freeatlast said:
Another step towards when the military will take up arms against the people.
Absolutely, I mean what you said. I never thought it was taken any other way. I believe that the nations leaders because of gradually integrating policy that strips away our rights and freedoms,TSA is one example HLS is another, will at some point use the military to take up arms against the people and the military will go along because of being brained washed.
Looking at the bolded wording; hopefully you can see the difference between your two posts.
Now, as for your last statement, I'll say this again: You have no experience with the military, or military members. You're envisioning a situation such as "The Siege" (Denzel Washington and Bruce Willis; interesting movie, but makes serious errors about the employment of military troops); but it's going to take an extreme situation to have any military member actually agree to deploy forces on U.S. soil. The last time martial law was declared in the U.S. was in Hawaii, just after Pearl Harbor was attacked; the situation was that they were expecting the Japanese to mount a land invasion of the islands.
Now, the one thing that was instituted that "solidified" the event, similar to Hitler taking over Germany, was the identification of a certain type of people as suspects. Hitler identified the Jews; in Hawaii, it was those of Japanese descent.
The thing you're missing, free, is that we don't have that situation in the U.S. today. Oh, they've tried to identify muslims and anyone who looks like a muslim; but then we elected a president that went the other way on that group. If you can't put a "face" on the enemy, then the people are reluctant to take up arms. Just ask the military, who you think are so brainwashed; ask Sapper Woody: We're absolutely tired of not knowing who the enemy actually is.
The people you're afraid of will have to clearly identify an enemy for them to make the step towards employing the military. Unfortunately, they're making the same mistake that we made with trying to identify Al Qaeda as a threat: it could be anyone.
The only other option is to do what Burt Ross did in 1967, when he conducted his "the Wave" experiment: identify the members, and anyone who's not a member is the enemy. And that's one of the reasons why we should continue to fight a national ID card. However, this administration has made a mistake in not establishing a national identification, a viewpoint that we're all of one community.
IN other words, the current regime holders are going to have to come up with some situation that the entire American population views as a threat; that they gain a sense of national identity because they all agree it's a threat; and that the regime holders can fan into a flame and hide behind "it's for our own safety and good that we do this."
We're not there yet. And frankly, I can't envision a situation that could be used at this point to justify it. I'm actually more concerned about it happening under a Republican president.
You call military members brainwashed. Maybe you'll understand that we think about this situation from a military standpoint: What would it take for the situation to actually happen? And then we think about it from a military standpoint some more: How do we prevent it?
-----
Wow, this is so far from the original topic of this thread.