184 replies to this topic

[WoIverine]

eqgumby, on 07 December 2011 - 05:08 PM, said:

More importantly, would the Guard or the Army really follow orders to begin disarming citizens or rounding them up into FEMA camps? Not likely...because the men and women of the military, are some of the staunchest supporters on a personal level of the right to bear arms (as citizens) and the rights to free speech, etc.

I think those military men and women will follow orders if it means not earning a paycheck to feed themselves and their families, well...most of them. Military may be some of the only actual jobs left that are viable after an economic collapse. There will probably be some staged event, or something that will make people willingly surrender their weapons due to some draconian law being passed as a result, you watch.

If anyone hasn't yet seen this one, might be worth a look:

Edited by Spid3rCyd3, 07 December 2011 - 05:19 PM.

[FLOMBIE]

Well, I could see that scenario, but a bunch of civilians holding up against trained soldiers? No way.

But you have to take into context that soldiers are also trained to follow orders, especially those they do not like personally. I am pretty sure in a situation like this, there would be many deserters, and the reaction of lots of soldiers will be about how will be delt with those 'traitors'. It will also be ensured that these soldiers are made to believe they do the right thing. In times like that, it's always about what you believe.

Edited by FLOMBIE, 07 December 2011 - 05:19 PM.

[Michelle]

Infowars
March 3, 2009
Continuing his assigned role as corporate media siren of the apocalypse, Glenn Beck interrupted a discussion on Russia and Iran last night on Fox & Friends to mention a heretofore no-no for national television — FEMA camps. At two minutes into the video below, Beck declares he attempted to “debunk these FEMAS camps” because he is “tired of hearing about them,” but was unable to do so. “We now for several days have done research on them… I can’t debunk them.” Beck follows this with a declaration that the United States may be headed for totalitarianism.

http://www.infowars....on-fox-friends/

It's the same ol' same ol'...

[Mr_Snstr]

FLOMBIE, on 07 December 2011 - 05:03 PM, said:

You believe you could defend yourself with your private gun against the Army, National Guard or whoever would arrest you? I doubt you could resist for very long.

How well did our army fare against a bunch of guys out in the desert? Granted they had some AKs, RPGs, and other old Soviet equipment. That and they were most likely trained by the Army they were fighting. But I bet the US public as a whole is better armed.

Not that I think it would ever come down to the US Army vs the People. The only way you could get the Army involved would be to "protect the people", or "liberate" them.

Edited by Mr_Snstr, 07 December 2011 - 05:25 PM.

[Mr_Snstr]

FLOMBIE, on 07 December 2011 - 05:18 PM, said:

Well, I could see that scenario, but a bunch of civilians holding up against trained soldiers? No way.

But you have to take into context that soldiers are also trained to follow orders, especially those they do not like personally. I am pretty sure in a situation like this, there would be many deserters, and the reaction of lots of soldiers will be about how will be delt with those 'traitors'. It will also be ensured that these soldiers are made to believe they do the right thing. In times like that, it's always about what you believe.

You also have to take into account foreign armies and mercenaries. Also the use of foreign nationals in the military. Doesn't look or sound like a problem now. But when they can pluck people out of 3rd world nations and offer them a paycheck more than they could ever earn in a lifetime...

[eqgumby]

FLOMBIE, on 07 December 2011 - 05:18 PM, said:

Well, I could see that scenario, but a bunch of civilians holding up against trained soldiers? No way.

But you have to take into context that soldiers are also trained to follow orders, especially those they do not like personally. I am pretty sure in a situation like this, there would be many deserters, and the reaction of lots of soldiers will be about how will be delt with those 'traitors'. It will also be ensured that these soldiers are made to believe they do the right thing. In times like that, it's always about what you believe.

I know many US military members. I was one for 20 years, and my spouse still is. It would take a LOT to get the military on-board with doing something un-constitutional at such a level, at home, to their friends and family.

[eqgumby]

Mr_Snstr, on 07 December 2011 - 05:27 PM, said:

You also have to take into account foreign armies and mercenaries. Also the use of foreign nationals in the military. Doesn't look or sound like a problem now. But when they can pluck people out of 3rd world nations and offer them a paycheck more than they could ever earn in a lifetime...

