Special army unit ready to be deployed on American soil just before Nov. elections

[Dragoon68]

That shouldn't placate us. The real trouble is what is legal, not what isn't. Even when it doesn't lead to collateral damage, the use of standing armies at home can, to quote Jefferson, "overawe the public sentiment," and acclimate Americans to a militarized home front inconsistent with democratic life.

SOURCE

Was Jefferson "slamming the military" when he said this Dragoon?

Jefferson was correct for the threats of his time. One could be put together quick enough. But today we'd be in really bad shape if we didn't have a "standing" army ready to fight when needed. In my opinion, we might best have one ready on our Southern border because that need may be coming soon.

But this isn't the issue here. This is a effort to have a response force trained and ready to respond to domestic chemical, biological, nuclear, etc. attacks that would otherwise - and might still - drive our country into panic, chaos, and anarchy. This is a good thing - not a bad thing. Let's see it for what it is and manage it carefully and properly.

 

[poncho]

Jefferson was correct for the threats of his time. One could be put together quick enough. But today we'd be in really bad shape if we didn't have a "standing" army ready to fight when needed. In my opinion, we might best have one ready on our Southern border because that need may be coming soon.

But this isn't the issue here. This is a effort to have a response force trained and ready to respond to domestic chemical, biological, nuclear, etc. attacks that would otherwise - and might still - drive our country into panic, chaos, and anarchy. This is a good thing - not a bad thing. Let's see it for what it is and manage it carefully and properly.

Okay, so who's supposed to manage it carefully and properly again? And are we really to believe this government (or the next) with all it's coruption and hunger for ever more power and control over us can be trusted to manage anything carefully and properly?

I think you're asking me to believe the impossible dream here.

 

[Dragoon68]

Okay, so who's supposed to manage it carefully and properly again? And are we really to believe this government (or the next) with all it's coruption and hunger for ever more power and control over us can be trusted to manage anything carefully and properly?

I think you're asking me to believe the impossible dream here.

That's why we have a military that is subordinate to civilian command, why Congress - our representatives - establish the organization of the military and fund its continued existence, why we have laws and rules that limit the use of military forces, etc., and, most of all, why it's so important never to elect corrupt or foolish men to any office of government. It is in the latter of these that we have failed and should have our greatest fear.

 

[carpro]

I don't think I can claim credit for this one Robert. If anyone can take credit it would be Obama.

If Obama were a "republican" president all the new conservatives like our friend Carpro would be cheering the appearance of the military openly policing citizens.

That is a lie.

 

[Dragoon68]

... would be cheering the appearance of the military openly policing citizens. It would be sold to us as "security measures" and making us safe from terrorists. ...

The problem with this statement is that federal military forces have not been "policing" the citizens nor is there any plan to do so!

 

[Crabtownboy]

I don't think I can claim credit for this one Robert. If anyone can take credit it would be Obama.

If Obama were a "republican" president all the new conservatives like our friend Carpro would be cheering the appearance of the military openly policing citizens. It would be sold to us as "security measures" and making us safe from terrorists.

But we have a "democratic" president today so the new conservatives see this it for it is . . . tyranny.

At least the new conservatives can see danger when it comes from the left. That's something I guess.

Just like they did while G. Bush took away many of their civil rights. Many of them still defend him. Seems they are blind when the danger comes from the Right.

 

[Dragoon68]

Just like they did while G. Bush took away many of their civil rights. Many of them still defend him. Seems they are blind when the danger comes from the Right.

That's easy to say but you have not shown how this consequence management function of federal military forces is in any way a danger to our civil liberties. It has nothing to do with left or right! The original article's title is very misleading about its purpose which has nothing to do with "policing" the citizens or interfering with voting at the polls in November. That's nothing but baloney! Take some time to study the facts and you'll learn that this function is a capability many - both left and right - will scream to have instantly at their time of need following the panic, chaos, anarchy, suffering, etc. of a major chemical, biological, or nuclear attack. This is a legitimate function of our military and even so is still subservient to civilian management.

