Nephews Who Are Army Officers Recently Asked "Are You Prepared To Kill US Citizens?"

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: bludragin

Discussions like this are had on a fairly regular basis. Context is important to note.

I've been asked this question before and my answer is always the same:

"Kick me out of the army".

I should note that I have never been asked this question in a official capacity. It was merely in conversation with my soldiers.

That said, I have a hard time believing, outside of BIG ARMY contingency planning, that these questions are being asked outside of conversational theorizing.

You don't need to believe me. But it is true. I know it disturbed them. These are good, caring men who love their country. And it was also a bit odd, as their main assignments have all been in Afghanistan. With that said, I respect that you'd rather get kicked out rather than shoot a US citizen. And, thank you for your service.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: bludragin

Understood.

In keeping with the thread topic I have several high school friends who joined the armed forces and many of them have confided in me that they have been asked similar questions. It seems to me that the this question goes around a lot. Again as in your case, I did not ask for context or specifics, only expressed mild dismay. My buddies didn't seem too shaken up about it though.

For clarification: One was Army active duty with three tours in the Middle East, the other a Marine (who never told me much about deployments)

Yes, I just replied to another respondent that what really struck my sister and I as odd is my nephews have only served overseas, in Afghanistan. So it seemed a bit jolting to hear they were asked this question. My sister was not comfortable saying anything more to me on this, and I am relatively certain they would not have told her anything more, anyway.

originally posted by: nukedog

originally posted by: bludragin

originally posted by: nukedog
Man I wish I can remember where I saw this. This isn't the first time I heard this. I have a feeling this was referenced in the book Empire by Orson Scott. I would have to verify. In the novel, of course the answer is no, for the vast majority of troops but those who say yes are hand picked and groomed for something else. Of course diabolical. I don't want to give the ending away though.

Thanks, I'll look up this book.

I got it here somewhere. Let me verify if I can. Might take a minute

Keep in mind this is fiction. I did link the wiki. It comes off with an air like the author knows a few things though. Especially military. I mean I guess. The military academy was the full extent of my experience.

But 1984 was once fiction too lol

a reply to: bludragin

"situation and terrain dictate" was a saying I was brought up on during my service. It means anything is possible so be prepared.

Under the right circumstances and with the correct RoE, it is feasible that American soldiers would be called upon to engage Americans.

Could they be ordered to shoot unarmed civilians? Not unless we do away with the Laws of Land Warfare.

Look at the Bundy Ranch situation. If 2000-3000 people had flocked to his cause and then became violent, I can see the military being called in. Clearing violent citizens (insurrectionists) and restoring peace could require soldiers firing on citizens in that situation.

If Dallas saw a quarantine put in place and had thousands fleeing, a hundred thousand dead, and tens of thousands looting, I could see soldiers engaging criminals in that situation as well.

It would never be culling of the population and the RoE would be extremely tight. However "situation and terrain dictate".

Some men/women do not have the stomach to follow those kinds of orders (right or wrong). It's always better to know ahead of time who is going to balk at the idea.

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: bludragin

The mods won't touch this blu, my friend, it's a refreshing and speculative topic that ATS thrives on...

Don't worry about the nay sayers...
It's in the grey area for a reason, their experience here should tell them to be more open!


Welcome to ATS!

Wow, you are the first person to welcome me to ATS. Most kind of you, and very refreshing. And your comment is also most reassuring. Namaste.

This story comes up constantly and the one thing every tale has in common is "I heard from a friend of a family member whose 3rd cousin knows a guy in the military and..."

The story never starts with "I'm a 2nd Lieutenant in the Army and I was asked..."

If this question was being asked as often as people claim, someone who's current or former military would have spoken out about it at some point. Soldiers, Marines, Sailors, and Airmen have the internet.

I'm former military and I've never heard any military member say anything about U.S. civilians apart from wanting to do whatever it takes to guarantee their safety, murderers and rapists not withstanding.

originally posted by: nukedog

originally posted by: nukedog

originally posted by: bludragin

originally posted by: nukedog
Man I wish I can remember where I saw this. This isn't the first time I heard this. I have a feeling this was referenced in the book Empire by Orson Scott. I would have to verify. In the novel, of course the answer is no, for the vast majority of troops but those who say yes are hand picked and groomed for something else. Of course diabolical. I don't want to give the ending away though.

