Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    7:49 AM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Nobel Peace Prize Nominee: Obama Asks Military Leaders If They Will “Fire On US Citizens” Back to Topics
sissurf

Champion Author
Virginia Beach

Posts:24,145
Points:2,198,480
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 24, 2013 1:30:28 AM

Could you believe this ever to happen? Does any one know anything about it?

January 22, 2013

2009 Nobel Peace Prize nominee Jim Garrow shockingly claims he was told by a top military veteran that the Obama administration’s “litmus test” for new military leaders is whether or not they will obey an order to fire on U.S. citizens.


[Edited by: sissurf at 1/24/2013 1:34:06 AM EST]
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
Panama19
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:30,252
Points:3,079,835
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Feb 5, 2013 2:05:44 AM


jdhelm, I was right on the choice but wrong on the reason. I thought it sounded like Obama.

Profile Pic
jdhelm
Champion Author Iowa

Posts:15,665
Points:1,737,815
Joined:Dec 2009
Message Posted: Jan 30, 2013 8:08:58 AM

A little trivia to see how much history you know (you're allowed to guess at your answers).

Be honest, it's kinda fun and revealing.

If you don't know the answer make your best guess.

Answer all the questions before looking at the answers.
Who said it?

1) "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
...
A. Karl Marx
B. Adolph Hitler
C. Joseph Stalin
D. None of the above

2) "It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few...... And to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity."
A. Lenin
B. Mussolini
C. Idi Amin
D. N one of the Above

3) "(We) .....can't just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people."
A. Nikita Khrushev
B. Josef Goebbels
C. Boris Yeltsin
D. None of the above

4) "We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own ... in order to create this common ground."
A. Mao Tse Dung
B. Hugo Norely Chavez
C. Kim Jong Il
D. None of the above

5) "I certainly think the free-market has failed."
A. Karl Marx
B. Lenin
C. Molotov
D. None of the above

6) "I think it's time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched."
A. Pinochet
B. Milosevic
C. Saddam Hussein
D. None of the above

Scroll down for answers

Answers
(1) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton
6/29/2004

(2) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton
5/29/2007

(3) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton
6/4/2007

(4) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton
6/4/2007

(5) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton
6/4/2007

(6) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton
9/2/2005

Profile Pic
sissurf
Champion Author Virginia Beach

Posts:24,145
Points:2,198,480
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 30, 2013 2:25:50 AM


Bravo Tim, Bravo!

Thanks for sharing something personal. It brings more light to issues going on now a days for me.

I was always an easy push over and one day my father told me and I will never forget his words, sissurf, sometimes you've got to stand up for what is right, or you will fall for anything.

"Now Daddy didn't like trouble, but if it came along
Everyone that knew him knew which side that he'd be on
He never was a hero, or this county's shinin' light
But you could always find him standing up
For what he thought was right

He'd say you've got to stand for something or you'll fall for anything
You've got to be your own man not a puppet on a string
Never compromise what's right and uphold your family name
You've got to stand for something or you'll fall for anything

Now we might have been better off or owned a bigger house
If Daddy had done more givin' in or a little more backing down
But we always had plenty just living his advice
Whatever you do today you'll have to sleep with tonight

He'd say you've got to stand for something or you'll fall for anything
You've got to be your own man not a puppet on a string
Never compromise what's right and uphold your family name
You've got to stand for something or you'll fall for anything

Now I know that things are different than they were in Daddy's days
But I still believe what makes a man really hasn't changed

You've got to stand for something or you'll fall for anything
You've got to be your own man not a puppet on a string
Never compromise what's right and uphold your family name
You've got to stand for something or you'll fall for anything

You've got to stand for something or you'll fall for anything"

You've got to stand for something or you'll fall for anything

[Edited by: sissurf at 1/30/2013 2:35:41 AM EST]
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,916
Points:817,485
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Jan 29, 2013 12:16:14 PM

West Baltimore was burning in the riots of 1968 and looters were firing on firefighters trying to extinguish the fires, requiring police to escort fire crews. The looters/rioters reached President Street, a double-wide boulevard separating East and West. They stopped there and turned around. No buildings were damaged and no shops were looted in Little Italy, on the east side of President Street. here was a line of little old, and not so little or old, Italian-Americans armed with pistols, rifles and shotguns who said, "You come across this street and we'll shoot you!" The rioters knew they meant it and departed. My father-in-law was one of the men in the line.

