Your Opinion-The Military vs. U.S. Citizens

This is a discussion on Your Opinion-The Military vs. U.S. Citizens within the Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; I got to thinking about the TEA Parties that have been held around the country AND the fact that if you hold a job, believe ...

Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 64

Thread: Your Opinion-The Military vs. U.S. Citizens

  1. #1
    Member Array gaowlpoop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Perry, GA
    Posts
    68

    Your Opinion-The Military vs. U.S. Citizens

    I got to thinking about the TEA Parties that have been held around the country AND the fact that if you hold a job, believe in god, want smaller government and lower taxes you are now an official extreme right wing terrorist.

    The thought came to me about Tiananmen Square in 1989. For those of you to young to remember:

    Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    My question is, would the military go up against the civilian population of the U.S. during protests like the Tea Parties?

    Before you answer, you should consider that it has happened before in the U.S., not only in the 1960's but much earlier in out history.
    Steven
    The "news media" has ceased being the watch dog of the people and has become the apologist for an irresponsible government.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    Senior Member Array fernset's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Miami, Fl
    Posts
    526
    I think that is something I rather think abot when the day comes. I think a protest would have to get very out of hand for them to take on civilians.

  4. #3
    Senior Moderator
    Array Tangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    9,647
    I have an idea that if/when we get to that point, it won't be US troops, it'll be UN troops. I suspect politicians would be very aware that US troops would have problems executing such orders, hence, they'd opt for UN troops that would probably be excited about shooting as many of us as they can.
    I'm too young to be this old!
    Getting old isn't good for you!

  5. #4
    jfl
    jfl is offline
    Distinguished Member Array jfl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Palm Beach County, FL
    Posts
    1,485
    I understand your question; however, I find it somewhat divisive as it becomes a "them vs us" position; the military are "us" also.
    As a former officer in the Army, I feel possible animosity and I don't like it; as another poster said "we'll cross that bridge if we get there".

    To the OP: please don't take this personally. I know you didn't mean what I felt; maybe I am too "reactive" today.
    The first rule of a gunfight: "Don't be there !"
    The second rule: "Bring enough gun"

    jfl
    (NRA Life Member/Instructor - GOA - IDPA - GSSF - ex-IHMSA)

  6. #5
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    43,837
    Like one of the above posters, my fear is the 'blue flags' not our own military.
    One way to go around the constitution and American law is to proceed with the U.N. route...more on this coming to your neighborhood in the future, I'm sure.

    Stay armed...beware of blue flags...stay safe!
    The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.

    ***********************************
    Certified Glock Armorer
    NRA Life Member[/B]

  7. #6
    New Member Array glockblocker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    3

    Interesting question

    Although hard to think about, it is interesting.

    When you see things like footage of the riots during the 1960's, you realize that normal people can become monsters in an instant, with the only thing holding them back being that there are more good people than bad. I certainly think the same would be true of our military, or the crowd they may be fighting.

    The thing to remember is that there are good and bad people in every part of life; some people do not know what they will do with power until they have it. Watch a riot and you can see how quickly a mob gets out of hand, but this is not how everyone in that situation would react. We fail to notice the people who protect others or flee before things get out of hand.

  8. #7
    Member Array gaowlpoop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Perry, GA
    Posts
    68
    jfl, I certainly did NOT mean what you felt. From what I understand, the China government had to bring in troops from another province very far away to be sure they would follow orders. As others have said, it would be the UN as the "other province"...I actually had not thought of that.
    Steven
    The "news media" has ceased being the watch dog of the people and has become the apologist for an irresponsible government.

  9. #8
    Distinguished Member Array bandit383's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    1,681
    Protest like the Tea parties...not a chance. Anarchy, mass hysteria, death and destruction...possible (States do have control over their National Guard)....you, you right wing extremist terrorist you :)))