Thanks, I'll look up this book.

I got it here somewhere. Let me verify if I can. Might take a minute

Keep in mind this is fiction. I did link the wiki. It comes off with an air like the author knows a few things though. Especially military. I mean I guess. The military academy was the full extent of my experience.

But 1984 was once fiction too lol

Forgive my confusion. I don't see any links...?

originally posted by: Answer
This story comes up constantly and the one thing every tale has in common is "I heard from a friend of a family member whose 3rd cousin knows a guy in the military and..."

The story never starts with "I'm a 2nd Lieutenant in the Army and I was asked..."

If this question was being asked as often as people claim, someone who's current or former military would have spoken out about it at some point. Soldiers, Marines, Sailors, and Airmen have the internet.

I'm former military and I've never heard any military member say anything about U.S. civilians apart from wanting to do whatever it takes to guarantee their safety.

Understood. Nevertheless, it is true. See my last few replies. I stand on what I said.

a reply to: 200Plus

"Some men/women do not have the stomach to follow those kinds of orders (right or wrong). It's always better to know ahead of time who is going to balk at the idea."

I've known my nephews since they were born. They were the most kind, compassionate, caring boys. They truly love their country, and the troops they manage. They are both idealists, in a way. This is how I know that they were deeply disturbed by the question. So disturbed, they told their mother. She sensed it was tearing them up. But, I doubt they told her any more than this, and even if they did, she wouldn't say, even to me, and my sister and I are very close.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: bludragin

Discussions like this are had on a fairly regular basis. Context is important to note.

I've been asked this question before and my answer is always the same:

"Kick me out of the army".

I should note that I have never been asked this question in a official capacity. It was merely in conversation with my soldiers.

That said, I have a hard time believing, outside of BIG ARMY contingency planning, that these questions are being asked outside of conversational theorizing.

I respect your position. If you have the inclination to read some of my replies to various respondents, on pages 3 and 4 specifically, I'd appreciate hearing any further thoughts you might have on all this, if any.

originally posted by: projectvxn

originally posted by: bludragin
a reply to: projectvxn

Per my sister, the question went a bit beyond that, although I wish that's all it was.

Are your nephews officers?

And I don't mean butter bars or warrant officers I'm talking about battalion commanders and above.

If not then I wouldn't worry about this too much.

Yes. They both are highly respected, high ranked officers.

originally posted by: signalfire
I thought it was Standard Operating Procedure for troops to fire on looters, etc, in a disaster situation; once the National Guard got down into Katrina country, it was complete chaos with people getting shot who were just trying to source water and diapers.

IMHO, after a massive hurricane or other disaster blows through, and no one has anything to fall back on for life support, raiding your local wrecked Walmart for the necessities of life is allowable and normal, not criminal behavior. What's more important, Walmart's sanctity and profits, or the people?

Obviously it's another thing entirely if we're talking cattle cars, FEMA camps and people disappearing by the 10s of thousands...

I'd sure like to know more about this Apocalyptic training, though.

Thanks for the reply. Of course, we all know the answer to that: Walmart. (And profits).

originally posted by: theMediator
Maybe he was talking about shooting the mob, bikers, street gangs, bankers, oligarchs and corrupted politicians?

Theses people are a threat to domestic stability.

I wish I myself knew the context. If you read some of my replies, page 3 and 4, you'll learn a bit more about my nephews. This shook them up a bit, from what I sensed from my sister when she told me. However it was asked, whatever the context, it disturbed them. Deeply.

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: MALBOSIA
The army does have domestic military operations procedures. It would be stupid of them not to.

I'm just saying that so much of this "army training for apocalypse" stuff is ridiculous, the implication being that I go to work every day to train for the mass killing of Americans.

I don't think you need special training as a soldier to fight your own countrymen. Either you will or you wont and the regular training as a soldier would be just as useful at home as anywhere else except for the question of whether or not the soldiers will go through with it. As far as the big planning like targets and time frames, just like anywhere else in the world the soldier wont have a clue till it is time to deploy.

If it is going to happen it has to happen at the drop of a hat with little to no time to think about it. But whether or not it could be accomplished may come down to interviews similar to the OP.

