20,000 Troops To Be Deployed in United States

[Gods_Mercenary]

Quote by: Jack You won't be able to even if they don't. I can't conceive of the average American with their personal firearm prevailing against the U.S. military.

The Iraqi insurgents did it for a while with Ak's and C4, the U.S. military is the finest in the world, and even it now knows that conventional military means are not effective when dealing with a truly hostile populace that supports the guerrillas. Between that and the morale issues brought up in a military force made up of the common american man while killing their neighbors, neighbors whose attitude towards government they likely share, a truly popular resistance could do some heavy damage to the U.S. military. Now, it would have to get pretty bad for hatred of the government to be this widespread, but using those military units to take away guns would be a start.

[Jinei]

Is someone expecting a nuclear attack soon??????

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: Jinei Is someone expecting a nuclear attack soon??????

I never heard anything about that, but if there was a nuclear attack I doubt 20,000 troops, or 50,000 or 200,000 could do a thing about it. If it was something like a nuke hidden in a large city, for example, that's what the cops and FBI are for. It would only take a handful of terrorists to pull that off and foiling it would take infiltration or some good investigation to get the goods on them, which soldiers are not trained to do anyway.
Which begs the question of what the troops would be here for in the first place? You won't be seeing massive groups of al-Queda members, or supporters, marching in the streets.

[HelioPrime]

Quote by: Scribbler1 NO government, anywhere, can be trusted that much. ANY organization with power over others cannot be trusted, as human nature dictated, and history proves that people with power eventually want more.

You only distrust someone once they've shown they can't be trusted. The current president is not the same as Bush or past presidents and the same goes for other leadership positions.

Saying "the government" is just foolishness. "The government" is made up of people who come and go. And go even faster if they displease those they serve.

[HelioPrime]

Quote by: Scribbler1 Which begs the question of what the troops would be here for in the first place? You won't be seeing massive groups of al-Queda members, or supporters, marching in the streets.

If Greece is any indication then yes, you could have mass marches in the streets. With a sinking economy such things might really happen. They have in the past and this could be the preparation to prevent widespread disruptions and damage.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: HelioPrime You only distrust someone once they've shown they can't be trusted. The current president is not the same as Bush or past presidents and the same goes for other leadership positions.

Wrong on two different levels.
First, trust is EARNED. I'll bet some of your closest friends know things about you you'd rather not have told to the world. Would you divulge those secrets to complete strangers? None of them have shown they can't be trusted, have they?

Second, you once again misunderstand what "trust" is all about. Unlike you I don't KNOW what Obama will do, therefore he will have to prove himself before I can trust him. Exactly where does YOUR trust for the man come from? Do you know him personally, or just from seeing him on TV?

Don't get me wrong, the very fact that I DON'T know Obama also means I don't have anything against him. In fact, I hope he's as good as half of the promises he has made. But unless HelioPrime really IS Barack Obama posting under a screen name neither you nor I know exactly what he will do.

Saying "the government" is just foolishness. "The government" is made up of people who come and go. And go even faster if they displease those they serve.

Like the Senate, where some of them have been there for decades? That's not exactly "coming and going" is it?
Do you really think that by saying "the government" I meant the border guards in Texas or the clerks in the FBI who fill out papers all day? When I say, as do most everyone else, "the government" I'm talking about the president and the Congress. You know, the guys who run the show and make all the decisions. If you think I was referring to anyone else the foolishness is all yours.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: HelioPrime If Greece is any indication then yes, you could have mass marches in the streets. With a sinking economy such things might really happen. They have in the past and this could be the preparation to prevent widespread disruptions and damage.

And that's why we call in the NATIONAL GUARD in cases like that. You still haven't shown one good reason to station 20,000 regular troops in this country.

And BTW, mass marches in the streets are not automatically riots, and public demonstrations ARE legal in this country, so long as they are peaceful. The rioters in Athens were obviously not peaceful, but they weren't terrorists either.

And you can't use Athens as a model for anything other than what's happening now in Athens. The riots originally started, in a crime-ridden slum of Athens when a coupe of cops pumped a few slugs into a kid who was part of a gang attacking their police car. It then grew when some political opportunists with anarchist ties fired up the mob against the government.

So you think we should station20,000 troops in this country because some people in the slums get burned up when a cop shot a kid?

That's happened in this country MANY times and almost every time the Cops took care of it. The only time the government really used military force, which was the National Guard anyway, was during the race riots in the 60's. And even then, I remember much of the time even THAT much force wasn't always necessary.

Any other great reasons to station 20,000 troops in this country?

[Gods_Mercenary]

As a fan of Roman military history, I'm reminded of the great generals entering Rome with troops under their command. There's a reason a magistrate with command was not allowed within Rome's traditional borders.

[ironeagle]

These troops are here for martial law purposes. Nothing more nothing less. Because our government likes illegal aliens has never really tried to stop terrorists from entering our country it's prety obvious because of our economic problems the people will eventually rally, then riot, and protest and challenge the government. These soldiers are being trained to imprison their own people.

