Ohio National Guard Training Envisions Right-Wing Terrorism

reply to post by opethPA

Exactly why is it a leap again?
As people get more desperate or as the Govt interferes more people will do horrible things.
I see nothing wrong at all with training for 1 possible scenario out of a billion.

The question is, why that particular scenario? I'm pretty sure they didn't randomly pick it out of a bucket of a million other scenarios. There hasn't been any such real life scenarios any time in recent past where an insane Second Amendment supporter used a WMD. There is a reason and it's not based off of anything in the past. It must be something that they're anticipating (or) will (make it happen?) in the future. Your guess is as good as mine.

There seems to be a theme in the U.S. of targeting conservatives or anyone that doesn't 100% agree with the Government's actions, for no apparent reason, there hasn't been any domestic terrorism coming from conservatives. Just because someone might not agree with something, then they may possibly be jumping on the terrorist bandwagon? How paranoid is that?

neo96
See before the 'internets' there were these things called books.

I wouldn't know about those, I don't think I have ever read them and I am certainly not reading one now while I have 6 others loaded on my tablet.

The average person with a web enabled phone has more knowledge at their fingertips then a whole town had access to 30 years ago.

I still haven't seen you explain why training for 1 possible scenario is a bad thing.

neo96

Has any gun owner in the last 100 years EVER used WMD's ?

I know it's been almost 20 years but anybody remember Tim McVeigh? I don't believe for one second it was just him and terry nichols acting alone but I'm damned certain they were involved and I'm damned certain a U-haul truck loaded with ammonium nitrate and diesel constitutes a WMD. I think there's more to fear from the American government but the threat is a real possibility and one that we ran training exercise on even before OKC. I enlisted in 1990 and we did a couple of them the first year w GHW Bush as our CIC. So I can't even blame it on Clinton.

opethPA

neo96
See before the 'internets' there were these things called books.

I wouldn't know about those, I don't think I have ever read them and I am certainly not reading one now while I have 6 others loaded on my tablet.

The average person with a web enabled phone has more knowledge at their fingertips then a whole town had access to 30 years ago.

I still haven't seen you explain why training for 1 possible scenario is a bad thing.

Guess you never heard of those things call Chemistry sets either.

That use to be real chemistry sets used make stuff blow up, and stuff.

We have always had access.

So the national guard training for an event that has never happened in all of US history is 'not a bad thing'.

Alrightie then.

Who cares!

kx12x

There hasn't been any such real life scenarios any time in recent past where an insane Second Amendment supporter used a WMD. There is a reason and it's not based off of anything in the past. It must be something that they're anticipating (or) will (make it happen?) in the future. Your guess is as good as mine.

Just because something hasn't happened previously doesn't mean it can't happen.

Regardless of if you believe 9/11 or Pearl Harbor were inside jobs had either of those attacks happened previously?

Don't get me wrong, if all they were training for was this particular scenario then I think that would paranoid but training for any possible scenario isn't a bad thing.

peter vlar

neo96

Has any gun owner in the last 100 years EVER used WMD's ?

I know it's been almost 20 years but anybody remember Tim McVeigh? I don't believe for one second it was just him and terry nichols acting alone but I'm damned certain they were involved and I'm damned certain a U-haul truck loaded with ammonium nitrate and diesel constitutes a WMD. I think there's more to fear from the American government but the threat is a real possibility and one that we ran training exercise on even before OKC. I enlisted in 1990 and we did a couple of them the first year w GHW Bush as our CIC. So I can't even blame it on Clinton.

Well aware of McViegh.

He didn't use 'mustard gas' either.


More of a threat from radical Islamo fascists than American gun owners.

In all fairness, WMD attacks of small scale and small causes have happened before.

750 sickened in Oregon restaurants as cult known as the Rajneeshees spread salmonella in town of The Dalles

I'd actually read a book on that one a number of years back but the media link there is a decent summary of it all. Not nice people.

Then there was the Tokyo Sarin attack by another homegrown group in Japan with common materials and bathtub levels of 'equipment'.

I'd say the threat is real enough.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Really ?