No one will ever confiscate my guns. Period.

Onanother note: How many guns are in America and how many of those are registered? I'm guessing the number is as vague as the number of illegal immigrants in America, times ten.
Profile Pic
Bell30012
Champion Author Atlanta

Posts:4,527
Points:692,610
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Jan 29, 2013 10:35:15 AM

Good question... and no way to answer it.
Profile Pic
Lucchese
Champion Author Oakland

Posts:3,355
Points:132,315
Joined:Mar 2007
Message Posted: Jan 28, 2013 6:00:19 PM



... quis custodiet ipsos custodes ?
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,087
Points:417,325
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 28, 2013 2:54:23 PM

I'll never understand why they gave Obama a peace prize.
Profile Pic
Bell30012
Champion Author Atlanta

Posts:4,527
Points:692,610
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Jan 28, 2013 2:05:13 PM

I'm not sure that I could fire upon a uniformed US Serviceman. It would have to be an absolute last resort.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,630
Points:1,468,245
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 28, 2013 11:32:38 AM

Gocat - great question - when would it be morally acceptable to fire on an American Military.

Really have to think on that one. Initial thoughts come to mind that flit back and forth rapidly. Bottom line - I would have to really think long and hard before I would even consider it - really long and hard. I would have to be convinced beyond a doubt that they were trying to harm us. Almost an impossibly high hurdle to pass.
Profile Pic
gocatgo
Champion Author South Carolina

Posts:18,839
Points:3,079,810
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Jan 28, 2013 11:06:30 AM

Pan, Bush did nothing but the 2nd Amendment is a federal issue as part of The Constitution.

Sis, "food prices (and all the rest) are going up", and when have they gone down? You don't think there could be some corporate greed in play do you? "Peoples salaries are not going up" but upper management salaries are skyrocketing which cons usually ignore while whining about lowering the minimum wage. "You want your guns taken away", yeah get back with me when you get that knock at your door. "The future" for me is great. My 401K is at an all time high, 4 weeks in a row. My pension and SS are more than enough to take care of my needs. Like the song says, "Life's Been Good To Me So Far" ~ Joe Walsh. If you spend as much time planning for your future as you do complaining things will work out just fine.

Bell, Thank you for your service. In my 3 yrs as an army enlisted man I never disobeyed an order whether direct or lawful. But I have questioned a couple. Your insight on the ucmj is on target.

Following orders that would include firing on American citizens is one part of this discussion. The other side of this topic should include American citizens firing on American servicemen. Anyone want to take a shot at that one? I personally would only fire at a uniformed soldier only to defend my life or my family. Even then I would be very reluctant to shoot to kill.
Profile Pic
jdhelm
Champion Author Iowa

Posts:15,665
Points:1,737,815
Joined:Dec 2009
Message Posted: Jan 28, 2013 8:52:31 AM

it has to do with our rights under the 2nd amendment and upholding the constitution - get it?
Profile Pic
F5
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:1,193
Points:120,105
Joined:Dec 2003
Message Posted: Jan 28, 2013 3:55:02 AM

What's this have to do with his thread?
Profile Pic
Panama19
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:30,252
Points:3,079,835
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 28, 2013 2:58:43 AM


sissurf, your link doesn't work, here you go...

Washington city councilman walks out on council meeting because of citizen with CCW
Profile Pic
sissurf
Champion Author Virginia Beach

Posts:24,145
Points:2,198,480
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 28, 2013 1:30:16 AM



You really need to watch the video to the end.
All I can say, is thank God for level headed people!

Washington City Councilman Objects To Veteran With Concealed Weapon, Tries To Vote Away His Right To Self-Defense

"Anybody on YOUR city council this crazy? You might be surprised.

A disabled 5-year veteran of the war in Afghanistan attended a Oak Harbor city council meeting in the state of Washington, and spoke for two minutes about why the 2nd Amendment was important and a right that should be protected. At one point he mentioned that he was a concealed carry permit holder and carried a weapon at all times to protect both himself and those around him.

