of it. We all know this.
> 
> We also know that the military is a community all its own, and that anyone who wants to achieve the next rank has to concentrate on his profession. This concentration doesn't make the professional any more knowledgeable of the true meaning behind the oath. Such things are not taught in primary leadership course, advanced leadership course, senior NCO academy, or in the college courses necessary to compete against other soldiers for the next stripe. This being the case, there is little reason to believe the E-6 is less inclined to enforce the same orders he would have been expected to blindly follow when he was an E-1.
> 
> I haven't read one post that suggested the soldier was evil, but I have read many that glorified the soldier beyond reality.
> 
> Oh, and those of you who believe all it will take is one soldier to stand against tyranny to cause others to step forward, too, need to remember that medic who refused to put on the U.N. helmet and insignia. He stood alone.
> 
> Now, flame me or put me on ignore; I do not care, but I suggest you good folks stop being so defensive and contemplate my points while adding in a good dose of history.


Great points. I always enjoy reading your contributions. You possess an unusual and refreshing objectivity regarding all things military.

I recall reading a quote by Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler stating that "his own mental faculties were in a state of suspended animation" until he left the service. I have had friends and relatives say nearly the same thing after retiring from military service. Did you experience something of an awakening when you left the military, or did it happen while you were still serving? Or, were you just resistant to the brainwashing to begin with?

I'm always very curious how anomalies like you happen. You are truly exceptional.


----------



## Denton

Charles Martel said:


> Great points. I always enjoy reading your contributions. You possess an unusual and refreshing objectivity regarding all things military.
> 
> I recall reading a quote by Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler stating that "his own mental faculties were in a state of suspended animation" until he left the service. I have had friends and relatives say nearly the same thing after retiring from military service. Did you experience something of an awakening when you left the military, or did it happen while you were still serving? Or, were you just resistant to the brainwashing to begin with?
> 
> I'm always very curious how anomalies like you happen. You are truly exceptional.


Thanks, but I am not exceptional.

The general is right in that your "mental faculties" are in a suspended, in a sense. Your concern is the military, your career in it, and the missions placed before you. Your days are quite full with achieving all the goals laid before you, and a lot of your off time is spent with the people who are doing the same things you are.

The military is not a 9 to 5 job, and mental conditioning for the missions are as much a part of life as is the physical conditioning. Part of the conditioning is responding to commands with swift obedience is a part of the conditioning, getting the job done and thinking about it later is necessary. Soldiers are trained from their first day to behave in such a manner. Training is tough and continuous. Sure, some soldiers might resist training that has become second nature, but I do not expect most birds to swim under water to catch fish.

There is a reason suicide within the ranks is going through the roof. Pray for them, and pray hard. They are pawns, and they are sacrificed at every turn, for whatever the reason.


----------



## Charles Martel

Denton said:


> Thanks, but I am not exceptional.


I respectfully disagree. The only other person I've ever known who has thrown off military conditioning like you have is an extremely high IQ individual who has gone on to do incredible things since leaving the service. I suspect you will do the same.



Denton said:


> The general is right in that your "mental faculties" are in a suspended, in a sense. Your concern is the military, your career in it, and the missions placed before you. Your days are quite full with achieving all the goals laid before you, and a lot of your off time is spent with the people who are doing the same things you are.
> 
> The military is not a 9 to 5 job, and mental conditioning for the missions are as much a part of life as is the physical conditioning. Part of the conditioning is responding to commands with swift obedience is a part of the conditioning, getting the job done and thinking about it later is necessary. Soldiers are trained from their first day to behave in such a manner. Training is tough and continuous. Sure, some soldiers might resist training that has become second nature, but I do not expect most birds to swim under water to catch fish.


A bird that swims underwater to catch fish...like I said...you are unusual.



Denton said:


> There is a reason suicide within the ranks is going through the roof. Pray for them, and pray hard. They are pawns, and they are sacrificed at every turn, for whatever the reason.


It's true...they are pawns. They have absolutely been thrown like sheep on the alter to be sacrificed. I wish they could understand this as you do. They have no comprehension that their overlords, those who make decisions that put them into harms way, care nothing for them.

On this subject, I found an interesting little documentary a few months ago that I think should be mandatory viewing for any individual considering risking their lives in any branch of the armed forces.






It goes into some detail regarding the true causes of most of the wars America has ever been involved in.

Coincidentally, it delves into the Smedley Butler affair (the planned military coup-d'état by global corporate/banking fascists to overthrow the U.S. Government). If you want to skip to this part, start viewing at about 19:00.


----------



## PaulS

The average IQ in the USA is between 98 and 100 on a scale from 10 to 150. IQ has nothing to do with education other than people with higher IQs learn more readily than those with lower IQs.

My IQ would be the same as a high school drop out as it is with a couple of degrees. I learn fairly easily even at 63 due in most part to having an IQ of 146.5. (aggregate score of four tests in the last year. The Mensa test is open ended and the 150 is equal to 200 on the Mensa scoring - mine was 197)

Problem solvers usually have high IQs and are more often less educated than others. Service professionals typically have lower IQs but more education.

"IQ" stands for Intelligence Quotient. That, simply translated, means ability to learn but the tests deal with spacial visualization and logic problems as well as memory, math and visual acuity. The tests provided in the USA are slanted toward English speaking people with a good grasp of the language.

A person can score "off the charts" in any one area and have a low IQ overall - typical of savants. If you can read and write English you can't score much below 60 on an IQ test. With a 98 as an average IQ it does explain why commercials and owners manuals are written for a third grade level of education in this country.


----------



## Charles Martel

PaulS said:


> The average IQ in the USA is between 98 and 100 on a scale from 10 to 150. IQ has nothing to do with education other than people with higher IQs learn more readily than those with lower IQs.
> 
> My IQ would be the same as a high school drop out as it is with a couple of degrees. I learn fairly easily even at 63 due in most part to having an IQ of 146.5. (aggregate score of four tests in the last year. The Mensa test is open ended and the 150 is equal to 200 on the Mensa scoring - mine was 197)
> 
> Problem solvers usually have high IQs and are more often less educated than others. Service professionals typically have lower IQs but more education.
> 
> "IQ" stands for Intelligence Quotient. That, simply translated, means ability to learn but the tests deal with spacial visualization and logic problems as well as memory, math and visual acuity. The tests provided in the USA are slanted toward English speaking people with a good grasp of the language.
> 
> A person can score "off the charts" in any one area and have a low IQ overall - typical of savants. If you can read and write English you can't score much below 60 on an IQ test. With a 98 as an average IQ it does explain why commercials and owners manuals are written for a third grade level of education in this country.