After the IRS, and conservatives being targeting that asinine report from DHS.

They see right wingers who support the second as a 'threat'.

Seems to me it can't get any more clear:

Conservatives today have a bullseye painted on their backs.

The same what Clinton/Gore, and their cheerleaders did the back in the 90s.

reply to post by neo96


Just so I can be clear, you're disputing that a rental truck loaded with a massive home made fertilizer bomb is actually a WMD? To each their own i guess though i think the residents of OKC would disagree. Honestly mustard gas sounds a little archaic even for radical Islamists. I think a dirty bomb would be more up their alley personally. It's easier to obtain the components and with the proper shielding or the right martyrs who don't care about radiation poisoning, probably a more viable alternative for the cave dwelling cellar dwellers. Most of the groups operating now just don't seem to have the organizational capacity to pull that off, but I've been wrong before. I thought the government would appreciate my service and not label me a potential terrorist for knowing what THEY taught me. That's some irony!

reply to post by neo96


Back in the 30s both your troops and those of the UK, pointed Machine Guns at Coal Miners who went on strike.

reply to post by peter vlar

Just so I can be clear, you're disputing that a rental truck loaded with a massive home made fertilizer bomb is actually a WMD? T

Just to be clear:

I don't put much stock in that term anymore since they classfied 'pipe bombs' as WMD"s and more people have been killed by Cruise Missiles, and drone's.

Than 'conservative' right wing 'terrorist's.

Waiting for the day guns are declared 'WMD's' since that is the direction we are headed.

reply to post by neo96


I have a lot of issues with the military units that have been seen and filmed flying over, through and around our cities with ground elements training and scaring the stuffing out of people.

I have a lot of issues with the VIPR teams popping up and also scaring people for little reason, as if a terrorist is hiding behind every bus, train and scale house. It's really getting absurd.

Of all the units though, a dedicated WMD unit is the one I least have issue with keeping a fine edge on their training and skills. They're one I can actually see a use for, outside war or outrageous abuse, inside the US. God forbid....but I can see a use that doesn't include martial law or the end of freedom.

kx12x
reply to post by opethPA

The question is, why that particular scenario?

why not?

The National Guard have a role in times of emergency - potentially including domestic terrorism - and by definition domestic terrorism REQUIRES there to be some US citizen or resident being the terrorist.

There are a number of potential domestic threats - there are plenty of right wing groups such as militia's with all-but-openly-stated aims of violence against anyone they feel they don't like - it's not like they are secret or anything!

National preparedness scenarios are specified as being against a "universal adversary", who is identified in very general terms..... :

A recent Report of the Homeland Security Council entitled Planning Scenarios describes in minute detail, the Bush administration's preparations in the case of a terrorist attack by an outside enemy called the Universal Adversary (UA).

The Universal Adversary, is identified in the scenarios as an abstract entity used for the purposes of simulation. Yet upon more careful examination, this Universal Adversary is by no means illusory. It includes the following categories of potential "conspirators":

• "foreign [Islamic] terrorists" ,

•"domestic radical groups", [antiwar and civil rights groups]

•"state sponsored adversaries" ["rogue states", "unstable nations"]

•"disgruntled employees" [labor and union activists].

so no-one needs to feel singled out just because they are a right wing nutcase - anti-terrorism is an equal opportunity repression.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

There are a number of potential domestic threats - there are plenty of right wing groups such as militia's with all-but-openly-stated aims of violence against anyone they feel they don't like - it's not like they are secret or anything!

Yep there is a number of potential domestic threats.

Starting with that weapon of mass destruction called the US federal government.

Who uses violence against anyone they feel they don't like.

It is not like that is a secret.

reply to post by neo96


completely miss the point often do you??

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

National preparedness scenarios are specified as being against a "universal adversary", who is identified in very general terms....

Yeah someone clearly missed the point.

1. The US government is a weapon of mass destruction that obliterates anything it touches.

2. Right wing extremists who 'beleive' in the second amendment.

IS NOT a 'universal adversary''.

National Guard 'training' was clearly defined.