When his remarks were finished, a city councilman immediately demanded to know whether the veteran was armed at this moment. The city attorney informed him that he couldn’t force the veteran to answer such a question, but the veteran obliged and respectfully responded that he was currently armed in accordance with the law, that he hoped everyone would be comfortable with that, and added that he would gladly give his life to defend any of them.

Instead of honoring this law-abiding hero, the city councilman immediately introduced a motion to require that all citizens either check their weapons at the door or leave the premises. The motion was denied, and the councilman walked out.

The mayor was much more reasonable, apologizing to the veteran and reminding the audience – half of whom had left – that all city council members had sworn and oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States, as well as the state constitution and the city charter.

Even if the motion had passed, constitutional rights are NOT subject to a vote. No voter or politician has a legitimate power to deny you your rights. But as this incident clearly illustrates, we must ever be vigilant, because liberals will not hesitate to strip even a wounded veteran of his unalienable rights if they think they can get away with it.

Here is the video of the incident (councilman’s tantrum begins at the 2:08 mark):

View on YouTube

Here’s a clue for the councilman: guns are TOOLS that require a human being to fire them. it’s not the gun you should be worried about – it’s the person who is in possession of it. If you are so distrustful of your constituents – even law-abiding, wounded veterans – that you actually believe that they pose a threat to you simply because they choose to carry the means to defend themselves, you have NO BUSINESS in any public servant’s office!"

Profile Pic
Panama19
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:30,252
Points:3,079,835
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 26, 2013 9:23:59 PM


Bell30012, that sounds right. That is not a job in which disobeying orders can be tolerated without destroying the purpose of the mission.

There would be no opportunity for judicial review for those that refused their orders after a nuclear war had been initiated.

Profile Pic
NickHammer
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,427
Points:3,119,295
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 26, 2013 9:23:35 PM

>>What paranoid delusional are you referring to YDraigGoch?<<

Perhaps I can help answer this question.

The source of the OP's information is Alex Jones' Infowars.com. Alex Jones is the conspiracy theorist's conspiracy theorist, the original "9/11 truther". Here is the type of content you'll see on his website:
- Sandy Hook hoax
- Proof The OKC Bombing Was An Inside Job
- Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About 9/11 Conspiracy Theory In Under 5 Minutes
- The LBJ-CIA Assassination of JFK
- New Obama Birth Certificate is a Forgery

Of course, that's just a sampling. To Alex Jones and his ilk, pretty much everything is some sort of government conspiracy. I believe "paranoid delusional" might be appropriate to describe those who have such leanings, since you ask.
Profile Pic
Bell30012
Champion Author Atlanta

Posts:4,527
Points:692,610
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Jan 26, 2013 7:27:46 PM

Many of those Army officers that failed to follow the orders, but not all lost their PRP status. They remained in the service but were taken out of nuclear units. I'm sure that the notations in the officer's 201 files didn't help their careers. The Air Force, was a little harsher. Since the missile silos were all manned by officer, most of them went through changes in their MOS and many moved on to other careers outside of the military.

There was even a couple issues where one officer in the silo wanted to follow orders but the other officer would not. Luckily, before the training operation the officer's sidearm ammunition was changes to dummy rounds.
Profile Pic
sissurf
Champion Author Virginia Beach

Posts:24,145
Points:2,198,480
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 26, 2013 5:02:33 PM



For those that don't believe!

Do you think this is the end or the beginning of things?!

Your Next Verizon Cable Box May Be Able To Watch And Listen To You In Your Own Home
Profile Pic
Panama19
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:30,252
Points:3,079,835
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 26, 2013 4:46:09 PM


Bell30012, "More than half of the units failed to 'launch' their missiles"

What was the outcome to those officers who failed to launch, and to those that did?

Which side failed the test?

Those that failed to launch?


[Edited by: Panama19 at 1/26/2013 4:48:05 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Bell30012
Champion Author Atlanta

Posts:4,527
Points:692,610
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Jan 26, 2013 4:36:14 PM

BGT - To be correct, I am a retired military officer. But my commission and ID Card say Indefinite on term of service. In the military, at least the US Army there is the UCMJ and then there is the Real Rules of how it is done. The real rules are of course, not anywhere in print.