IQ is a very interesting thing. True intelligence appears to be a complex synthesis of the abilities measured by standardized IQ tests and a number of other less easily quantifiable factors (creativity, intellectual curiosity, etc.).

As you mentioned, high IQ people excel at learning. Naturally, formal schooling is much easier for high IQ people than it is for those of average intelligence. This is why the more intellectually rigorous fields are dominated by high IQ individuals. People of average IQ simply cannot assimilate difficult and complex coursework quickly enough to keep up. I saw many hard working (but less intellectually gifted) people wash out of my Geology undergraduate program. Less than half of those who started with us finished.

And you are correct, IQ is largely inherited. Recent studies show that education and cognitive training can boost one's IQ modestly, but you are essentially born into an IQ range.


----------



## James m

When I used to take iq tests I would score lower because I didn't know what to do with the number sequences. Now I know or I think I do. I just had to dig up an online test. First one was 110 and the second was 140.
As for an iq tests usefulness? It must be useful to determine what you can learn and how fast. But I think its more important what you know. Or the knowledge stored in your brain?

What was this thread about again? 
I had a navy guy tell me recruitment is more about how many people they need. I know they called me right before iraq. I had alot of friends go in right before 9/11. One I knew is still but is a contract for tobyhanna army depot. Another retired early from the same place. I remember seeing a job on a board. It was for common sensor? Is it called guardrail common sensor? It was beyond my qualifications but won't be by the end of next may. 
I don't think anyone is calling soldiers dumb or questioning intelligence. That is my feeling.
I think they are more likely to follow orders or risk themselves. I think it more likely for people to be portrayed as a common enemy. This is probably a bad example but middle eastern people. The difference between a person who has committed a crime and a person who owns a convenience store. Would you be more likely to suspect someone who is arab? Its about perception.


----------



## Smitty901

John Kerry made it clear anyone that joins the military is uneducated. And The DHS said we were the biggest threat to America.
For an Un educated low life with on other options Some how I manage to come out in pretty good shape
You would be shocked at how many Soldiers today have advanced education in many fields. Try promoting to E7 and above without some additional education .
I did not stay in The Army because I had no options , I had plenty. I stayed because I was able to go place most never heard of.
I lived life on the edge and loved most of it. When they put what is left of me in the ground one thing it will not say on my stone is that I had a boring life. 
From where I sit now "Been there done that takes on a whole new meaning".


----------



## Inor

Smitty901 said:


> John Kerry made it clear anyone that joins the military is uneducated. And The DH said we were the biggest threat to America.
> For an Un educated low life with on other options Some how I manage to come out in pretty good shape


I know nothing about your education, but I know for a fact that you are no "low life".

I have no idea, nor do I care, what my IQ is. I do not think I have ever taken an IQ test. Maybe in school, but I do not remember it. As far as I am concerned standardized testing is just another way to put my life into some kind of box. I don't "do" boxes.


----------



## James m

A lot of things in life I feel is just a hoop you have to jump through. Like school.
I feel you can learn useful things anywhere. Its good to have knowledge.


----------



## csi-tech

I joined the Navy when I was 17. I was raised in Memphis in a low-income working class neighborhood. I was mediocre (at best) in school and was born with a spork in my mouth. I couldn't afford college and the only way out of that doomed town was the military for someone like me. I have no idea what my IQ is but I suspect it is relatively high. I seem to have a penchant for remembering the trivial and mundane. I am, however, given over to a sense of "ignorance is bliss". If we were cannon fodder, grist for the mill or lambs to the slaughter I just felt it was my duty. I enjoyed launching and recovering aircraft on the flight deck and had a ball (except in Beirut). Most of the military men and women I meet these days are bright, engaging and thoughtful folks. I thank God every day for them.


----------



## Deebo

csi-tech said:


> I joined the Navy when I was 17. I was raised in Memphis in a low-income working class neighborhood. I was mediocre (at best) in school and was born with a spork in my mouth. I couldn't afford college and the only way out of that doomed town was the military for someone like me. I have no idea what my IQ is but I suspect it is relatively high. I seem to have a penchant for remembering the trivial and mundane. I am, however, given over to a sense of "ignorance is bliss". If we were cannon fodder, grist for the mill or lambs to the slaughter I just felt it was my duty. I enjoyed launching and recovering aircraft on the flight deck and had a ball (except in Beirut). Most of the military men and women I meet these days are bright, engaging and thoughtful folks. I thank God every day for them.


I may be speaking out of line here, but csi-tech, I commend you, judging by your posts and my limited knowledge of you, you are just old enough to remember "the little rock 9", and you lived in Memphis, so just making it out of there is a big step. 
My dad also was Navy. I never spoke with him of "following orders". He would have his "moods", and when he was talkative, would tell me some of the funny things.
I just wanna say, THANKS to ALL you that served.


----------



## rice paddy daddy

God and the Soldier, we adore,
In time of danger, not before.
The danger passed and all things righted,
God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted.

Kipling


----------



## inceptor

rice paddy daddy said:


> God and the Soldier, we adore,
> In time of danger, not before.
> The danger passed and all things righted,
> God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted.
> 
> Kipling


Ain't it the truth.


----------



## rice paddy daddy

Bury Me With Soldiers

I've played a lot of roles in life;
I've met a lot of men.
I've done some things I'd like to think
I wouldn't do again.

And though I'm young, I'm old enough
To know that someday I will die,
And think about what lies beyond,
Beside whom I would lie.

Perhaps it doesn't matter much;
Still, if I had my choice,
I'd want a grave amongst soldiers when
At last death quells my voice.

I'm sick of the hypocrisy
Of lectures by the wise.
I'll take the man, with all his flaws,
Who goes, though scared, and dies.

The troops I know were commonplace:
They didn't want the war;
They fought because their fathers had and
Their fathers had before.

They cursed and killed and wept God knows
They're easy to deride,
But bury me with men like these;
They faced the guns and died.