After mulling over what my sister shared with me, I came to pretty much the same conclusion as you. Then, lately, I started to wonder what might happen domestically if there were a global pandemic. Hence, my post. Thanks for replying.

a reply to: bludragin

I didn't read all the responses so maybe someone mentioned it already, and it's just a guess here, and contrary to what most of our initial reactions are, but there's an alternate possibility - the idea that the Americans they will be asked to shoot upon are the civilian police forces that were instituted in recent years - such as DHS who have purchased loads of arms, ammunition and hardware.

Obama back in 2008:

“We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

So maybe the military are aware of something and this may require them to act to protect the nation from an attack from within the borders. Maybe the high brass that have been let go were aware of what may be in the works, were found out and relieved. However those who were subordinate are still on guard for what may be inevitable.

Let's look at the state of affairs. Open borders, release of foreign illegal criminals from prisons, spending the country much deeper into debt and virulent agents introduced to the general population. I mean what else do we need to see happen to understand that the POTUS is bent on meeting some agenda that doesn't coincide with the tenets of the Constitution?

The quote above came from this link.

originally posted by: bludragin

originally posted by: nukedog

originally posted by: nukedog

originally posted by: bludragin

originally posted by: nukedog
Man I wish I can remember where I saw this. This isn't the first time I heard this. I have a feeling this was referenced in the book Empire by Orson Scott. I would have to verify. In the novel, of course the answer is no, for the vast majority of troops but those who say yes are hand picked and groomed for something else. Of course diabolical. I don't want to give the ending away though.

Thanks, I'll look up this book.

I got it here somewhere. Let me verify if I can. Might take a minute

Keep in mind this is fiction. I did link the wiki. It comes off with an air like the author knows a few things though. Especially military. I mean I guess. The military academy was the full extent of my experience.

But 1984 was once fiction too lol

Forgive my confusion. I don't see any links...?

Sorry I thought I linked it originally. I was hoping I had made it clear this was a piece of fiction. Still the meme is not unknown as it were. I'm trying to find the exact quote right now. This is definitely the book.

"Empire" (a novel)

a reply to: bludragin

Hello, and you've got an interesting thread here (and welcome to the site btw, a vast land of good and plenty). It'd be interesting to see, if the U.S. Army ever got into a shooting war with the citizens, how many soldiers would be aiming at the officer who ordered them to kill Grandma Josephine and Grandpa Kettle who are in front of their City Hall exercising their constitutional rights. I doubt it will come to this though, and hopefully the questions were just some guy spouting off and not an official policy of the Armed Forces.

originally posted by: Aleister
a reply to: bludragin

Hello, and you've got an interesting thread here (and welcome to the site btw, a vast land of good and plenty). It'd be interesting to see, if the U.S. Army ever got into a shooting war with the citizens, how many soldiers would be aiming at the officer who ordered them to kill Grandma Josephine and Grandpa Kettle who are in front of their City Hall exercising their constitutional rights. I doubt it will come to this though, and hopefully the questions were just some guy spouting off and not an official policy of the Armed Forces.

Thanks for the warm welcome! No, wish it had been casually asked and non-official, but the opposite is true. It was asked in an official interview setting. And my nephews are both high ranking, highly respected officers. They serve in Afghanistan, currently, commanding and training airborn troops (if that's the right term - I am not a military person, myself).

originally posted by: Bilk22
a reply to: bludragin

I didn't read all the responses so maybe someone mentioned it already, and it's just a guess here, and contrary to what most of our initial reactions are, but there's an alternate possibility - the idea that the Americans they will be asked to shoot upon are the civilian police forces that were instituted in recent years - such as DHS who have purchased loads of arms, ammunition and hardware.

Obama back in 2008:

“We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

So maybe the military are aware of something and this may require them to act to protect the nation from an attack from within the borders. Maybe the high brass that have been let go were aware of what may be in the works, were found out and relieved. However those who were subordinate are still on guard for what may be inevitable.

Let's look at the state of affairs. Open borders, release of foreign illegal criminals from prisons, spending the country much deeper into debt and virulent agents introduced to the general population. I mean what else do we need to see happen to understand that the POTUS is bent on meeting some agenda that doesn't coincide with the tenets of the Constitution?

The quote above came from this link.

I find your informative reply truly fascinating. Yes, this is also a possibility, I agree. I look forward to perusing your link.

a reply to: Aleister

BTW: Not implying this was "official policy". And, hoping it is not-! But, if they are now asking this... (gulp).