[Bluewater2015]

The people in Arkansas should have called the troops bluff. It is extremely difficult to get regular Army troops, recruited from the population at large, to fire on civilians. If the Arkansas authority simply ignored the troops, and block the students anyhow, the troops would have been in a real quandary. They'd have to use force to stop them. But they couldn't bring themselves to fire on their own people. So it would have been something of a checkmate. Here's an example. In 1962, bread riots broke out in the Rostov region of the USSR. The police were unable to stop it. So regular Soviet army troops were brought in. They sided with the rioters! Ethnic Kazakh troops from the Interior Ministry had to be brought in to suppress the riots. A text case in military psychology. Besides, what President in his right mind wants a mini civil war on the 6:30 news. And imagine how the Soviets would have played the story in the Third World. Alas what might have been.

[Conscience of a Conservative]

“The people in Arkansas should have called the troops bluff”

Or perhaps the people of Arkansas should have desegregated the schools before the troops were brought in.

[Durus]

"It is extremely difficult to get regular Army troops, recruited from the population at large, to fire on civilians.

That is a naive and simply incorrect assumption. History of just the 20th century has shown that the biggest threat to civilians is their own military. Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, China, Cuba, Cambodia...one could go on and on.

Can't happen here?

Hooverville.

Kent State.

[lonestar]

I have several friends who were students at Central High during this time.

You're clueless.

[GreyFriar]

Blue I recommend you read this volume published by the US Army Center of Military History about the Army and the Civil rights movement during the 1950s and 60s. Dr. Paul J. Scheips, CMH Publications Authored ◦The Role of Federal Military Forces in Domestic Disorders, 1945-1992 [30-20] GPO S/N: 008-029-00397-0, Cloth; GPO S/N: 008-029-00400-3, Paper The Role of Federal Military Forces in Domestic Disorders, 1945-1992, the third of three volumes on the history of Army domestic support operations, continues the story of institutional and other changes that took place in the Army during the post–World War II years. Paul J. Scheips adeptly relies on official records and other contextual supporting materials to chronicle the U.S. Army's response to major social events in contemporary American society—the civil rights movement, including the integration of Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas, and the University of Mississippi; the racial disturbances of the 1960s, especially the civil unrest in Chicago, Baltimore, and Washington, D.C., following Martin Luther King's assassination; the protest marches during the Vietnam conflict; and the controversies surrounding the Army's role at Wounded Knee and the race riot in Los Angeles in 1992. Despite occasional lapses, the Army has carried out its civil disturbance duties with moderation and restraint—a testament to the common sense, flexibility, and initiative of highly disciplined soldiers at all levels of command. These hallmarks of a trained and ready force are invaluable not only during domestic civil support but also during the full range of military operations so prevalent in today's uncertain times. You can either view and/or download, for free, at this url: http://www.history.army.mil/html/books/030/30-20/index.html This is a case where I can state that I knew the author and that he was fastidious about his research.