It's funny, when you think of it,
The way we got along.
We'd come from different worlds
To live in one where no one belongs.

I didn't even like them all;
I'm sure they'd all agree.
Yet I would give my life for them,
I hope; some did for me.

So bury me with soldiers, please,
Though much maligned they be.
Yes, bury me with soldiers, for
I miss their company.

We'll not soon see their like again;
We've had our fill of war.
But bury me with men like them
Till someone else does more.


Rev. Charles R. Fink
(Former Sgt in the 199th Light Infantry Brigade, Vietnam 3/69-3/70)


----------



## Moonshinedave

Old SF Guy said:


> So if the SHTF and it comes down to the suspension of posse comitatus and American soldiers are asked or rather directed to conduct actions within the US...where do you think most will land? On the constitutional side where we believe that we have no rights to interfere and most won't..to include the leadership? or will the congressionally appointed generals push for action...and knowledge less soldiers violate our constitution? In the past we have had about an 80/20 split along republican/democratic lines.
> My thoughts are...most senior generals are democratic and will uphold presidential decrees as lawful irrespective of the constitution. However most of the middles NCO leadership are constitution focused folks and will rebel against it. The leadership will quickly intimidate through court marshals and squash independent thought unless the colonels take sides...which they may unless they are politically minded as about 75% are. Lower enlisted and junior officers will be influenced by the most the dominant personalities among them which is very diverse and equally divided among the sects.
> My supposition... 1/3rd will support the Government, 1/3 will sit idle, 1/4 of 1/3 will openly support opposition to the government and 2/3rd of 1/3 will fight amongst itself. At best we can count on 1/12th of the military, How bad is my math? so 1 out of 12 directly fighting 1/3 equals a 4 or 5 to 1 internal battle supporting the people. With logistic control by the greater miltary forces. At best we can hope for state by state declarations...but I don't expect that at all.
> 
> Just thinking outloud.


Thanks for such a well thought out post. Two main things concern me if the people ever have to take up arms against our government (heaven forbid) One, which you have already written of, is what will the military do? If the military holds together as a unit, then things will be very bleak to say the least. Second, is what will the masses do? Will everyone take up arms at the same time?, or because the government owns the media, will it be only small pockets of resistance at a time? Sheer numbers would seem to be our only advantage. Third, (I know I only said two, but I thought of another one) what will Russia or China (or perhaps some other country) do? I am not so sure they wouldn't make a move if they see major civil unrest in the US. I hope we never have to find out the answers to these questions, hopefully, we can vote these socialistic jerks from office, and move back towards the real United States.


----------



## jimb1972

I think the breakdown of where the military would stand would depend a great deal on where the soldiers are from eg. TX vs. New Yawkers or Bostonians. I do not know if China or Russia would try to intervene at all since a weaker and less free United States would be in their interest, possibly if it looked like the constitutionalists were winning.


----------



## Charles Martel

rice paddy daddy said:


> Bury Me With Soldiers
> 
> I've played a lot of roles in life;
> I've met a lot of men.
> I've done some things I'd like to think
> I wouldn't do again.
> 
> And though I'm young, I'm old enough
> To know that someday I will die,
> And think about what lies beyond,
> Beside whom I would lie.
> 
> Perhaps it doesn't matter much;
> Still, if I had my choice,
> I'd want a grave amongst soldiers when
> At last death quells my voice.
> 
> I'm sick of the hypocrisy
> Of lectures by the wise.
> I'll take the man, with all his flaws,
> Who goes, though scared, and dies.
> 
> The troops I know were commonplace:
> They didn't want the war;
> They fought because their fathers had and
> Their fathers had before.
> 
> They cursed and killed and wept God knows
> They're easy to deride,
> But bury me with men like these;
> They faced the guns and died.
> 
> It's funny, when you think of it,
> The way we got along.
> We'd come from different worlds
> To live in one where no one belongs.
> 
> I didn't even like them all;
> I'm sure they'd all agree.
> Yet I would give my life for them,
> I hope; some did for me.
> 
> So bury me with soldiers, please,
> Though much maligned they be.
> Yes, bury me with soldiers, for
> I miss their company.
> 
> We'll not soon see their like again;
> We've had our fill of war.
> But bury me with men like them
> Till someone else does more.
> 
> Rev. Charles R. Fink
> (Former Sgt in the 199th Light Infantry Brigade, Vietnam 3/69-3/70)


Very moving.

Obviously, all the flowery language in the world won't prevent U.S. military personnel from confiscating firearms, or even firing on American citizens if ordered to do so, though. Despite such stirring propaganda...despite attempts to glamourize and glorify them...military and police personnel murdered literally hundreds of millions of non-combatants during the 20th Century. We'd all do well to remember this.


----------



## Inor

I am thinking this thread has run its course.


----------



## Moonshinedave

jimb1972 said:


> I think the breakdown of where the military would stand would depend a great deal on where the soldiers are from eg. TX vs. New Yawkers or Bostonians. I do not know if China or Russia would try to intervene at all since a weaker and less free United States would be in their interest, possibly if it looked like the constitutionalists were winning.


Intervene, wasn't the word I was thinking of, more like occupy.


----------



## rice paddy daddy

Inor said:


> I am thinking this thread has run its course.


Awww, gee, Inor! You're no fun!
I was going to quote Shakespeare next. As in Henry V, Act IV, Scene iii. :-D
Because, as you know, soldiers have a low IQ and wouldn't understand The Bard.


----------



## Smokin04

Trust in me my friend, for I am your comrade. 
I will protect you with my last breath 
when all others have left you. 
The loneliness of night closes in, 
I will be at your side. 
Together we will conquer 
all obstacles and search out 
those who might harm others. 
All I ask of you is compassion 
and the caring touch of your hands. 
It is for you that I will unselfishly give my life. 
Although our days together may be 
marked by the passing of seasons, 
I know that each day at your side is my reward. 
My days are measured by your footsteps. 
I anticipate at every opening of the door. 
You are the voice of caring when I am ill. 
The voice of authority when I am wrong. 
Together we shall experience a bond 
only others like us will understand. 
Outsiders see us with envy. 
I will quietly listen and pass no judgment, 
nor repeat your spoken word. 
I will remain silent and ever loyal. 
When our time is done, you move on in the world. 
Remember me with kindness and that nothing 
passed among us undetected. 
If we should meet again on another street, 
I will gladly take up your fight. 
I am a Police Working Dog. 
We are the guardians of the night. 
(Author Unknown)

And one for the K9 guys in the house...Had to Denton.


