Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
regeneratia

Obama to US Military?: Must shoot US Citizens

246 posts in this topic

Well then one might ask why our police forces are being MILITARIZED ,which went into full swing with the advent of occupy wall street .

Just google militarized police USA .

The police have been becoming more militarized since before anyone ever considered the occupy protests. It's a very bad sign. They've basically converted the police into a domestic army that doesn't need to follow international law, just relatively easily altered local law. Remember, I did say I believe the government is planning bad things.

I was just pointing out that there are reasons most of us might consider legitimate that might force the military into direct conflict with Americans. That being the case, I don't see asking whether they'd actually fight or would instead stand there refusing orders is something unreasonable for the military leaders to want to know about the soldiers. Between that and the unnanounced mock training missions we've seen publicized recently I think there's a good chance something major is coming. I just don't see this particular concept as the controversy lots of people do. Sure, maybe it's been a given before and this is the first time there was a rumor of somebody actually asking this particular question, but anyone with a brain should know that joining the military means that being ordered to fight at home is a possibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you telling me that the police does not enforce the law letting those who illegally run around with guns just up to their machination? No wonder you have a high criminality rate in your town.

No, they arrest people on a daily basis that are breaking the law with illegal guns. The problem is with the court system and they get tired of arresting the same people day after day. I thought we were talking about the police or military trying to take away law abiding citizen's guns. I don't think you would find many that would do it.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, they arrest people on a daily basis that are breaking the law with illegal guns. The problem is with the court system and they get tired of arresting the same people day after day. I thought we were talking about the police or military trying to take away law abiding citizen's guns. I don't think you would find many that would do it.

So, if guns were outlawed, and that law upheld by the Supreme Court: do you still believe the cops would not go after the then illegal guns? Right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really get how this is controversial. Is it shocking that cops must be willing to lock up American Citizens? There are situations where it could be called for - everything from a bunch of people storming the white house to an actual civil war.

Don't get me wrong. I believe our government is planning bad things. I just don't see this concept alone as the huge warning flag that big brother's about to drop the hammer.

As far as soldiers refusing orders to do so, I can't see it. Sure, if those in charge were stupid enough to say, "We're going to throw a scare into the People so they'll sit quietly while we financially rape the country.", there'd be a lot of dissent. If they said they were putting down a terrorist cell that was a danger to their own friends and families, I can't imagine soldiers saying, "Ummm, you'll need to prove that before I'll follow your orders."

The entire military is based on the fact that their job is a dirty one and they are rigorously trained to believe that it shows strength for them to follow through and obey even when it feels wrong. I believe an insurrection within the military would occur if the government decided to use it to sytematically stamp out anyone who disagrees with its policies, but I think there would be a lot of dead Americans before that point.

And quite a few dead soldiers as well. We have always respected, even cherished our military where I come from but if they started shooting at us in our homes? Buddy you can believe there are more than a few folks down here that can give as good as they get.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I haven't seen many people mention is that if there's an eventual economic collapse...the government might not be able to pay the police. There's already been a lot of lost jobs in police departments around the US. In that instance, I could see the military being used to quell mass rioting, looting, and who knows what kind of chaos. I also think that the administration hasn't gone after every possible type of gun out there due to the need of law abiding citizens to defend themselves and their families in such a crisis. I can see the assault weapons thing being a logical, reasonable thing in some ways, but imagine if nearly all guns were taken, and then an economic collapse happens.

Edited by WoIverine
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, if guns were outlawed, and that law upheld by the Supreme Court: do you still believe the cops would not go after the then illegal guns? Right.

310 million..... what are they going to do, Q? Door to door? And after a couple get shot down at said doors? If you believe it won't happen you are kidding yourself. No, they will chip away and set legal precedent and chip away some more before they ever try an outright confiscation. An armed insurgency would blow up on them within weeks if they tried that stuff! Living in Greece for awhile you may have forgotten just how much of a pain in the butt Americans can be when they want something. And it's MUCH WORSE if they think you want to take something from them against their will.
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I haven't seen many people mention is that if there's an eventual economic collapse...the government might not be able to pay the police. There's already been a lot of lost jobs in police departments around the US. In that instance, I could see the military being used to quell mass rioting, looting, and who knows what kind of chaos.

