service men and women will fire upon civilians if ordered

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by NavyDoc

 

They are trained to follow the chain of command. Like previously posted, if they were told a group of individuals were terrorists or whatever was fashionable at the time, do you not think they would follow orders and take them out? Or is the average army grunt able to wait, send out an intelligence team and come to their own conclusion?

Not everyone would, but, with the threat of being discharged/jailed, wouldn't you? (Remember, you don't know they are bad or good, you are just told.)

Well, that is a valid point and the answer comes back to "it depends." What you may also not realize that we are also trained on the rules of war, the convention, and the concept of disobeying unlawful orders. The Naval Academy even way back when I was a Mid had many, many courses on the ethics of war and this very subject. I agree that, for even someone who would refuse an order that contravened the Constitution, that at the time the situation may not be as clear and cut and dry as many assume.

OTOH, in response to your silly emoticon, yes, if a soldier is shown a bunch of women and children lined up against a wall and ordered to shoot them, he is expected to recognize that as an unlawful order and not only refuse to do it, but stop the culprit in question.

The issue is not that soldiers will obey unlawful orders, but that will they be able to recognize the unlawful ones.

edit on 30-1-2013 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)

Sorry about that, I didn't mean to make you have an emotional response to that emoticon, it was only there to show that that is ridiculous to think that the average soldier knows what is unlawful and lawful in the situation being discussed. I would expect that no one in charge (given the topic that we are talking about, US soldier on US public violence) would be so obvious in trying to decieve their men/women. If that happened it would no longer be about the law or not, but, about ethics, as you stated. Just as the servicemen that were urinating on corpses(one of many examples) were not being ethical, I believe there would be quite a few that would join in quashing the rebellion by "terrorists" just because they are blinded by their patriotism. Oathkeepers included.

reply to post by yourmaker


I didn,t say imulate them.I talked about what happen in their ranks.If your reply is in anyway a look into your mind,I feel very very sorry for you.

reply to post by oasisjack

Any one american or foreign national who sympathized with the taliban or al-Qaida is a terrorist and is hunted down even if they have yet to cause any damage

What are you saying we should wait until they commit an act of terrorism and kill people before we don’t something about them?

Originally posted by Dustytoad
reply to post by EL1A5

 

you deleted your post.. ?

If you had a double post you should leave one of them there.

I agree with Wrabbit by the way.. It's one of the reasons they are gaining info on all of our activities.. I'd want to know who would potentially be violent., and so do they..

We are coming into very complicated times, and it's more important every day to know for sure where exactly your morals lie in all conceivable situations.

Be Good guys.

edit on 1/30/2013 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)

Yes, data, and the drones. Cranking the input and material output as fast as their godless bastard hands will allow.
Neighborhoods will look like that little house in Indianapolis, the tomahawk strike or whatever, oh yes, the water heater blew up, was that it.

Be good? What exactly are you saying, don't show your colors? Bow to zionist fascism?

I don't think so.

And I don't think the military will either.

I do not anticipate this scenario. One way or the other, the enemy is the same. They are locked up in news rooms, writing stories to keep us in line. Take you new flu jab now, or don't eat, and are you fit to fornicate?

I've had enough of them, personally. Chaos favors them who collect data, because they have their hit lists compiled, and the drones (skynet) are already programmed with the names, and addresses, while we need no list to know who they are. All this talk of civil whatever-I won't even say it-is brought on by those who can't wait for it to happen, so empty are their lives. This war has already begun. They are pushing it as to become militarily alive. Why do you think rahm is so busy scooping up guns?

I repeat: The higher the order of a system, the more chance there is of catastrophic failure. Skynet will work, at first, and then fail. When the survivors see what the zionist tried to do to us with the keypad army, they will be livid, and not even ProjectJimmy will be enough to suppress final justice.

reply to post by oasisjack


Definitely. You are right. If it came to some kind of rebellion the media would be in full force calling them domestic terrorists. If something like that were to happen it would be massive spin. If half the public buys it then the military is going to as well.

I would like to direct this thread to take a look here: www.abovetopsecret.com...

Not all soldiers are brainwashed puppets. Not all Cops/Sherriffs et cetera are either. Could this be the lines in the sand? The dividing? Still I just wanted to make sure everyone was aware that not all our boys that defend our country (i'm saying that like I know any of you are from America) are going to shoot on civilians.

reply to post by sulaw


Then why, oh why, did not one Seattle cop stop to minister healing to the artisan who was walking back to his studio with a knife, now with 5 slugs in him, obviously disabled?