----------



## Denton

I preferred the tear-jerking poetry of the shirt I bought at dog school, Smokin...

"U.S. Army K-9 Corps. Talk ####, Get Bit."

Moving words! Huh? :lol:


----------



## Smitty901

It will not be long a most of the US military will be made up of groups with a political agenda.
Gays ,Trans and illegals. They are not there to serve they are there to take over. Look at how it is being transformed already.


----------



## Smokin04

Smitty901 said:


> It will not be long a most of the US military will be made up of groups with a political agenda.
> Gays ,Trans and illegals. They are not there to serve they are there to take over. Look at how it is being transformed already.


Honestly brother, since "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" has been repealed...there has been no change in anything. It had zero affect in the ranks...at least at every place I've been to. I don't know if that was what you were referring to...


----------



## Smitty901

Clearly some of us are speaking with different people on what is going on. I know a lot of current members bailing out.


----------



## PaulS

Where will the loyalty of our military be?

It won't be with the president - whomever it may be at the time.
It won't be with the generals who send them out without reason or rhyme.
It won't be with base commanders or even company officers.
Their loyalty will be to each other with whom they fight and die.

Rightly so say I!, with hope that the strongest among them remember their vow to protect our constitution and the families that support them. The rest will follow the strongest lead and that too, is as it should be!

The prose is mine but offered to the public domain. Paul Stephens 2014


----------



## Smokin04

Smitty901 said:


> Clearly some of us are speaking with different people on what is going on. I know a lot of current members bailing out.


Understood, however...they can't just "bail out" because of a change in policy. They can choose not to reenlist after they satisfy their current contract...but that's usually for more than just DADT.


----------



## PaulS

All soldiers and cops have the right - and responsibility - to disobey an unlawful order (an order that contradicts the constitution).


----------



## Inor

Smokin -

I ask this seriously, and definitely NOT to start any kind of argument. But how do you know when an order crosses the rubicon of being unconstitutional? I think RPD gave the example of "Corporal, check the IDs of these people before they enter the store" (or something similar).

This is a really tough line to define, especially so if you are in the middle of "it". An order may seem like a logical response to an out of control situation. But if the Constitution dictates otherwise, how do you recognize it, let alone deal with it? For example, a bunch of hippies demonstrating (and throwing shit - literally throwing *shit*, as hippies are prone to doing) you are given an order to dispatch them; How do you make the determination of when that becomes a self-defense situation vs. allowing the ungrateful little pricks to speak their empty minds?

*Note:* This is not any kind of defense of hippies. If you have read more than 3 of my posts you know that I hate hippies more than the Devil hates Holy Water. I firmly believe it is my 1st Amendment right to kick them in the nuts then knock out some of their teeth if they have the 1st Amendment right to burn my flag.

I think you touched on it in our earlier discussion when you referred to the current American military being "better" than past generations. I keyed on the word "better" and disputed you, when upon further thought, I think you meant "more powerful". I think what does give some folks here pause is that given the military firepower each member is entrusted with. What assurance can you give us that ALL of your coworkers will recognize an unconstitutional order?

I have not yet met Smitty face to face. But I have read every one of his posts here since I discovered this site a year or so ago. I can say without reservation, that I would follow him anywhere and do anything he told me to do because he is a natural leader and his judgement is right on. I have worked with several of your current batch of officers, doing DoD contracts off-and-on for the last 15-20 years. They do not instill anything close to the same level of confidence I have in a man that I only know through posts on the internet.


----------



## PrepperLite

Smokin04 said:


> Honestly brother, since "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" has been repealed...there has been no change in anything. It had zero affect in the ranks...at least at every place I've been to. I don't know if that was what you were referring to...


I agree, no difference.. no one cares now, no one really cared before.

The only reason i say no one really is i have seen only 2 people in my 5 1/2 years complain about them. Oh yeah and both were pretty upset about the ******* and ***** too..... Oh yeah one got kicked for Alcohol and the other got NJP for spousal abuse, good people, people i want in my service.



Smitty901 said:


> Clearly some of us are speaking with different people on what is going on. I know a lot of current members bailing out.


(Just FYI i'm not racist or anti-semetic, i used such strong language to make my point)


----------



## Deebo

PaulS said:


> All soldiers and cops have the right - and responsibility - to disobey an unlawful order (an order that contradicts the constitution).


True, Paul, But Im 40 years old, I consider my self educated, and I know NOTHING of the constitution, I ask honestly, is there training for cops and soldiers on constiution laws. i have been neither one. I still have not "sat down for a beer with my cousin", the local K9 handler and trainer, to ask him a mil;lion questions. Let me text that fella right nnow.


----------



## Inor

Deebo said:


> True, Paul, But Im 40 years old, I consider my self educated, and I know NOTHING of the constitution, I ask honestly, is there training for cops and soldiers on constiution laws. i have been neither one. I still have not "sat down for a beer with my cousin", the local K9 handler and trainer, to ask him a mil;lion questions. Let me text that fella right nnow.


Deebo, my friend, the Constitution was not written to be understood by the scholars from Harvard and Yale. It was written SPECIFICALLY to be understood by the common folks like you and I.

THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION - We the People

Please read it, know it, live it every day. I re-read the Constitution at least once per month just to keep it at the forefront of my mind.

Also read (and re-read) the Federalist Papers and the Anti-Federalist Papers as they explain what the Founders envisioned for us and the arguments they had. I read those at least once per year, again to keep my mind focused. Short of God and your family, there is nothing more important than this. (Yeah it's cliché, but it's true.)


----------



## Deebo

So, just by my first read, I have what I think is at least three questions.
Article 3, section 3- talks about "helping any nation to overthrow this nation"
Article 8- cruel and unusual punishment- Many, many many people have lost their gun rights over petty things that have been classified as felonies- Isn't that cruel, to take away their right to defend themselves?- Non violent drug offense equals loss of gun rights forever? Goes against the second?
Article XIV- No president shall have been involved in any insurrection or rebellion against this country.
Shit, I just read the thing, and I am ready for "high crimes and treason" to throw a man out. What do more edumacated folks think? Wasn't our dear old pres a constitional scholar?
Thanks Inor.