I mentioned this scenario in another thread. This is the one instance when I think US troops would fire on US citizens and not feel they are out of line. And, frankly, if a citizen is armed or in the middle of destroying property I think they've taken that risk onto themselves and I wouldn't blame the soldiers. But going door to door to collect guns? The Brits learned about the efficacy of squirrel guns in the right hands a long time ago and the US army is teachable as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And quite a few dead soldiers as well. We have always respected, even cherished our military where I come from but if they started shooting at us in our homes? Buddy you can believe there are more than a few folks down here that can give as good as they get.

Around here too. That doesn't change my opinion that if they framed it the right way, they wouldn't get very much balking at the orders until they'd done it enough that the pattern was too clear for anyone to ignore.

Imagine - a briefing where Military Intelligence comes in and tells the soldiers that a small town of several thousand had been identified as the US headquarters of Al Queda and were days away from implementing an attack that would dwarf 9/11. They tell the soldiers the problem is too big for the police and we're going to head in and capture terrorist leaders and evidence that'll end the war on terror in one fell swoop. You think soldiers who know none of these people personally would actually stand up in front of their peers and say they refuse because these are Americans? And then when the military does start occupying the town and Americans being what we are, there's about 100% chance somebody would decide to start sniping from the woods and "prove" to the soldiers that their cause is just. While I can't imagine why they'd want to actually do this, I think it's a believable scenario. Now, it they were stupid about it and said they were going to go in and just massacre everybody, then they'd get mutiny.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If chaos were to ever happen here and in the EU due to economic issues, I can really only think of a few places that wouldn't be hammered anywhere near as bad. Russia, and China have been preparing for it for a long time already.

Edited by WoIverine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If THEY want guns out of anybodies hands THEY don't need soldiers. Police will do fine, thank you. And police are more accustomed to effectively disarm civilians than any soldier will ever be able to.

Don't you guys take a reality check like twice a month before your imagination runs off with you?

imagine if nearly all guns were taken, and then an economic collapse happens.

Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand. ~ Albert Einstein

There's some wisdom there. You're not going to argue with Einstein now are you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/04/sunday-review/have-american-police-become-militarized.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Again,occupy wallstreet scared the **** out of them .

If we rise up,even in peaceful ways,obomba has made it so its illegal to gather ,its illegal peacefully protest ,which are now almost felonies,and he wants any other means of defence OUT OF OUR HANDS ,if he declares martial law ,which he's been itching to do since 2009.

That's what the whole H1N1 crap was about.

He declared it a pandemic,despite the fact more people die from regular flu yearly ,than have of all h1n1 cases combined .

He could have declared martial law with the pandemic announcement ,but since some people were SMART ENOUGH TO NOT GO GET THE STUPID VACCINE ,the disease was not half as widespread as they had hoped it would be ,so he couldn't declare martial law,but he's been working his way up to it,building the FEMA camps,since he took office.

Now he's making sure we have to reload ,while the army kills us when we resist,with AK 47s .

Wake up people ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, if guns were outlawed, and that law upheld by the Supreme Court: do you still believe the cops would not go after the then illegal guns? Right.

Not unless an incident was brought to the public's attention. What are they going to do...get a search warrant for everyone's homes looking for unregistered guns?

Edited by Michelle
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. I'm pretty sure those that matter do get it.

But not the majority . So when the caca hits the fan,they will be so out of it,they will just be a liability to the rest of us .

The reason they need both police and the military,because of our numbers .

It's why bloomberg is so behind the get NYCs guns,because we are the wild card,and they know it.

They can't kill us all without dropping bombs,which will either kill too many,or hurt physical structures .

Bioweapons can be unreliable if they just want to target the people fighting,so they need ground support,with big enough numbers,and there are more of us than them ,but some will just be too out of it ,and get in the way .

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not unless an incident was brought to the public's attention. What are they going to do...get a search warrant for everyone's homes looking for unregistered guns?

Laws have never kept guns out of hands that want them .The black market will rake in so much cash with this,its not funny .

