Posted on 02/25/2002 12:52:18 AM PST by kattracks
Edited on 05/26/2004 5:04:16 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Meanwhile the two SF guys would have gone on their merry way and every citizen of Moore County would have been carrying their shotguns around looking for these perps.
ROFLMAO! You need to increase your meds
Sure bub, sure. I'm sure that there's nothing to worry about, right? The world is an oyster and we're in search of the pearl and things are just peachy.
No government ever, ever planned to disarm its populace, as history has shown, right? Legislation combined with media propaganda is pressuring down against gun owners on a daily basis. Never a bad thing happens but that private ownership of arms isn't criticized. We are militarizing the police forces of the U.S., we are seeing a general disrespect for citizen's rights as a growing trend, our government is growing beyond human scope or control. We cannot claim to have freedom (aka liberty) in any meaningful sense any longer. Gun registration has become a bigger and bigger "trial balloon" floated each election, and our military is training to disarm entire cities apparently (whatever happened to shooting the enemy btw, as opposed to knocking on their door or assuming they'll be tooling along in their car with a cache of weapons?). But hey, I'm just three sheets to the wind apparently.
I don't buy into conspiracy theories at all, but I do believe that governments tend to consolidate and then expand power. Whether they are training with "us" in mind or not is irrelevant. The fact is that they are training to do this kind of thing, at an ever increasing rate. And you as well as I know that once another Clintoon wannabe gets in office and gets guns registered its only a matter of time before some yahoo at the BATF will come up with the brilliant idea of using the military for confiscation "cause they've been trained to do it anyhow".
You go ahead and not worry and scoff at those who pay attention to history. I'll continue to practice putting holes in paper, thank you very much.
Nope, they would kill us.
BUT, that should not deter us from acting responsibly if we see someone coming near our family whom we do not know, is heavily armed and acting theatening by not putting the weapon(s) down with the first challenge and or command to do so.
Nukem
It's hard to figure out what your point is- the "sarcasm" gets in the way- are you suggesting that these training exercises are part of an attempt to disarm american citizens? are you suggesting that we can infer this from the attempt by the students to diarm the cop?
What exactly is your take on this incident?
What exactly is your take on this incident?
On a 10,000 foot level, I would rather this training not occur regardless of the justification and who it may or may not be aimed at. I'm not a proponent of Empire America, and if our troops were relegated to defense of the United States and its territories only, as opposed to having them stationed in some 141 some odd countries as occupational forces, this would be unnecessary. So I'm against it for that reason.
At a closer level, I don't like the fact that they are using cities and actual live citizens/communities as practice material. Things like this are bound to occur, as has been demonstrated by this incident.
Third, the cop in question did his job and did the correct thing, and I fault him not the least for performing his duty as he should have. Obviously the entire town was NOT aware of this exercise, government claims to the contrary.
Fourth, it is not beyond the scope of pale for the military to be used to confiscate our arms in the not so distant future. Providing this kind of "training", even though ostensibly not aimed at us, is just prepping them for the day when Hillary! orders a general ban on weapons via executive order.
Given that the job of SF troops is to help local non-military types learn to organize and fight invaders, this training would seem to be exactly what a "defend the US" military would need.
Providing this kind of "training", even though ostensibly not aimed at us, is just prepping them for the day when Hillary! orders a general ban on weapons via executive order.
Given that this kind of "training" (why the quotation marks in your "post"?) has been going on since the '40s, they must have have some sort of precognitive portent of her birth, right? Must have been sitting there at Bragg thinking "Hmmmm... Hildebeast will be born in a few years, let's start a training program we can use in the year 2004 to take weapons away from the american people..."
At a closer level, I don't like the fact that they are using cities and actual live citizens/communities as practice material. Things like this are bound to occur, as has been demonstrated by this incident.
Given that these excercises, and ones like them, have been carried out for almost sixty years, your statement seems to be...what's a nice word...inaccurate Regarding the "live citizens" being used as "practice materials" I don't think they would see it that way- my understanding is the citizens, many of whom are prior service themselves, or have family members in the service, love participating, and have done so for years, if not decades.
Regardless of what the plans of the government may or may not be, there is nothing in this incident, or in this training program to warrant the sort of ignorance-fuelled paranioa you and others have demonstrated.
It is clear in this case that someone screwed the pooch per se this time in a test/exercise that has been going on for decades..........
I don't like it when civilians are used in military training. I think it is improper and an intelligence weakness for any operational procedure used by our troops. I say this based on my 26 years in working missions among civilians in EOD work and training.
Just my opinions of course......Stay Safe Ya'll !
I don't really like to get into explaining the scenarios because it could tip some future student off about what to expect,but most likely a scenario involving capturing a cop would be a "POW swap" scenario.
Really,and what experience do you have with this type of thing to base your sniff test on? Besides the wrong premise you started out with,that is?
Yeah,you are when it comes to this specific training exercise. You have valid points and concerns,but they just don't apply here.
In the game they were playing, he isn't necessarily a "deputy". A war game may specify an "urban environment", but that doesn't always mean an "American urban environment." The tragedy here is that the Army looks to have been too tight-lipped with local law enforecement regarding their off-post operations.
There is never any shortage of volunteers. It's a hell of a lot of fun.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.