Not one of them appeared to be grieving. These men are sick in the soul. They are begging for death.

I just cannot get over this. Did the man live? Does anyone care?

www.youtube.com...


"Ma'am, he had a knife and wouldn't drop it"

That poor bastard cop. God pity him, and God help us.

It`s happened before, and it will almost certainly happen again.

Maybe you`ve heard the tune..

Tin soldiers and Nixon comin
We`re finally on our own
This summer I hear the drummin
Four dead in Ohio

Originally posted by jimmyx

Originally posted by Artanis667
I have wondered, is it a possibility that if civilians were to rebel against the US government that UN troops could be used to "stifle the terrorist threat"? I mean, it certainly has to be on their minds that US troops might not want to kill other Americans. Especially considering a rebellion likely wouldn't be "region vs region" but strike much closer, in our homes. What soldier is going to shoot his brother for the president?

Just something I've wondered about but speculations as far as i've got.

"what soldier is going to shoot his brother"??...are you kidding?...there are tens of thousands of guys that relive the civil war each year, with actual muskets, grey and blue uniforms, cannons, etc....in realistic (but, not deadly) battles across the southern and northern states. you don't think southern boys wouldn't want to shoot a few thousand northerners, if they felt threathened?... "revenge is sweet" is a cliche, due to the fact that it happens so much, not so little.

They re-enact it so they (and indeed all of us) do not forget the lessons learned in this conflict.

Do you not understand, this is why studying history is so important. Not history as told by TPTW, but history in the form of knowledge gained through actual understanding.

In the coming troubling times, you'll find the military will be our ally. They ARE our brothers and sisters. In some case, literally. Any group firing on civilians in this day will be few and far between, specially picked for the task. In a case-by-case basis, yes you'll find such folks. But this is the information age, and "grunts" communicate rapidly just like normal folks do. Look up what ASMDSS and you'll get an idea. They are our allies.

Originally posted by superman2012
Sorry about that, I didn't mean to make you have an emotional response to that emoticon, it was only there to show that that is ridiculous to think that the average soldier knows what is unlawful and lawful in the situation being discussed. I would expect that no one in charge (given the topic that we are talking about, US soldier on US public violence) would be so obvious in trying to decieve their men/women. If that happened it would no longer be about the law or not, but, about ethics, as you stated. Just as the servicemen that were urinating on corpses(one of many examples) were not being ethical, I believe there would be quite a few that would join in quashing the rebellion by "terrorists" just because they are blinded by their patriotism. Oathkeepers included.

edit on 30-1-2013 by superman2012 because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-1-2013 by superman2012 because: spelling and clarification

Well, let me start by saying that your concerns are valid and logical. After all, when discussing the potential of an overreaching and abusive government, it is quite logical to question the intentions and actions of those part of that government, the military included.

The military in the United States, in general, tend to be a conservative, pro-freedom, pro-Constitutional, duty-honor-country lot because that is the sort of demographic that signs up for the military. The elitists distain military service. LIberals and the left distain military service. Statists tend to distain military service and seek power in other governmental venues. Thus, I would suggest, that the military in general tends to be more of a freedom (for American citizens at least) oriented organization than one would suspect.

Given that, we must also recognize that the military is also a microcosm of society in general. As such, we do have a large amount of "i only signed up for college and or/benefits" crowd who don't care about anything as long as they can serve their hitch in one piece (although I would submit that this group is much smaller in an all volunteer military than it would be among a draftee military). I also recognize that there are many people in the military who would do anything to climb that ladder and get that next promotion no matter what it was. Anyone who has been chewed out by a First SGT for not waering their reflective belts knows that the military has many people who are "by the book" "rules first and above all" types. They do exist and there may be an even split between the idealists and the "corporate men" but IMHO, the idealists are a tad bit more commmon. I would suggest that for every military person who would rape your grandmother in front of you if it meant a promotion, that there would be one or two people who would stand by you and fight injustice.

As for lawful orders...this can get a bit tricky. We are taught to disobey obviously unlawful orders such as "shoot those women and children lined up against that wall." Likewise, if an order comes down to fire for effect at grid coordinates 12324/4321 and that grid has women and children lined up against that wall the guy shooting the cannon has no idea that this would be an unlawful order at all. There are a million potential scenarios in between both examples.

Now, I know that Mai Lai is a case that people point to as an example of US military war crimes, but what people forget is that the massacre was stopped by US troops. It was Hugh Thompson who saw what was going on, recognized it for what it was, and turned his weapons against Calley and his guys and stopped the massacre. This is an example of an atrocity stopped by one military member by turning his guns against another...might I add that Thomson, a Warrant Officer, was out ranked by Calley and Medina but he stood up to them.