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Americans are losing freedoms and liberties each year. Gummug posted a video of the battle of Athens in another recent thread where the authorities were terribly corrupt and took te ballot boxes, allowing improper vote counting for a corrupt leadership.

Now the authorities were outnumbered but were armed like the civilians. At the very least I believe automatic weapons could be illigalised in the US. Now, the only justification I have for automatic weapons in the US is that if the government and authorities attempt to suppress the populace, they would be armed with automatic weapons. With more and more being taken away from the US populace each year, it wouldn't be totally crazy to consider some attempt at suppression of a discontent populace somete in the future.

Imagine how much easier if the populace were only allowed to be armed with single shot rifles at the very least as opposed to automatic weapons for the authorities?

The next biggest threat to te populace, minus the government. Are probably criminals on the street. They will get guns whether they are legal or illegal. That's what criminals are.

From what we see on the "news", is that what basically is happening is like what happens in primary school, one child acts out and the whole class has to stay in. One guy goes and does selfish and stupid things with his gun and everyone loses that right.

I live in Australia, I am definitely not in favour of guns here. I've visited the US once and I can definitely say that if I were to live there I'd have a gun as a means of self defence. But should people who use their guns responsibly and practise intruder invasion scenarios and the like lose their right to own a firearm simply because someone else doesn't? Should the child who just simply did their work and was kind and courteous to everyone around them be kept inside as well?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Laws have never kept guns out of hands that want them .The black market will rake in so much cash with this,its not funny .

On top of that, if they implemented a mental health analysis of gun owners, people who would go shoot up a school or something would have a lot harder time than getting them but if they were made illegal he/she could just walk down a back alley and pick up an ak47. Again the government is responsible for putting more cash into the pocket of a criminal. No doubt an excuse to bolster the authorities arsenal.

The law abiding citizen loses out, as usual.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Americans are losing freedoms and liberties each year. Gummug posted a video of the battle of Athens in another recent thread where the authorities were terribly corrupt and took te ballot boxes, allowing improper vote counting for a corrupt leadership.

Now the authorities were outnumbered but were armed like the civilians. At the very least I believe automatic weapons could be illigalised in the US. Now, the only justification I have for automatic weapons in the US is that if the government and authorities attempt to suppress the populace, they would be armed with automatic weapons. With more and more being taken away from the US populace each year, it wouldn't be totally crazy to consider some attempt at suppression of a discontent populace somete in the future.

Imagine how much easier if the populace were only allowed to be armed with single shot rifles at the very least as opposed to automatic weapons for the authorities?

The next biggest threat to te populace, minus the government. Are probably criminals on the street. They will get guns whether they are legal or illegal. That's what criminals are.

From what we see on the "news", is that what basically is happening is like what happens in primary school, one child acts out and the whole class has to stay in. One guy goes and does selfish and stupid things with his gun and everyone loses that right.

I live in Australia, I am definitely not in favour of guns here. I've visited the US once and I can definitely say that if I were to live there I'd have a gun as a means of self defence. But should people who use their guns responsibly and practise intruder invasion scenarios and the like lose their right to own a firearm simply because someone else doesn't? Should the child who just simply did their work and was kind and courteous to everyone around them be kept inside as well?

I like everything you said. Just curious though, you said you visited here. Where'd you go and how long were you there? Reason I'm asking is because from just a visit you seem to have made up your mind that you'd own a gun if you lived here while seeming to have no desire about having one back home. Was it something you seen? Just because I live here doesn't mean I want to own a gun. It only means I can own one if I want to.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW ,my soldier pal who told me this back in 2009 ,said his comrades all said they would give them lip service to keep their jobs,but no one was all in on shooting civilians .

Occupy wallstreet and Anonymous is FULL of military ,many of whom came home from Iraq or Afghanistan ,and were **** on for their efforts overseas,by this same government . They know the deal,and no longer believe any of the garbage the govt spews while claiming to do it for our own good , so you might be surprised who shares some of these "outrageous" conspiracy theories.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Americans are losing freedoms and liberties each year. Gummug posted a video of the battle of Athens in another recent thread where the authorities were terribly corrupt and took te ballot boxes, allowing improper vote counting for a corrupt leadership.