----------



## Deebo

I thought every time someone gets into trouble, the papers will say "he had a copy of the federalist papers at his house"?
More digging, more fact finding.


----------



## Smokin04

Inor said:


> Smokin -
> 
> I ask this seriously, and definitely NOT to start any kind of argument. But how do you know when an order crosses the rubicon of being unconstitutional? I think RPD gave the example of "Corporal, check the IDs of these people before they enter the store" (or something similar).
> 
> This is a really tough line to define, especially so if you are in the middle of "it". An order may seem like a logical response to an out of control situation. But if the Constitution dictates otherwise, how do you recognize it, let alone deal with it? For example, a bunch of hippies demonstrating (and throwing shit - literally throwing *shit*, as hippies are prone to doing) you are given an order to dispatch them; How do you make the determination of when that becomes a self-defense situation vs. allowing the ungrateful little pricks to speak their empty minds?
> 
> *Note:* This is not any kind of defense of hippies. If you have read more than 3 of my posts you know that I hate hippies more than the Devil hates Holy Water. I firmly believe it is my 1st Amendment right to kick them in the nuts then knock out some of their teeth if they have the 1st Amendment right to burn my flag.
> 
> I think you touched on it in our earlier discussion when you referred to the current American military being "better" than past generations. I keyed on the word "better" and disputed you, when upon further thought, I think you meant "more powerful". I think what does give some folks here pause is that given the military firepower each member is entrusted with. What assurance can you give us that ALL of your coworkers will recognize an unconstitutional order?
> 
> I have not yet met Smitty face to face. But I have read every one of his posts here since I discovered this site a year or so ago. I can say without reservation, that I would follow him anywhere and do anything he told me to do because he is a natural leader and his judgement is right on. I have worked with several of your current batch of officers, doing DoD contracts off-and-on for the last 15-20 years. They do not instill anything close to the same level of confidence I have in a man that I only know through posts on the internet.


I gotta go to work right now, but I'll answer this when I get home tonight.


----------



## Smitty901

Do not confuse the UCMJ with the Constitution.
Of course like the Constitution the UCMJ is taking on a whole new meaning on the last 5-6 years.


----------



## rice paddy daddy

Charles Martel said:


> ..military and police personnel murdered literally hundreds of millions of non-combatants during the 20th Century. We'd all do well to remember this.


Where? Boston, Chicago?
Or some Third World cess pool? Or Nazi Gemany? Or Russia, China?
California?
WHERE??


----------



## csi-tech

There have been million of innocents killed under despots in the 20th century. Pol pot, Stalin, Hitler the Japanese in Nanking, Bosnia, Rwanda and so on and so on.... Aside from Sand Creek and Wounded Knee I don't know of any on this soil.


----------



## Denton

Inor said:


> Deebo, my friend, the Constitution was not written to be understood by the scholars from Harvard and Yale. It was written SPECIFICALLY to be understood by the common folks like you and I.
> 
> THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION - We the People
> 
> Please read it, know it, live it every day. I re-read the Constitution at least once per month just to keep it at the forefront of my mind.
> 
> Also read (and re-read) the Federalist Papers and the Anti-Federalist Papers as they explain what the Founders envisioned for us and the arguments they had. I read those at least once per year, again to keep my mind focused. Short of God and your family, there is nothing more important than this. (Yeah it's cliché, but it's true.)


Inor, I do believe you are my hero.


----------



## rice paddy daddy

csi-tech said:


> There have been million of innocents killed under despots in the 20th century. Pol pot, Stalin, Hitler the Japanese in Nanking, Bosnia, Rwanda and so on and so on.... Aside from Sand Creek and Wounded Knee I don't know of any on this soil.


My point exactly.


----------



## Denton

rice paddy daddy said:


> My point exactly.


Is there a need to once again list the times troops or agents have violated their oaths to the constitution while following orders? Is there are reason to believe units will not do the same?

Do I believe that the 82nd would obey orders to close off entry and exit to Houston while imposing martial law, today? Nope. Of course not. What about when times are not as they are, today? What if things go to pot? What if the conditions are created so that a tyrannical government can expect the troops to obey orders to lock Houston down? Create a scenario in your own mind; no need for me to do it.

I was drinking a beer at a Gasthaus while stationed in Germany back in 1984. I was sitting next to an elderly gentleman who had been a Nazi during WWII. He asked if I had a problem drinking a beer with him, and I told him no; the war was behind us. He looked sad, and said, "We were misinformed, and we were wrong."

Germany was not some primitive bunch of people in the darkest parts of Africa, and wasn't a Muslim nation in the Middle East. It was a civilized European nation.

To think that we can find ourselves hearing, "We were misinformed, we were wrong" is more arrogant than I can imagine.

Time and circumstance will tell.

I'm thinking it's time to step out of this thread. I'll continue to pray for our military folks, and pray they never have to face a situation like what we have been discussing.


----------



## Charles Martel

rice paddy daddy said:


> Where? Boston, Chicago?
> Or some Third World cess pool? Or Nazi Gemany? Or Russia, China?
> California?
> WHERE??


Everywhere. North America, South America, Africa, Australia, Europe, and Asia.

You name a place, I will name you a major genocide or democide committed by government soldiers and/or police in that region. The continental United States is no exception. The U.S. Federal Government eliminated untold thousands of native Americans on the road to manifest destiny. The very land you live on was stolen, and its original inhabitants probably killed or starved off by government troops. As many as 6,000 Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Muscogee Creek, and Seminole died on the "Trail of Tears" alone. The US military has as much innocent blood on its hands as just about any other.

What makes you think that America today is any different than Germany prior to the Holocaust, or Russia Prior to the Bolshevik Revolution? Germany was probably the most modern, the most enlightened, the most technologically advanced society on the planet before igniting a global conflagration, and plunging Europe into genocide. I see startling similarities between pre-fascist Germany/the Weimar Republic and the current United States.


----------



## Smokin04

Smokin04 said:


> I gotta go to work right now, but I'll answer this when I get home tonight.