If you are ever given an order by a senior and you decide not to follow it, there will be a courts martial. It will either be yours for refusing to follow the order or it will be the senior who gave the orders. Either way in the end your career is over. Even if you were right, you will be a pariah that no one wants to work with. You will be passed over for promotion. You will receive orders to wonderful scenic places that no one wants to go to. You will be encouraged to resign your commission or not reenlist.

It may not be fair. It may not be right but that is how the military does it. Your 201 file follows you every where you go in your career. The wrong letter in your 201 file and no commander will want you in his/her unit.

My MOS was 13A. In that job, we drilled and trained on delivering a nuclear payload capable of taking life on scales that make Hiroshima and Nagasaki look like a range accident. There was once a set of orders given to several Field Artillery Detachments giving them the orders to launch on a set of coordinates. These coordinates were in "friendly" territory, a NATO country. More than half of the units failed to "launch" their missiles. This same test was given to Air Force Missile Commands, here in the states. Again, more than half of the units failed to follow the orders and launch.

The weapons had been made safe to where they could not be launched unbeknownst to the crews.
Profile Pic
sissurf
Champion Author Virginia Beach

Posts:24,145
Points:2,198,480
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 26, 2013 4:16:28 PM



Things are much different then any other time in history.

Food prices are going up.

Gas prices are on the raise.

Medical care and just to get the meds themselves are over the roof.

If you look around there is more stealing and robbing of banks, convenient stores, gas stations, etc. then ever before.

Peoples' salaries are not going up compare to the inflation of the world.

How many here are having a hard time just heating your homes?

Something has to give! When it does, you bet your bottom dollar it will be your guns before all hell is let loose!

You want your guns taken away, be my guest, but don't fringe on my rights. There will come a time when our military leader/police will be firing on US citizens. When you are hungry, cold, without shelter because you can not now afford the things you once could, what would you do;
rely on the government? Like those in New York and New Jersey who are still waiting for help. There will be too many people in the same sorry state. I know, I take care of the homeless at my church for years and there's an unbelievable number of people without a home then ever before. People now like you and me loosing their jobs right and left, some maybe working part time so that their employee doesn't have to give them health insurance.

Are you that blind, gocatgo, that you can't see what the future holds and why now is the time to confiscate our guns? You start out little and then work your way up to more guns being confiscated. Why do you think New York passed that law for guns to only hold 7 bullets? How many guns/rifles do you think carries 7 bullets? How about you list them here for me.

There are so many people doing crime and yet not doing the time, because as one grocery store manager told me it's not just worth it. He would have to spend countless hours and days to get the criminal in jail and then to prison. He's right I do understand. I've myself spent two years of countless hours and days bringing a criminal to court. Finally this March we will find out how many years in prison he will get. He already has six years from another incident and probably looking at another four or five years with me.

The point being of all this. The criminals have more rights then you and me! If you don't believe this, then your head has been in the sand to long.

This guy had a record from day one as a kid and yet he still roamed the streets constantly getting in trouble, until the day he ran into my family!


[Edited by: sissurf at 1/26/2013 4:22:05 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Panama19
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:30,252
Points:3,079,835
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 26, 2013 4:14:12 PM


gocatgo, "Pan, so what did Prez Bush do about the 'gun confiscation during Katrina'?"

Nothing that I am aware of. It was a State and local law enforcement action - not a Federal one.

The NRA successfully sued the State and local governments and got an agreement that forced the police to return the confiscated guns to their rightful owners.

Profile Pic
gocatgo
Champion Author South Carolina

Posts:18,839
Points:3,079,810
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Jan 26, 2013 12:00:36 PM

sis, here's a news flash for you, Prez Lincoln's army fired on American citizens too many times to count from 1861-65. Prez Hoover ordered 17,000 WWI bonus marchers removed at the point of a bayonet by General MacArthur in 1932. During the protest 4 citizens were killed 1,017 were injured and 69 police officers were injured. To date Obama has not fired on American citizens. Getting all worked up about something that has not happened is hate mongering, so chill.