LOL! You want to see a "Red-Neck Apocalypse"? Send a foreign army into Alabama to quell the rioting citizens. It would be a short fight.

[FLOMBIE]

Mr_Snstr, on 07 December 2011 - 05:23 PM, said:

How well did our army fare against a bunch of guys out in the desert? Granted they had some AKs, RPGs, and other old Soviet equipment. That and they were most likely trained by the Army they were fighting. But I bet the US public as a whole is better armed.

These bunch of guys were still soldiers. And the invasion of Iraq was done pretty fast. Within one week the US troops were about 60 km away from Bagdad. And remember, the bunch of guys in the desert were trained warriors and had commanding officers traind in war tactics.

The biggest problem civilians would face would be the supply of ammuniton. You won't be able to get any in a state of emergency.

Edited by FLOMBIE, 07 December 2011 - 05:40 PM.

[Mr_Snstr]

eqgumby, on 07 December 2011 - 05:30 PM, said:

LOL! You want to see a "Red-Neck Apocalypse"? Send a foreign army into Alabama to quell the rioting citizens. It would be a short fight.

Hahahaha! Very true.

But in reality you would only need to occupy major cities and population centers; and industrial sectors. Many of our larger cities are "disarmed" for the most part.

I imagine most of the more rural areas would be ignored. That way you could also create a food crisis for the all people in the major population centers you've occupied.

Edited by Mr_Snstr, 07 December 2011 - 05:35 PM.

[FLOMBIE]

eqgumby, on 07 December 2011 - 05:28 PM, said:

I know many US military members. I was one for 20 years, and my spouse still is. It would take a LOT to get the military on-board with doing something un-constitutional at such a level, at home, to their friends and family.

Not if you sell it as being clearly constituional. If the president, media, your seargent, the general all say that you are protecting America by concentrating civilians in camps, many will follow and just do that.

[WoIverine]

eqgumby, on 07 December 2011 - 05:30 PM, said:

LOL! You want to see a "Red-Neck Apocalypse"? Send a foreign army into Alabama to quell the rioting citizens. It would be a short fight.

The president authorized Interpol to do whatever they see fit in the United States a few years ago.

http://www.whitehous...ive-order-12425

Edited by Spid3rCyd3, 07 December 2011 - 05:44 PM.

[Little Fish]

if the document is real, it is worrying. kbr subcontracting catering, security, and laundry services etc. companies don't spend money if they don't have to, so clearly they are planning to fill these camps.

[Corp]

Spid3rCyd3, on 07 December 2011 - 02:04 PM, said:

Yep, read about this yesterday. Look for an economic collapse probably in the next 6-10 months, the government already knows it's coming, hence the camps.

You mean the economic collapse people have been saying would happen "any time now" for the last three years?

747400, on 07 December 2011 - 03:35 PM, said:

"Uploaded by TheAlexJonesChannel" says about all you need to know, I think.

How many times has "The Govt." supposedly been about to round up the People™ and intern them/exterminate them? Wasn't 9/11 supposed to be the excuse that would give the Bush Administration the excuse to do it?

Remember during the swine flu how everyone was put into FEMA camps to be killed off?

Yeah me neither...

eqgumby, on 07 December 2011 - 05:08 PM, said:

More importantly, would the Guard or the Army really follow orders to begin disarming citizens or rounding them up into FEMA camps? Not likely...because the men and women of the military, are some of the staunchest supporters on a personal level of the right to bear arms (as citizens) and the rights to free speech, etc.

You forget that all American soldiers are mindless robots who are just waiting for the chance to kill their family and friends.   Air Force and Navy seems cool though.

[WoIverine]

Corp, on 07 December 2011 - 05:48 PM, said:

You mean the economic collapse people have been saying would happen "any time now" for the last three years?

Not the collapse, the FEMA camps, articles all over the place hit the interwebs simultaneously yesterday.

[eqgumby]

FLOMBIE, on 07 December 2011 - 05:39 PM, said:

Not if you sell it as being clearly constituional. If the president, media, your seargent, the general all say that you are protecting America by concentrating civilians in camps, many will follow and just do that.

Sorry, not likely. It would take an epic and monumental effort to do this. A HUGE effort.