It really is (to me anyways) a simple answer. If you ever have a question of whether or not an order violates the constitution, you have the SJA and legal department on 24 hour standby waiting to take your call. That is EXACTLY their purpose. To advise commanders of legal implications of current or future orders or judicial decisions. Legal folks and SJA (Staff Judge Advocate) are bound to the same obligations as the civilian sector...and then some. I have never been steered wrong by them. Ever. Not to mention, we have a library worth of written instructions that dictate the proper way to do EVERYTHING that we could potentially come across; that have been vetted by armies of lawyers to make sure that we are NOT in violation of any laws. Checks and balances my friend. That simple.

Of course, I have also been privileged enough to be the one in charge giving the orders. As a flight chief, I was in charge. I made the decisions for ALL security posture on the installation, and spoke for the Installation Commander. I know for a fact that I never gave an unlawful order, nor one that would violate the constitution. I have (and always had) faith in my fellow flight chiefs to make the right decisions when it comes to use of force. We get decades of training on the right thing to do...contrary to some beliefs. We don't just get our badges and guns and hit the streets, training of PROPER legal procedures and USE OF FORCE is evaluated constantly. If you fail even one part, you are not a cop. We take your gun away until your figure out the proper way to do things.

How would I dispatch protesters? I would immediately upchannel the situation to the appropriate civilian agency, while directing traffic/bystanders to safety. I would of course deny entry using appropriate levels of force (no lethal is not warranted if they're only throwing objects) to protect the installation. And assist local law enforcement in anyway legally possible.

Hopefully, I answered sufficiently. I could run these scenarios all day. If you'd like to have a telephonic conversation about it...PM me your number and I'll absolutely talk all day about it.


----------



## Inor

Thank-you for addressing my concerns. (I have been looking forward to this post all day.) I pray that all of our military have as much common sense as you appear to have.


----------



## Smokin04

Any time...and thank you for the compliment. People with similar attitudes and demeanor are really all that I've experienced in 16 years. That's why I have trouble buying that military member regardless of branch will just blindly follow orders. In fact, the Inspector General (IG) actually has rules (Air Force Instruction [AFI] 90-301) that prevent Commanders from retaliating (called retribution in the military) against members who question their orders as lawful or unlawful. This is in place to protect the soldiers from blowing the whistle against an unlawful order.


----------



## Denton

Smokin, that sounds great and all, but I don't believe you have been a part of what we are really discussing, and I don't think the Air Force will be the one to do it if it comes to that. I don't think the SJA will be a thought in those days, either.

Glad to hear a good leader is out there. Flight chief, does that mean you are a cheif, as in E-9?


----------



## Denton

I have been lucky enough to have served with chiefs who not only know the creed by heart but live it to the letter.


----------



## Charles Martel

Smokin04 said:


> It really is (to me anyways) a simple answer. If you ever have a question of whether or not an order violates the constitution, you have the SJA and legal department on 24 hour standby waiting to take your call. That is EXACTLY their purpose. To advise commanders of legal implications of current or future orders or judicial decisions. Legal folks and SJA (Staff Judge Advocate) are bound to the same obligations as the civilian sector...and then some. I have never been steered wrong by them. Ever. Not to mention, we have a library worth of written instructions that dictate the proper way to do EVERYTHING that we could potentially come across; that have been vetted by armies of lawyers to make sure that we are NOT in violation of any laws. Checks and balances my friend. That simple.
> 
> Of course, I have also been privileged enough to be the one in charge giving the orders. As a flight chief, I was in charge. I made the decisions for ALL security posture on the installation, and spoke for the Installation Commander. I know for a fact that I never gave an unlawful order, nor one that would violate the constitution. I have (and always had) faith in my fellow flight chiefs to make the right decisions when it comes to use of force. We get decades of training on the right thing to do...contrary to some beliefs. We don't just get our badges and guns and hit the streets, training of PROPER legal procedures and USE OF FORCE is evaluated constantly. If you fail even one part, you are not a cop. We take your gun away until your figure out the proper way to do things.
> 
> How would I dispatch protesters? I would immediately upchannel the situation to the appropriate civilian agency, while directing traffic/bystanders to safety. I would of course deny entry using appropriate levels of force (no lethal is not warranted if they're only throwing objects) to protect the installation. And assist local law enforcement in anyway legally possible.
> 
> Hopefully, I answered sufficiently. I could run these scenarios all day. If you'd like to have a telephonic conversation about it...PM me your number and I'll absolutely talk all day about it.


This is a well thought out and articulated response.

My only problem with this is that there's no way to ensure that SJA (or whatever other governing agency will be handling military "legal" dilemmas in the future) hasn't become just as corrupt as the rest of the military/government establishment. Relying on other government agencies to be your conscience sounds like a recipe for disaster.

Your assurances that you are given "decades of training on the right thing to do" isn't particularly reassuring. Especially when this training is created by the same federal government that consistently and almost universally does the wrong thing with regards to civil liberties and individual freedoms these days.

My hope is that U.S. soldiers will remember their broader moral and ethical obligation to their fellow human beings when ordered to violate the lives, liberty and property of their fellow Americans. This is a slim hope, as history is almost completely devoid of soldiers standing up to tyrannical and despotic regimes in defense of the civilian population, but it is all we have for now.

Remember whom you truly serve, soldier.


----------



## Smokin04

Denton said:


> Smokin, that sounds great and all, but I don't believe you have been a part of what we are really discussing, and I don't think the Air Force will be the one to do it if it comes to that. I don't think the SJA will be a thought in those days, either.
> 
> Glad to hear a good leader is out there. Flight chief, does that mean you are a cheif, as in E-9?


No sir. I am but a mere E-6. Technical Sergeant in AF terms. I just tested for E-7, Master Sergeant...hopefully I made it. Chief for us can also be given to a duty position...like "Superintendent". Usually held by an E-8, but our current Sup is an E-6 just based on lack of ranking people available. Cut backs and all....


----------



## Denton

Smokin04 said:


> No sir. I am but a mere E-6. Technical Sergeant in AF terms. I just tested for E-7, Master Sergeant...hopefully I made it. Chief for us can also be given to a duty position...like "Superintendent". Usually held by an E-8, but our current Sup is an E-6 just based on lack of ranking people available. Cut backs and all....


Ah. In my unit, only the chiefs are called chiefs. The sups are referred to by rank. 
The AF thing that kills me is calling first sergeants, "shirt." I still use the army thing, "Top." If they deserve it. That is a weighty monicker conveying high honor.