Green, the only "poop" is coming from cons what ifing themselves into a frenzy and yes it's "poop".

Pan, so what did Prez Bush do about the "gun confiscation during Katrina"?

Cons can be counted on to come up with a conspiracy for any occasion pushed by yahoo zealots of the T party.
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,557
Points:318,475
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Jan 26, 2013 11:29:30 AM

I miss Norm Crosby.
Profile Pic
F5
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:1,193
Points:120,105
Joined:Dec 2003
Message Posted: Jan 26, 2013 3:09:39 AM

>What paranoid delusional are you referring to YDraigGoch? Your answer wasn't really clear cut here.
....the fact that the government can not only turn on your phones and computers, but can listen and see what is going on without you even knowing it.<

I think you answered your own question.
Profile Pic
Panama19
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:30,252
Points:3,079,835
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 26, 2013 2:35:42 AM


BlackGumTree, "BTW, did the brass order Lt. Calley to kill unarmed civilians?"

Yes. As I recall the action reports, Lt. Calley had rounded up all of the civilians (women, children) he had encountered and had them squatting on the ground at the intersection of two trails. He reported this to his superior, Capt. Medina, who told Lt. Calley that his unit was falling behind in the sweep and to take care of his prisoners and then catch up with the other units.

Calley replied that he had the prisoners secured, and Medina said that that was not what he had ordered - TAKE CARE of them. Calley gave the order and his men gunned them down. I don't recall the number, but it was between 60 and 120 if memory serves.

Then they moved into the village killing everything in sight. A large number of villagers had taken shelter in an irrigation ditch and Calley's men opened up on them in the ditch. There were perhaps over a hundred of them killed in the ditch.

WO Thompson saw and reported the excessive killing he saw going on and landed near the ditch. He saw a baby that had been shot but was still alive, which he rescued from the ditch and took to his chopper. Calley asked him what he was doing there and Thompson told him he was trying to stop the killing. Calley ordered him to get out of the way as he and his men shot the survivors in the ditch.

Thompson then saw a group of villagers running for cover, followed by GIs, and he put his chopper down between the villagers and the civilians and trained his M60 on the Americans and threatened to open up on them if they did not stop.

Col. Henderson was in a chopper in the air watching the progress of the operation and had to have heard the radio traffic and had to have known what was going on.

This was clearly a war crime, but it looks much more obvious in retrospect than it did at the time.

The My Lai complex of villages was located in an area controlled by the VC - which were guerilla fighters indistinguishable from civilians. The area had been declared a "free-fire zone" by the South Vietnamese government, meaning that there were no friendlies in the area. Anyone you encountered was considered to be VC.

The only way to distinguish a VC from a civilian was that the VC was shooting at you. The women and children of the villages were the families of the VC, and had helped to build the booby traps for American patrols passing through the area, and had recently watched silently as men from the Americal Division walked into them. The soldiers involved were primed for payback.

Still, shooting unarmed and unresisting prisoners is a war crime - even if they had been soldiers seen killing your friends moments before they were captured and disarmed. Once captured, it becomes murder to kill them.

There was another unfortunate practice that led to this massacre. Soldiers rotated in and out of the war zone individually on one year tours of duty, not as units. Also, as officers and men gained experience they moved up the chain of command and were relieved on the line with green replacements still learning the ropes. By the time a soldier got good at the job and developed combat judgment he was replace by someone learning the ropes.

Killing other human beings is a strong taboo in our society. Having to kill as a normal part of one's job takes a lot of getting used to, and fine points like killing under this set of conditions is good, but if you change one small detail it becomes murder are not obvious to the novice; it takes experience and training to make these fine judgments competently.

For instance, there was a firebase that was overrun by VC. One GI saw a zip coming at him and the GI shot him in the gut with his M79 grenade launcher. However, the range was too close and the grenade did not have the time to spin arm, and it did not go off. However, the zip had a 40mm grenade imbedded in his spine and went down hard.

After the firebase was retaken and the wounded were being evacuated, this zip with the grenade in his spine was airlifted out and operated on in a MASH unit to remove the live grenade. The doctors had to operate from behind sandbags in case the live grenade went off while they were extracting it.