  10. #9
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,756
    If it was necessary for them to support, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States I would hope they would! They swore oath against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Now the question is under what circumstnces do you think you could get responsible, well educated officers to believe that taking up arms against the civilian populace is necessary?
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  11. #10
    Member Array CPTMO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    North Mississippi
    Posts
    164
    You are right Viper. Here is an explanation. 1878 Posse Comitatus Act was passed with the intent of removing the Army from domestic law enforcement. "Posse Comitatus" means the "power of the county," reflecting the inherent power of the old west county sheriff to call upon a posse of able-bodied men to supplement law enforcement assets and thereby maintain the peace. Following the Civil War the Army had been used extensively throughout the South to maintain civil order, to enforce the policies of the reconstruction era, and to ensure that any lingering sentiments of rebellion were crushed. However, in reaching those goals the Army necessarily became involved in traditional police roles and in enforcing politically volatile reconstruction era policies. The stationing of federal troops at political events and polling places under the justification of maintaining domestic order became of increasing concern to Congress, which felt that the Army was becoming politicized and straying from its original national defense mission. The Posse Comitatus Act was passed to remove the Army from civilian law enforcement and to return it to its role of defending the borders of the United States.
    The best preventative medicine is superior fire power.

  12. #11
    Senior Member Array thebigdl86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    OK
    Posts
    662
    Quote Originally Posted by CPTMO View Post
    You are right Viper. Here is an explanation. 1878 Posse Comitatus Act was passed with the intent of removing the Army from domestic law enforcement. "Posse Comitatus" means the "power of the county," reflecting the inherent power of the old west county sheriff to call upon a posse of able-bodied men to supplement law enforcement assets and thereby maintain the peace. Following the Civil War the Army had been used extensively throughout the South to maintain civil order, to enforce the policies of the reconstruction era, and to ensure that any lingering sentiments of rebellion were crushed. However, in reaching those goals the Army necessarily became involved in traditional police roles and in enforcing politically volatile reconstruction era policies. The stationing of federal troops at political events and polling places under the justification of maintaining domestic order became of increasing concern to Congress, which felt that the Army was becoming politicized and straying from its original national defense mission. The Posse Comitatus Act was passed to remove the Army from civilian law enforcement and to return it to its role of defending the borders of the United States.
    Seems to me we are always defending someone elses borders lol. On the op's post, we did take an oath that says all enemies foriegn and domestic. Im sure if it was a shtf situation we could be ordered to do some hasty things. Although i think it would lead to mutiny.
    "Anyone worth shooting, is probably worth shooting several times."

  13. #12
    Administrator
    Array QKShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Off Of The X
    Posts
    34,616
    Members need to be on their very best behavior in this thread.

    AKA Intelligent conversation and not stupid fantastical speculation.

    Think before you type or this thread will not stay open very long.

  14. #13
    VIP Member Array Paco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    McKinney, TX
    Posts
    3,493
    I would hope IF it got to that point in the US that we would have already had exhausted many many other options. I would also hope that the Soldiers would see who they were about to run over with a tank and realize it is a fellow countryman, but that didn't stop them in the civil war.

    I agree with others that if this does happen it will be UN troops and not US troops, and I would hope the UN would be foolish enough to use foreign troops to try it.
    "Don't hit a man if you can possibly avoid it; but if you do hit him, put him to sleep." - Theodore Roosevelt

    If you are not willing to stand behind our Troops, feel free to stand in front of them!

    -Paco

  15. #14
    Distinguished Member Array sniper58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,631
    The overwhelming majority of the U.S. Troops with whom I've spoken won't violate their Oath - period. Troops from another country is a different (and plausible) scenario.
    Tim
    BE PREPARED - Noah didn't build the Ark when it was raining!
    Si vis pacem, para bellum
    ________
    NRA Life Member

  16. #15
    Ex Member Array Ram Rod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fayetteville, AR
    Posts
    13,687
    Your Opinion-The Military vs. U.S. Citizens
    Would you follow orders to insure your family's welfare or your own life?

Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. More Military Info Desired - Any Military Intelligence (35x) or Signal guys here?
    By Tally XD in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: August 5th, 2010, 02:48 PM
  2. Mc vs Feds - Open military base rights? Opinion q and a.
    By tangoseal in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: July 12th, 2010, 09:34 AM
  3. Bush: US Military Can Police American Citizens
    By sniper58 in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 163
    Last Post: January 15th, 2009, 04:28 PM
  4. LEOs/AD Military, read about gangs in military/ with military training
    By cagueits in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: February 22nd, 2007, 12:30 AM

Search tags for this page

best suppressor for cz 452

,

glockblocker mob wars

,

mobwars glockblocker

Click on a term to search for related topics.