Pentagon to Detail Troops to Bolster Domestic Security

Washington Post ^ | Monday, December 1, 2008 | Spencer S. Hsu and Ann Scott Tyson

[redgolum]

Not good.

Soldiers make bad cops, and vice versa. This is a very disturbing move.

What it signals is that the Government expects a lot of unrest

[Thunder90]

This could be done just as easily by enlarging the National Guard and having part of it dedicated to this full time, with full time Guardsmen, and having the Feds pay the states for it.

[Thunder90]

I think that the military is getting ready for different scenarios I can’t mention on this forum that would cause massive rioting within inner cities and would stretch the National Guard thin here, while defending the homeland from outside attack at the same time.

[Thunder90]

If they are sent after the rioting street scum in the inner cities when the $#!+ hits the fan, so be it.

[PowderMonkey]

"...they have managed to retain their traditional values and take a larger look at what it means to serve their nation. They truly love it and each other."

I am encouraged and uplifted by your narrative. It is my most fervent hope and prayer that your son and his colleagues continue to be guided and protected by the divine hand of Providence, and as they travel on the road of life, that it safely returns them to your doorstep in the years to come. That they may yet be the salvation of this Republic. God bless.

[Colorado Cowgirl]

I stand corrected, thank you. Did you know that The United States Navy employs Gurkha Guards as sentries at its base in Naval Support Activity Bahrain. The Gurkhas work alongside Navy members in day to day operations. Gurkhas are also sometimes employed to provide security for ships in foreign ports. A smart move by the Navy, I think the U.S. Army would be well served by employing Gurkhas guards also.

[happinesswithoutpeace]

Hey dude. There was the controversial (PRIVATE) combat arms survey that was given to 300 Marines at 29-Nine palms MCAGCC back In 1994. There were a couple of off the hook questions which included:

“46. The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, sale,
transportation, and transfer of all non-sporting firearms. A thirty (30) day
amnesty period is permitted for these firearms to be turned over the local
authorities. At the end of this period, a number of citizen groups refuse to
turn over their firearms. Consider the following statement:

I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of
firearms banned by the U.S. government.”

“Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree No opinion”

26-27% said they would fire- 18% agreed- 7& strongly agreed.

-61.67% (around) said they would NOT fire.

85% Were willing to become part of a US national Emergency police force

84% favored direct military involvement in the enforcement of domestic drug laws.

82% aqreed that US combat troops should be used within the United States as advisers to local Swat Units, the FBI or the ATF

70 % opposed the use of US combat troops to teach US civilian school children, 22% agreed and 8% had no opinion

69% disagreed with swearing to a code as a “UN fighting person- pledged to maintain every nation’s way of life,,and -quote-”give my life in their defense. 23% would agree to such an oath and 7% had no opinion.

47% disagreed with using US troops to clean up environmental disasters in the US. 46% Agreed. 7% no opinion.

There was a lot of tinfoil and Conspiracy faggotry surrounding the survey. Some people thought the author was a raging pro-UN gun grabbing commie...but the opposite was actually true. He was a self described “ardent constitutionalist” who included the questions because of the recent (at that time) AWB and he also was disturbed by what he felt was anti-2nd amendment and “pro-UN control” attitudes he was hearing and seeing from younger members of our Military.

The author of the survey was LCDR (Navy) Ernest Cunningham. ^^^^^ (that guy was also over at 20th Special Forces group at some point).

Again the survey was a private project by that guy, not put out by the Pentagon.

But the numbers were real...(lot of reasons for why that is)

If I can find some non-moonbat links I will link the old survey,

[B-Chan]

I do recall that survey. Interesting, but ultimately meaningless as a predictor of future behavior.

Remember My Lai — only three of our boys, a Warrant Officer and two Spec4s, were willing to step between those poor civilians and the guns. A few others refused to kill the civilians at My Lai, but did nothing to save any of them. The rest (26 were eventually tried for war crimes) gleefully raped, mutilated, and slaughtered those civilians as ordered. The officer in command, 2LT William Calley, himself personally killed a good many of them’ when confronted, said he was “just following orders”.

And then there’s the sad story of MacArthur and Ike vs. the Bonus Army...

Sure, all that was way back when, but I see no reason to think it’d be any different now. The urge to obey orders is graven in our military men and women as if with a laser in granite. They might have tears in their eyes while doing it, but my gut tells me that most of our good soldiers and Marines would probably blow you or me away if their officers ordered them to — especially if we are “hate criminals”, “religious extremists”, or “rebels against the government of the United States”.