When I saw this I marveled. One minute you would have been happy to see this enemy blown in half (and a serious attempt was made to do just that), and the next minute we risked our aircrew, chopper, and surgical team trying to save the man's life. It seemed stupid to me.

But upon further reflection, it was the only civilized thing to do. The wounded enemy soldier was an unarmed, unresisting prisoner and it was our duty to protect him to the best of our ability.

Green soldiers have not had the time to reflect on such moral distinctions, their officers are green as well, and the training of large numbers of draftees was more rudimentary than we see today.

Calley and his men were in the kill or be killed mode, and were not thinking either deeply or ahead to the consequences.

It takes time and experience to develop judgment and wisdom - neither of which Calley and his men had.

But that is a reason - not an excuse. It was still a war crime.

It is interesting to note that when LT. Calley was called to Washington he thought he was going to get a medal for his service - but he got court-martialed instead.


[Edited by: Panama19 at 1/26/2013 2:42:22 AM EST]
Profile Pic
BlackGumTree
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:18,444
Points:1,459,940
Joined:Dec 2005
Message Posted: Jan 25, 2013 9:51:23 PM

Panama19 - It is not a good position to be in when given an illegal order. Officers have been convicted of War Crimes and executed for obeying an illegal order. And it is no satisfaction that the brass that gave the illegal orders were also convicted and executed.

AS for the unhappy chain of command, Panama19, their behavior toward WO Hugh Thompson should not have been tolerated; they should have faced discipline and possibly a career end for their actions.

When faced with such a situation, have the courage to do the right thing. Further down the pike you will be thought of much better.

BTW, did the brass order Lt. Calley to kill unarmed civilians?

Also Note: The government cannot turn on my computer or my phone unless they physically enter my home.

[Edited by: BlackGumTree at 1/25/2013 9:54:03 PM EST]
Profile Pic
KatmanDo
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:15,212
Points:3,144,885
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 25, 2013 9:11:07 PM

"or the fact that the government can not only turn on your phones and computers, but can listen and see what is going on without you even knowing it."

There you go. Sounds like the government may already have a dossier on those hoarding weapons to be used against "a tyrannical U.S. government", just in case things get beyond just jabbering.
Profile Pic
sissurf
Champion Author Virginia Beach

Posts:24,145
Points:2,198,480
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 25, 2013 7:57:47 PM



What paranoid delusional are you referring to YDraigGoch? Your answer wasn't really clear cut here.

Or do you mean the surveillance cameras on every street corner, or the drones that will fly over head, or the military being able to be used in law informant, or the fact that the government can not only turn on your phones and computers, but can listen and see what is going on without you even knowing it.

Profile Pic
michaelphoenix2
All-Star Author Tucson

Posts:887
Points:12,080
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Jan 25, 2013 7:17:15 PM

What is a person supposed to add when the only evidence presented is a story that someone hered from a person that heard from another person about some wild fantasy??

paranoid delisional sounds about right.I heard that godzilla is going to destroy Kansas city next week i heard from a guy that heard from another guy so it must be true!

Prove me wrong
Profile Pic
Panama19
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:30,252
Points:3,079,835
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 25, 2013 5:58:52 PM


Oh my, someone on the left that can only indulge in name-calling rather than adding anything worthwhile to the discussion.

Profile Pic
YDraigGoch
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:7,346
Points:86,435
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 25, 2013 1:58:43 PM

Oh my. The paranoid delusional set is at it again.

Here's a tip for you guys. There are some nice medications to help you, and they cost less than guns do.

I wonder if "Obamacare" covers those costs. :o)
Profile Pic
Panama19
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:30,252
Points:3,079,835
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 25, 2013 12:41:19 PM


BlackGumTree, "That attitude on your part will be a career ender, so don't let it become known"

Actually, Bell30012 is right.

I was an officer in Viet Nam when Lt. Calley was arrested for following orders by Capt. Medina to kill his unresisting civilian prisoners so that his unit could keep up with the other units in the assault.

There was a OH-23 Raven pilot, WO Hugh Thompson that placed his chopper between the American troops and a group of civilians that were being gunned down, trained his M-6o on the American troops and threatened to open fire on them if they did not stop.