Consider that this case is studied and gone over and over and over in every service academy, every OCS class, and every ROTC unit. It is held up as an example of unlawful orders and the proper response to them. Awareness is much greater now than it was then when Thompson stood fast, said "hell no!" and stopped the atrocity. With such awareness, I would suggest that many more soldiers now would resist such a thing that would then and even back then soldiers stood up for what was right.

This sort of thing, especially after Katrina and Ruby Ridge, is discussed in barracks, wardrooms, O/E clubs, and on the back porch by military members every day. We've thought about it. We've talked about it, and I think you would be surprised just how many members would come down on your side.

if you shoot someone because some other person told you to and you know it is wrong to shoot them, who's to blame.

Look at the Hungarian Uprising against their own Communist government and the Soviets in 1956 for an answer to this. The government called the uprising a Western provoked counterevolution against the people by traitors and terrorists.
Units of the Hungarian Army reacted differently. Some fought against the people as the government wanted them to. More actually fought with the people. Many sat out of the confrontation. The people won and the interim government bean plans to integrate the Army with the citizen militias and the police into a new citizen based military.

In the end, despite the people's victory over their own "Security police", the Soviet Army rolled in and crushed what was truly a popular uprising. It took the Soviet Army

I realize that the Hungary of 1956 is not the US of 2013, but I tend to think similar things would occur (god forbid it came to that).

Originally posted by Dustytoad
reply to post by oasisjack

 

Actually they were thought of as Hadji's... But yea.. Sand monkeys.. Other mean negative racist phrases..

It's harder when you are against your own homeland's people.. Cops still shoot criminals..

I guess it all comes down to belief.. If they fall for it, they will go through with it..

Thing is it will break down.. When all the death is all neighbors and Americans it will start to break through..

"What am I doing?"

It's happened in Iraq and Afghanistan... It would happen quicker in America..

I'm not in contact with any military friends as I don't want them to get in trouble just being my friend.. I say awkward things for a current Army guy to read.. Trust that there are those that would not go through with it.. the ratio is even something like 40-60 as far as my experience goes.. This is after the first month... Before that about 99% will follow through.. It would start VERY bad, and how it continues is based on how peaceful and helpless the American (terrorists) look... If it becomes shooting puppies, then it will stop soon after..

edit on 1/30/2013 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)

I don't feel like being one of the first puppies just to prove a point for the rest. If they come to my door, things will get very REAL, very fast for them.

reply to post by oasisjack


For me, the question isn't, Will our soldiers fire upon civilians, but rather, exactly who are these civilians and what would they stand for if they actually took up arms for a cause?

With 350 million U.S. citizens, would you let just a thousand armed American revolutionaries represent you against the government? A million?

What would be their cause? To fight against the banning of weapons? To take back the right to fly in a plane without being molested at the airport? Lower taxes?

What line does the government need to cross where violence must be the answer?

Point is, why and what would you support when it comes to overthrowing the government?

Valid point. If you took some WWIi vets and time traveled them from 1945 to today, the very well would be shocked and take up arms (see the Battle of Athens,TN 1946). However, with creeping incrementalism, these changes have occurred gradually and over time so that they lack the shock value needed to stir up a revolution.

Originally posted by Monger
It`s happened before, and it will almost certainly happen again.

Maybe you`ve heard the tune..

Tin soldiers and Nixon comin
We`re finally on our own
This summer I hear the drummin
Four dead in Ohio

edit on 1/30/2013 by Monger because: (no reason given)

Neil used to be sharp as a knife. Then he fell for 911FF op.

Nixon looks like a Saint these days. Oh my God, a BUG!

Meanwhile there are targeted individuals walking around with synthetic strands sucking their energy, which will bring their own drone and hellfire, when the day comes....

Sorry I'm new here so forgive me!

My first time in any thread, so excuse the intruder alert,

If a US Service member fires on a US citizen, isn't that an act of war or self defense? I have spent some time within US border and sates, and they don't take kindly to trespassers!

Well, i hope that if somebody, anybody, starts killing Americans of any kind,
They will reserve the right to kill them back.....
Nobody will NOT know whats happening in short order.....
There will be leaders emerge.....

I know my unit was appalled at what they were asked to do during Katrina. I get the feeling that the Majority are like me, and would NOT disarm or fire on civilians. I try not to instigate [as a commander] but I sure as Sh** listen!

reply to post by oasisjack


Unfortunately...I think your right.