When exactly did supporting the Constitution of the United States make one anti-government? And I have seen this from both the left and the right, so it is not a political issue. It is something that is occurring regardless of which party is in power. I am definitely NOT right wing by any stretch of the imagination, since I see the right as being intolerant, stubborn, and the epitome of oppression and the instigators of class warfare, but I do agree with them when it comes to the 2nd amendment. Mainly because I agree with those who founded this country on almost every point. Not every point, but mostly every point, mind you, as there were some things that the world just was not ready for during their time. Or maybe some of those guys were just ignorant in some respects, but they still created probably the greatest layout for the functioning of government that has ever been seen on this planet. It is just too bad we have strayed so far from what they intended when they formed the country and its laws.

But something that is important to understand about the military, and ESPECIALLY about the high command of the military...They like to run simulations for EVERYTHING. They also have contingencies for things that we wouldn't even believe were possible. This is important so that on the off chance something does happen, they can be a bit more prepared.

However, the terminology, anti-government, being tied in with those who support the 2nd amendment, if this is indeed what they said, is preposterous. THAT is anti-American if you ask me. Why aren't we saying that anyone who doesn't support the 2nd amendment is anti-American? I guarantee that the majority of people who want to abolish guns either don't grasp what the amendment was created for, or they are naive enough to believe that such a provision would never be necessary in the United States. If the former, then these people need to educate themselves on WHY the Founding Fathers included such an amendment. And if they believe the latter, they need to re-read their history books. Or just look around them if they live in the US.

If you don't think the government will oppress the people and their rights just because this is the US, then obviously you have missed all of the times they have done it in the past. There are countless examples of government abuse when it comes to the rights of the citizenry. And the fact that they are disregarding our Constitutional rights as we speak should worry everyone. This is EXACTLY why we have the 2nd amendment. When the people wise up, and the government pushes them too far by disregarding their lawful rights, that amendment is the only thing that can restore order.

Talking about armed revolution is NOT treason, considering that the government would be the treasonous body, as they are stomping on the rights and the laws that lawmakers have created. We CANNOT disobey the laws, so they should't be able to either. Especially when it comes to our most sacred laws...those dealing with our freedoms and rights. The entire mindset of the populace, where they are letting the government get more and more power, while these same people give up more of their personal freedoms for safety, or for some other lie that they've been sucked in to, is going to be the death of our personal freedoms in the end. It is quite obvious to me and many others at present, and not just conspiracy nutters on the internet, but educated and influential people as well, that the US is headed in such a direction.

JiggyPotamus
When exactly did supporting the Constitution of the United States make one anti-government?

This isn't about being anti-Govt - this is aimed at terrorists - it is entirely possible to be anti-Govt without being terrorist.

neo96
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

National preparedness scenarios are specified as being against a "universal adversary", who is identified in very general terms....

Yeah someone clearly missed the point.

1. The US government is a weapon of mass destruction that obliterates anything it touches.

and yet you and I exist.

2. Right wing extremists who 'beleive' in the second amendment.

that might e one of their beliefs, but if they are actually terrorists then they have proceeded to violence.

Or do you think that everyone who believes in the 2nd amendment is going to be a terrorist?? The US govt doesn't - so why would you??

IS NOT a 'universal adversary''.

National Guard 'training' was clearly defined.

Indeed - they have scenarios - his is one scenario that defines a particular group as resorting to terrorism. there are other scenarios that specify that other groups do so - left wing as well as right wing.

Terrorism is not a matter of political ideology - anyone can engage in it - christians, moslems, right wing, left wing - picking a given scenario for 1 NG exercise out of hundreds is not an indication of anything.

Whining about it as if it is Armageddon is just plain paranoid.

reply to post by JiggyPotamus

. I am definitely NOT right wing by any stretch of the imagination, since I see the right as being intolerant, stubborn, and the epitome of oppression and the instigators of class warfare,

Instigators of class warfare ?

Hardly.

Want to know who gun control laws effect the most ?

The poor.

Gun control puts people out of work, and they make guns more expensive, out of reach.

In fact the gun is the truest form of equality in this country.