Lt. Calley was court-martialed for following orders and WO Thompson was threatened with court-martial initially for stopping the killing and for reporting the incident up the chain of command.

WO Thompson's career was ended when he was shot down and his back was broken in the crash landing, but it would have been over anyway because his chain of command was not happy that he refused to follow unlawful orders.

Thirty years after the action Thompson and his crewmembers were awarded the Soldier's Medal for their actions (one posthumously) but at the time they were in deep trouble with the brass and many of their fellow soldiers because of what they did at My Lai.

In the aftermath of Calley's trial the military stressed to the officer corps that it was their duty to refuse an illegal order.

But you had better be right if you do - because the chain of command will eat you alive in any event.

Disobeying orders is not tolerated in the military.

Profile Pic
BlackGumTree
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:18,444
Points:1,459,940
Joined:Dec 2005
Message Posted: Jan 25, 2013 11:57:05 AM

Bell30012 - "Also keep in mind that if you ever make the decision that an order is unlawful and you are not going to follow it, you had better be absolutely certain that you are right. Either way it comes out, it will be a career ender. As a military officer, I can tell you this is something that no officer wants to do. When you make the decision to not obey the order, you are most likely going to be relieved on the spot and your junior officer will be put in command, given the same order you just refused to comply with..."

That attitude on your part will be a career ender, so don't let it become known. You took an oath to defend the Constitution. Obeying an illegal order would be a violation of that oath. Even saying that you would can terminate your career.

If you really are a military officer, you need to do what is right even if that requires telling your superior officer that he is wrong. To do otherwise makes you unworthy to be an officer and could make a criminal out of you. Your choice.

You are correct when you said, "Also keep in mind that if you ever make the decision that an order is unlawful and you are not going to follow it, you had better be absolutely certain that you are right." And then have the courage to stick by your convictions.
Profile Pic
Bell30012
Champion Author Atlanta

Posts:4,527
Points:692,610
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Jan 25, 2013 6:58:52 AM

Actually that was the Ohio National Guard. They were acting in a state capacity. They were under the orders of the governor of the state. But yes, they fired on Americans.
Profile Pic
Panama19
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:30,252
Points:3,079,835
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 24, 2013 11:28:51 PM


American soldiers opened fire on American students at Kent State University on May 4, 1970.

Well, hippies. But American ones.

Profile Pic
KatmanDo
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:15,212
Points:3,144,885
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 24, 2013 11:23:18 PM

I don't foresee any shortage of ambitious 18 or 19 year olds who would be more than willing to fire upon any "domestic enemy combatants" if orders were issued to do so. Al-Qaeda or a band of anti-government, domestic militia-types armed to the teeth with AK-47s or AR-15s would likely be treated the same by such kids in U.S. uniforms. So, arguments that U.S. citizens need to maintain military-style arsenals to protect against a "tyrannical U.S. government" would just be signing their own death warrants.
Profile Pic
johnnyg1200
Champion Author St. Louis

Posts:8,072
Points:1,183,665
Joined:May 2011
Message Posted: Jan 24, 2013 7:14:08 PM

“””””””So if ordered to "Fire on US Citizens", they will have to choose whether to fire on citizens acting legally or on a citizen giving an illegal order. Either way they will get to fire or one or more US citizens.”””””””

One very important thing to remember is that history is written by the victors. The same could be said about the courts. The victors will run the courts. If the people who refuse to give up their weapons win then the officers who fired on the civilians will be prosecuted. If the people taking the weapons win then the officers who refused to fire will be prosecuted.

As for me, regardless of who I thought would win I would never fire on American civilians. The consequences be dammed. Once in my life did I let fear of the consequences stop me from doing the right thing. The thought of my cowardice still haunts me and I will never fail to follow my conscience ever again.
Profile Pic
michaelphoenix2
All-Star Author Tucson

Posts:887
Points:12,080
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Jan 24, 2013 2:53:45 PM

I was told by this guy who was told by this other guy that there is a litmus test for military leaders.

This isnt a first hand account. It is't even a second hand account. This just sounds like the normal fear mongering BS that ive come to expect from the right wingers.
Profile Pic
Panama19
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:30,252
Points:3,079,835
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 24, 2013 2:32:05 PM


The Second Amendment is not about hunting.