As far as you and chief, I suspect you already know and live by the creed.


----------



## Old SF Guy

Smokin04 said:


> Pretty sure that military members are being called stupid in a few different ways here...
> 
> Normally I don't take offense to things, but really guys? If you can read, you can comprehend the Constitution.
> 
> I think the people who haven't had military affiliation in 20+ years, or that folks are completely clueless, are jumping to statements that are beyond the scope of their own comprehension.
> 
> I work with people who's IQ's are well beyond average. This is not meant to offend, but just to say that military members (ESPECIALLY IN THE FACE OF EXTREME CUTS!) today are far more intelligent and capable than previous generations. More with less is the current motto. That will not change any time soon.
> 
> The dissention (and downright ignorance of the current state of mindset in the MILITARY AS A WHOLE...not just some political figure heads) displayed from the members here make me really wonder why I still bother trying to contribute anything here. It's almost downright hatred against the PEOPLE THAT DEFEND your rights to speak in such hurtful ways. Its like that obligation means nothing to you people...or you think the military members are too stupid to even know what the oath means anymore. Really?
> 
> You guys make it seem like some random troop will just shoot a random American just because some Colonel said to. To this I say you really to enlist and find out how full of shit your thoughts really are. Evaluate your words before you press enter, will ya?


SMokin...you are taking many many things out of context and certainly too personal. First of all when was the last time you went to the local PErsonal finance office and asked their opinion...or to the Arty BN's and asked theirs. You are assuming that every military branch and specialty has your same level of understanding, honor, commitment and also assuming that I, we, are talking about you directly. I served 20 years, retiring in 2006 after 5 tours in Afghanistan and Iraq. I have done 6 more tours (although shorter in duration) as a civilian with the Navy Seals I develop capability for. I have asked a current serving Computer Network Operator (short for Computer hacker) if he felt what the NSA was doing was ok and his response was...if your not doing anything wrong then why should we care....I then asked him if he would like a device in his car that issued a speeding ticket every time he exceeded the speed limit...he had no comment. It is a valid discussion and time and time again throughout history we have seen soldier do things that were illegal (Mai Lai). Frined...you can take this personal, which is was never meant to be...and try to be the defender of the actions of every soldier , sailor, or marine in the US military....in which I'd say then you are personally accountable for explaining the mis -behavior....such as an e-4 in fort hood going nuts and shooting a bunch of people...or understand that the discussion is not about not respecting current soldiers for their service, but rather a question of how well do they know the constitution and would they oppose their leadership if required. Your choice friend...but I think your trying to lift a mantle that need not be lifted. If you think that current soldiers are universally Constitutionally aware...then I ask you to go question a few of them on what is in the bill of rights...what are the rules of Posse Comitatus, etc and inform us what you find in order to correct our train of thoughts. No disrespect intended BRother...but this is not a fight we are trying to discuss but rather a discussion on what peoples thoughts are.. As a 20 year vet and a 7 year DOD Civ...I appreciate the comments...I disagree with some...but I'm not going to go all F- you you ungrateful dogs...on those I disagree with. I hope you don't either my friend. Many, many people here have given as much as you or I. and in the end we gave it so that they could express their opinions. I appreciate being able to hear diverse opinions.


----------



## Old SF Guy

Smokin04 said:


> It really is (to me anyways) a simple answer. If you ever have a question of whether or not an order violates the constitution, you have the SJA and legal department on 24 hour standby waiting to take your call. That is EXACTLY their purpose. To advise commanders of legal implications of current or future orders or judicial decisions. Legal folks and SJA (Staff Judge Advocate) are bound to the same obligations as the civilian sector...and then some. I have never been steered wrong by them. Ever. Not to mention, we have a library worth of written instructions that dictate the proper way to do EVERYTHING that we could potentially come across; that have been vetted by armies of lawyers to make sure that we are NOT in violation of any laws. Checks and balances my friend. That simple.
> 
> Of course, I have also been privileged enough to be the one in charge giving the orders. As a flight chief, I was in charge. I made the decisions for ALL security posture on the installation, and spoke for the Installation Commander. I know for a fact that I never gave an unlawful order, nor one that would violate the constitution. I have (and always had) faith in my fellow flight chiefs to make the right decisions when it comes to use of force. We get decades of training on the right thing to do...contrary to some beliefs. We don't just get our badges and guns and hit the streets, training of PROPER legal procedures and USE OF FORCE is evaluated constantly. If you fail even one part, you are not a cop. We take your gun away until your figure out the proper way to do things.
> 
> How would I dispatch protesters? I would immediately upchannel the situation to the appropriate civilian agency, while directing traffic/bystanders to safety. I would of course deny entry using appropriate levels of force (no lethal is not warranted if they're only throwing objects) to protect the installation. And assist local law enforcement in anyway legally possible.
> 
> Hopefully, I answered sufficiently. I could run these scenarios all day. If you'd like to have a telephonic conversation about it...PM me your number and I'll absolutely talk all day about it.


Smokin...in the 10 plus fire fights I have been in in Afghanistan and 5 in Iraq..I have never had the time or the ability to call to a Staff Judge Advocate for interpretation of orders. I get the Rules of engagement briefing coming into theater and I remember the 1st and last one I received. THe 1st was detailed, but what sticks out was the guidance that if someone was using a signal mirror I could shoot them...the last one was that even if a person was pointing an RPG at me previously...if he dropped it to run I couldn't shoot him. You are dealing with young Captains and Majors who in the end tend to bend toward their commanders position where there is ambiguity in the law. I do not place as much faith in the SJA corp as you may. Take a look at the most recent Torture arguments where a lawyer said to Bush...oh that is perfectly legal...and then the new regime comes in and calls it Torture. Over there I didn't care as much since I chose to always be judged by 12 over being carried by 6. But what about when it comes to the extremely complex laws of American soldiers agains American Citizen? Posse Comitatus was suspended once before....and then years later found to be in violation of the Constitution...but that didn't resuscitate the dead.


----------



## ApexPredator

Gotta agree with ya OLD SF, JAG spends more time validating then investigating.


----------



## Old SF Guy

ApexPredator said:


> Gotta agree with ya OLD SF, JAG spends more time validating then investigating.