 

[Revmitchell]

That's easy to say but you have not shown how this consequence management function of federal military forces is in any way a danger to our civil liberties. It has nothing to do with left or right! The original article's title is very misleading about its purpose which has nothing to do with "policing" the citizens or interfering with voting at the polls in November. That's nothing but baloney! Take some time to study the facts and you'll learn that this function is a capability many - both left and right - will scream to have instantly at their time of need following the panic, chaos, anarchy, suffering, etc. of a major chemical, biological, or nuclear attack. This is a legitimate function of our military and even so is still subservient to civilian management.

He didn't care about the facts or even being on topic. He just wanted to rabblerouze and stir something up.

 

[Robert Snow]

That is a lie.

You react like someone who just got caught with your hand in the cookie jar. I think if it were a republican, you would either find a way to justify it or you would ignore it altogether.

 

[targus]

You react like someone who just got caught with your hand in the cookie jar. I think if it were a republican, you would either find a way to justify it or you would ignore it altogether.

You react like someone who just got caught with your hand in the cookie jar. I think that because it is Obama, you find a way to ignore it altogether.

Wow, pointless posts like this are easy. No wonder that is all you ever have to offer.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

That's easy to say but you have not shown how this consequence management function of federal military forces is in any way a danger to our civil liberties. It has nothing to do with left or right! The original article's title is very misleading about its purpose which has nothing to do with "policing" the citizens or interfering with voting at the polls in November. That's nothing but baloney! Take some time to study the facts and you'll learn that this function is a capability many - both left and right - will scream to have instantly at their time of need following the panic, chaos, anarchy, suffering, etc. of a major chemical, biological, or nuclear attack. This is a legitimate function of our military and even so is still subservient to civilian management.

Excellent answer to the fear mongerers!

 

[Robert Snow]

You react like someone who just got caught with your hand in the cookie jar. I think that because it is Obama, you find a way to ignore it altogether.

Wow, pointless posts like this are easy. No wonder that is all you ever have to offer.

:sleep: :sleep:

 

[Revmitchell]

While I see no need whatsoever to question the "veracity" of the report neither do I see a reason for concern. While I do not trust government and even more I do not trust extreme far left demcoms, what is listed in the op is reasonable and responsible. We cannot work to find monsters under every rock.

 

[carpro]

You react like someone who just got caught with your hand in the cookie jar. I think if it were a republican, you would either find a way to justify it or you would ignore it altogether.

Still nothing to contribute but personal attacks.

Grow up.

 

[Robert Snow]

Still nothing to contribute but personal attacks.

Grow up.

This entire tread is nothing but supposition based on dislike for our democratic president.

Carpro said:

The existence of this unit doesn't really concern me that much. A sensible president would only use them in a sensible manner, but...

a thug from Chicago is Commander -in-Chief and he's openly trying to destroy the country as we know it.

That is something to be concerned about.

This is really the "personal attack" and you know it.

 

[Dragoon68]

This entire tread is nothing but supposition based on dislike for our black democratic president. ...

This wasn't directed at me and personally I don't have a problem with the "consequence management" capability of our federal military forces but, never the less, I think this response is a real cheap shot! The concerns expressed had nothing to do with the President being black - actually half black or half white whichever way you see it. This is just like the NAACP wanting to put a racist label on the Tea Party. Carpro expressed a legitimate concern - we should always keep an eye of the government's doings - and, neither he nor anyone else except you that I can see, made any reference - implied or otherwise - to the race of the President and neither should you!

 

[Revmitchell]

This entire tread is nothing but supposition based on dislike for our black democratic president.

Its not but you would like it to be because then you would have a leg to stand on.

 

[targus]

Libbies always trot out the race card before it's over.

Racism is universally despised so libbies like to call their opponent a racist to make the subject about their opponent.

But in my personal experience white liberals are the biggest racists around.

 

[just-want-peace]

RS:

This entire tread is nothing but supposition based on dislike for our black democratic president.

Let me, if I may, rephrase this statement (in red) to a believable form!

This entire thread is nothing but a distinct possibility based on a complete and total distrust for our (deleted) democratic socialist president, and his equally socialistic Demoncrat & Rino compradres.

With this revision, I am in complete agreement!!!:smilewinkgrin:

 

[Robert Snow]

I removed the word "black."