Profile Pic
Panama19
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:30,252
Points:3,079,835
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 24, 2013 2:18:35 PM


Of course, that could never happen here.

Our officials would never turn their guns on us.

Don't look at the gun confiscation from homeowners in the aftermath of Katrina, either.



[Edited by: Panama19 at 1/24/2013 2:23:47 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Panama19
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:30,252
Points:3,079,835
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 24, 2013 12:49:55 PM


Bell30012, "Also keep in mind that if you ever make the decision that an order is unlawful and you are not going to follow it, you had better be absolutely certain that you are right. Either way it comes out, it will be a career ender"

Remember My Lai, when this exact situation came up, albeit not against Americans.



[Edited by: Panama19 at 1/24/2013 12:55:07 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Bell30012
Champion Author Atlanta

Posts:4,527
Points:692,610
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Jan 24, 2013 12:37:39 PM

"Keep in mind that our military officers know that they are not required to obey an illegal order." - Blackgumtree

Also keep in mind that if you ever make the decision that an order is unlawful and you are not going to follow it, you had better be absolutely certain that you are right. Either way it comes out, it will be a career ender. As a military officer, I can tell you this is something that no officer wants to do. When you make the decision to not obey the order, you are most likely going to be relieved on the spot and your junior officer will be put in command, given the same order you just refused to comply with...
Profile Pic
greentre
Champion Author Pensacola

Posts:1,286
Points:402,405
Joined:Oct 2011
Message Posted: Jan 24, 2013 9:43:00 AM

Rumbleseat,

Maybe our Founding Fathers knew what the government would do over time:
" That the people and the States should, for a sufficient period of time, elect an uninterupted succession of men ready to betray both; that the traitors should, throughout this period, uniformly and systematically pursue some fixed plan for the extension of the military establishment; that the governments and the people of the States should silently and patiently behold the gathering storm, and continue to supply the materials, until it should be prepared to burst on their own heads, must appear to every one more like the incoherent dreams of a delirious jealousy, or the misjudged exaggerations of a counterfeit zeal, than like the sober apprehensions of genuine patriotism."

How long have the mechanisms of deciet and corruption been in the halls of government? How long has there been a government?

BGT,

With all the new 'laws' and the Patriot Act and other such government terrorist protection hoopla, who is to say we all aren't in violation of 'some' legaleze BS?

Just sayin', if looks like poop, smells like poop, then...
Profile Pic
BlackGumTree
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:18,444
Points:1,459,940
Joined:Dec 2005
Message Posted: Jan 24, 2013 9:17:28 AM

Keep in mind that our military officers know that they are not required to obey an illegal order.

So if ordered to "Fire On US Citizens", they will have to choose whether to fire on citizens acting legally or on a citizen giving an illegal order. Either way they will get to fire or one or more US citizens.
Profile Pic
rumbleseat
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:25,181
Points:3,824,340
Joined:Oct 2002
Message Posted: Jan 24, 2013 4:19:32 AM

Concerns over US troops being given orders to fire on American citizens in the event of mass gun confiscation first arose in 1995 when hundreds of Marines at 29 Palms, California were given a survey as part of an academic project by Navy Lieutenant Commander Ernest Guy Cunningham which asked the Marines if they would, “Fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the United States government.”
And was Barack Obama President of the USA then?

a leaked US Army Military Police training manual for “Civil Disturbance Operations” (PDF) dating from 2006.
The 2006 document outlines how military assets will be used to “help local and state authorities to restore and maintain law and order” in the event of mass riots, civil unrest or a declaration of martial law.
On page 20 of the manual, rules regarding the use of “deadly force” in confronting “dissidents” on American soil are made disturbingly clear with the directive that a, “Warning shot will not be fired.
Again, was Barack Obama President of the USA then?

Seems maybe it isn't actually his idea!
Profile Pic
Panama19
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:30,252
Points:3,079,835
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 24, 2013 1:41:18 AM


This is the downside of the all-volunteer force.

"Civilian soldiers" (draftees) serving their obligation to their country do not see the American society as significantly different from themselves.

Professional militaries over time have not demonstrated that trait.

Post a reply Back to Topics