Damn right they do..."well sir ...unh...yes sir their is allowance for that course of action if it is done for the purpose of preventing the continuation of the afore mentioned course of action which could continue to the extent that it infringes on the ability of you to make the decision to tell me what to say.....Sir"


----------



## Rigged for Quiet

Old SF Guy said:


> Damn right they do..."well sir ...unh...yes sir their is allowance for that course of action if it is done for the purpose of preventing the continuation of the afore mentioned course of action which could continue to the extent that it infringes on the ability of you to make the decision to tell me what to say.....Sir"


ROFLMAO

For the folks who just think they hate lawyers now, just try and imagine some snot nosed kid trying to tell you when you can shoot back.


----------



## Smokin04

Old SF Guy said:


> SMokin...you are taking many many things out of context and certainly too personal. First of all when was the last time you went to the local PErsonal finance office and asked their opinion...or to the Arty BN's and asked theirs. You are assuming that every military branch and specialty has your same level of understanding, honor, commitment and also assuming that I, we, are talking about you directly. I served 20 years, retiring in 2006 after 5 tours in Afghanistan and Iraq. I have done 6 more tours (although shorter in duration) as a civilian with the Navy Seals I develop capability for. I have asked a current serving Computer Network Operator (short for Computer hacker) if he felt what the NSA was doing was ok and his response was...if your not doing anything wrong then why should we care....I then asked him if he would like a device in his car that issued a speeding ticket every time he exceeded the speed limit...he had no comment. It is a valid discussion and time and time again throughout history we have seen soldier do things that were illegal (Mai Lai). Frined...you can take this personal, which is was never meant to be...and try to be the defender of the actions of every soldier , sailor, or marine in the US military....in which I'd say then you are personally accountable for explaining the mis -behavior....such as an e-4 in fort hood going nuts and shooting a bunch of people...or understand that the discussion is not about not respecting current soldiers for their service, but rather a question of how well do they know the constitution and would they oppose their leadership if required. Your choice friend...but I think your trying to lift a mantle that need not be lifted. If you think that current soldiers are universally Constitutionally aware...then I ask you to go question a few of them on what is in the bill of rights...what are the rules of Posse Comitatus, etc and inform us what you find in order to correct our train of thoughts. No disrespect intended BRother...but this is not a fight we are trying to discuss but rather a discussion on what peoples thoughts are.. As a 20 year vet and a 7 year DOD Civ...I appreciate the comments...I disagree with some...but I'm not going to go all F- you you ungrateful dogs...on those I disagree with. I hope you don't either my friend. Many, many people here have given as much as you or I. and in the end we gave it so that they could express their opinions. I appreciate being able to hear diverse opinions.


Yeah Mike, maybe I read a bit too deep into it, but I got the feeling that people think troops would really just jump at the first chance to shoot innocent people just because someone tells them too. I don't agree. Is it coincidence that most that feel this way have never served? Probably not. They're afraid of the big bad military machine knocking on their door...I'm merely trying to keep the calm and tell them how completely unrealistic that scenario is. Nothing more.



Old SF Guy said:


> Smokin...in the 10 plus fire fights I have been in in Afghanistan and 5 in Iraq..I have never had the time or the ability to call to a Staff Judge Advocate for interpretation of orders. I get the Rules of engagement briefing coming into theater and I remember the 1st and last one I received. THe 1st was detailed, but what sticks out was the guidance that if someone was using a signal mirror I could shoot them...the last one was that even if a person was pointing an RPG at me previously...if he dropped it to run I couldn't shoot him. You are dealing with young Captains and Majors who in the end tend to bend toward their commanders position where there is ambiguity in the law. I do not place as much faith in the SJA corp as you may. Take a look at the most recent Torture arguments where a lawyer said to Bush...oh that is perfectly legal...and then the new regime comes in and calls it Torture. Over there I didn't care as much since I chose to always be judged by 12 over being carried by 6. But what about when it comes to the extremely complex laws of American soldiers agains American Citizen? Posse Comitatus was suspended once before....and then years later found to be in violation of the Constitution...but that didn't resuscitate the dead.


The ROE's for combat are totally different than in peacetime, or when in CONUS, you know that. I also would not think twice about returning fire immediately. Key word is returning. Initiating fire however is a different can of worms...especially when in CONUS. I'll say it like this. If we had to worry about every order being lawful or unlawful, we would be a military of lawyers. We would spend everyday questioning everything and the mission would not get done. The ROE's, UOF, SOP's are there because they have been vetted through legal channels already. They exist to eliminate the possibility of CC's giving unlawful orders. Can people act outside of them? Absolutely...but they will be tried in a Court Martial when they do. The world is never perfect, and neither are people...but to be judged by 12, is what keeps us in line.


----------



## Old SF Guy

SMokin yes you have that part accurate in my opinion...where I think there would be issues is in commands to disarm folks based on them being designated suspects or other terms. The fighting comes when a citizen who knows he has the right to that weapon, and the right to not be searched or his property seized without reasonable suspicion or a warrant issued. All while being unconstitutionally detained by a military he knows has no right to act against Americans in America. There are Many among us who would fight against that and that would lead to gun fights. Unfortunately that means even though the citizen is within his rights to defend himself...he would be wrong in the eyes of the Government. When I posted this...I was not necessarily thinking of soldiers just out right attacking Americans...that is not how it would happen. I was thinking soldiers following orders to act as security or in a Law enforcement/check point role. This is unlawful outside of Military installation. I can see good soldiers, who are just thinking they are doing the right thing, setting up check points as commanded and searching vehicles because they have been told that domestic terrorists are moving through the area. I myself have had Law enforcement that I have trained with previously, ask me to help, with my specialized equipment, to locate a suspected individual. I told them that I cannot do so as it violates the constitution and I refused to give them access to the equipment to use against Americans. Finally...you are right and I have said it before...Soldiers are not mindless jackboots. They will immediately rebel against commands to attack or harm Americans....It would never happen that way. I can see them being used to suppress violence, thinking they are doing what is right, I can see them helping LOE because that seems right. Yet it still violates the Constitution.


----------



## keith9365

I took my oath to support and defend the constitution January 23, 1989.


----------



## keith9365

My concern is that when John Q. Cop with a wife and two kids is faced with follow this order or lose your job and your family has no house or pop tarts THEY WILL follow it.


----------