[HelioPrime]

Quote by: ironeagle These troops are here for martial law purposes. Nothing more nothing less. Because our government likes illegal aliens has never really tried to stop terrorists from entering our country it's prety obvious because of our economic problems the people will eventually rally, then riot, and protest and challenge the government. These soldiers are being trained to imprison their own people.

Agreed. Well on the rioting part. And it's a good thing. We can't have a hopefully improving government brought to a halt by civil unrest. Mobbing and rioting isn't a solution to anything.

[Rog]

Quote by: HelioPrime Sounds like you live in a state of paranoid fear over an evil government. The type of fear where you probably see the government as slowly trying to take control of every aspect of people's lives. And people would never know it since they control all forms of media. People who diss the government would disappear... In all this have you forgotten who makes up the military? Sorry but US troops would not willingly go along with any of the whacked up totalitarian fears people think up. Jez I miss MB and the other looney gun totting ron paul fans now

Helio you sound young. how do you think some of the totalitarian powers got in power?

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: Rog Helio you sound young. how do you think some of the totalitarian powers got in power?

Exactly! Many of them were VOTED into power. And once they took over completely they stifled public dissent, either militarily or by convincing people like HelioPrime that critics and dissenters were whack jobs and they then supported the dictators efforts to silence them.

I don't know how young he is, but I'm quite he's not OLD, as in, old enough to remember the likes of Hitler and Stalin outside of a page in Wikipedia.

[improvident]

Hooray for a military state!!!

Who didnt see this coming though?

The left and the right have gone at it so hard for so long that they forced everyone in the middle to choose up their sides

Perhaps a little civin unrest is what we need to get back to square one that this country was so beautifully first built upon

[key wish]

Quote by: Nono That Army Times is one informative news sources. And they've been eager to get going for years: Troops Begin Combat Operations in New Orleans

I don't like this anymore than you but your link is about the national guard. They are the ones that are supposed to do this type of work so the federal forces do not have to operate domestically.

[key wish]

Quote by: Rortykiller Its funny how threads like this just keep away some posters, afraid they couldn't even defend this criminal endeavor in a debate

Like who?

[key wish]

Quote by: Jack You won't be able to even if they don't. I can't conceive of the average American with their personal firearm prevailing against the U.S. military.

It is not about wether or not we can prevail. IT is about the right to try. That is the most important thing.

[key wish]

Quote by: HelioPrime Sooooooooo... Is the fear here: A) The military will take begin martial law enforcement in cities and communities? B) The military will be used to oppress a hostile takeover by key government players that throws out democracy and the courts? C) Some other tin hat fantasy? Isn't it possible this is just what it is: Training additional troops to use in the duties the guards have been used in for years: Disaster relief, unrest protection, ensuring civil order, etc...

The things described that the 20,000 are going to handle are to be handled by the national guard. It was made so in order to keep federal troops from having to much involvement within the boarders.

[key wish]

Quote by: grandpa I wonder where most of them will be stationed. If certain politicians have their way, nuclear power will take off in the coming years. And, as anyone might imagine, the need for security measures at nuclear power plants (whether we agree with their construction or not) is all the more serious nowadays. Of course, there is no actual cause for fear or alarm in this regard if we don't (hypocritically) expand our nuclear capabilities. I should also note that, even with thousands of troops around the nation, there is no guarantee that, in the event of an attack, they will make it within proximity fast enough to prevent it. Frankly, I think this is a little melodramatic, and it may be a public demonstration that our tax dollars are going somewhere, however successful the efforts at making us feel "safe" are. And the mainstream media --especially a certain Republican-party-oriented network -- can create dramatic, hyper-active, shout-out-loud, sub-standard reports about how an attack is imminent, much to its own delight. There is, after all, a reason Geraldo went from CNBC to FOX. Grandpa h.

I don't agree with the new troop movement and training but I do have this to say about your rant about the republican oriented network with the hyper active yakity bla bla blah.

To bad they didn't do it before one of the two times the world trade center was attacked. They may have only been my imagination though because I'm so sure someone with the name of grandpa would know a little history and not say there is no danger of an attack on US soil.

OK. I was being a little facetious so don't get offended.

[key wish]

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary As a fan of Roman military history, I'm reminded of the great generals entering Rome with troops under their command. There's a reason a magistrate with command was not allowed within Rome's traditional borders.

Excellent point. Fabulous historical reference.

[key wish]

Quote by: improvident Hooray for a military state!!! Who didnt see this coming though? The left and the right have gone at it so hard for so long that they forced everyone in the middle to choose up their sides Perhaps a little civin unrest is what we need to get back to square one that this country was so beautifully first built upon

Reading what you wrote prompted me to look a little deeper into this. I probably would have gotten around to this anyway because I never take the word of a blog without checking the original story.

What I found out was that the blog neglected to mention an important facet of the story. It is especially important to the people who just like to say "It all that damn Bush's fault.

If you read the Washington post article you find out we started we started preparing for this in 1996 but in a much smaller contingent of marines. Probably because of what you can find in the articles I posted in Iraq war my biggest regret on post #17.

Pentagon to Detail Troops to Bolster Domestic Security

I doubt any bush bashers will read the washington times article or the news week articles anyway. They would only put facts into the discussion.