Now the authorities were outnumbered but were armed like the civilians. At the very least I believe automatic weapons could be illigalised in the US. Now, the only justification I have for automatic weapons in the US is that if the government and authorities attempt to suppress the populace, they would be armed with automatic weapons. With more and more being taken away from the US populace each year, it wouldn't be totally crazy to consider some attempt at suppression of a discontent populace somete in the future.

Imagine how much easier if the populace were only allowed to be armed with single shot rifles at the very least as opposed to automatic weapons for the authorities?

The next biggest threat to te populace, minus the government. Are probably criminals on the street. They will get guns whether they are legal or illegal. That's what criminals are.

From what we see on the "news", is that what basically is happening is like what happens in primary school, one child acts out and the whole class has to stay in. One guy goes and does selfish and stupid things with his gun and everyone loses that right.

I live in Australia, I am definitely not in favour of guns here. I've visited the US once and I can definitely say that if I were to live there I'd have a gun as a means of self defence. But should people who use their guns responsibly and practise intruder invasion scenarios and the like lose their right to own a firearm simply because someone else doesn't? Should the child who just simply did their work and was kind and courteous to everyone around them be kept inside as well?

The first person in authority that I shoot with my single shot rifle, his automatic becomes my automatic.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think that martial law and curfews would be the first steps taken by our govt. should anything arise within the US. This happened with Pearl Harbor, and unfortunately many US citizens of japanese ancestry were arrested and placed into detainment camps by the military.

I don't believe we're at the "Wild West" stages yet, however, the probability of NATO/UN forces coming in, is what will more likely happen should the people get out of control. Just my take on it.

Edited by NiteMarcher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like everything you said. Just curious though, you said you visited here. Where'd you go and how long were you there? Reason I'm asking is because from just a visit you seem to have made up your mind that you'd own a gun if you lived here while seeming to have no desire about having one back home. Was it something you seen? Just because I live here doesn't mean I want to own a gun. It only means I can own one if I want to.

I visited the "nice" part of Los Angeles for a week. I was pleasantly surprised to say the least about the people of America. I'd actually seriously consider living there if it wasn't for the government in charge of the place. I loved it. I didn't see anything bad or met anyone rude or horrible. Honestly if I could get into US politics later in life and mchansons positive changes I couldn't think of anything better.

The only crime I saw take place would be someone spray painting on a wall in hollywood. I just know the reality as to the fact that most criminals there will be armed.

I'm no gun nut or anything. I don't particularly enjoy the prospect of owning a gun or knowing I've got one locked up in the cabinet in case mine or any other innocents life was threatened. I don't believe anyone should need to live with that in mind but that only exists in a utopian world.

The matter of the fact is, if guns are made illegal. The two groups which will have main access to the guns would be the authorities and the criminals. So that leaves us the civilians, unable to protect ourselves from either if something goes pear shaped.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first person in authority that I shoot with my single shot rifle, his automatic becomes my automatic.

That's very well. But imagine a scenario where a large group of civilians are approaching an armed barricade built by the authorities. It would be a massacre. This has happened in other countries. If the US falls into civil war that could very well be replicated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kent State, Ruby Ridge, Shawn Nelson (The guy who stole the tank), and Waco would be examples of how the government previously answered the question of, "Will we shoot US citizens?". Heck half of the posts on this forum is how people need to keep their guns to shoot criminals and intruders (Almost certain to be US citizens). Gun control isn't the issue, the issue is "shoot people to solve problems" mentality Americans have. (One of my less intelligent friends wanted to bomb Kazakhstan because of the movie "Borat"!) And I can't count on my hand the number of times people have brought up the second ammendment solution to solving the governments problems.

So as for Obama ordering the military to be willing to shoot Americans- He doesn't have to. Most of them are not adverse to the idea to begin with.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what's wrong is simply asking if you're willing to shoot a citizen with no further specifics. It's too general and saying yes comes with an array of implications.

The guy in the tank deserved it though.

Edited by -Mr_Fess-
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.