US Military "training for urban environments"

[Likely Guy]

.

can i ask you why you think words on a screen would scare "us soft-shell bodies"?

Hey, shut up. I'm getting nervous.

[Little Fish]

Lol classic Little Fish theory.

Make up a situation that ONLY supports his theory and disregard the rest.

Paper targets don't fire back or make an attempt to kill you. Exactly what makes you think the situation given was that the target on the paper was not attempting to take your life or the order given was to stop the threat in a non lethal way?

You merely took a look at the picture and jumped to conclusions that fit your theory. Bravo.

http://www.infowars.com/florida-nurse-terrorized-by-us-marshals/

I am pointing out that the lady in the above story is more likely to have been killed had that officer undergone the "no more hesitation" training, this is surely obvious to everyone. there is no sensible reason to train police to shoot 8 year olds, pregnant women and geriatrics. a scenario where the police would encounter one of those situations where a pregnant woman, child or pensioner would be the aggressor against an armed police officer is extremely unlikely, but such training will lead to innocents being unlawfully killed as would have happened in the situation above. the implementation of such training only makes sense if a top down decision has been made to ignore the 4th amendment, as happened in the above story and after the boston bombing, where it seems to now be policy for armed police to aggressively raid homes without probable cause and without warrants. it's a pity for the moral majority that some people seem to enjoy this situation.

[Clarakore]

The US military has been training for urban combat since before 1979. Most future battles will take place in urbanized theaters. Where else would they train for this?

Military Operations on Urban Terrain [MOUT] are not new to the US Army. Throughout its history the Army has fought an enemy on urban terrain. What is new is that urban areas and urban populations have grown significantly during the late twentieth century and have begun to exert a much greater influence on military operations. The worldwide shift from a rural to an urban society and the requirement to transition from combat to stability and support operations and vice-versa have affected the US Army's doctrine.

It is estimated that by the year 2010, seventy-five percent of the world's population will live in urban areas. The increased population and accelerated growth of cities have made the problems of combat in built-up areas an urgent requirement for the US Army. Urban areas are expected to be the future battlefield and combat in urban areas cannot be avoided.

*snip*

The US Army's Field Manual 90-10, Military Operations in Urbanized Terrain, was last issued in 1979, though a revision of FM 90-10 is under way.

http://www.globalsec...ry/ops/mout.htm

During World War II, as preparation for the allied invasion of Normandy, the population of the English village of Imber was evacuated compulsorily to provide an urban training area for United States forces.

http://en.wikipedia....arfare_training

It is not a conspiracy theory of planning martial law and the taking over of our cities. It is simply training where past and future battles take place. The days of two large armies using tanks and meeting on empty fields is long gone...

Edited July 20, 2013 by The world needs you

[Babe Ruth]

I have no objections to MOUT per se, but I do object to such training taking place in CONUS cities, in our own cities.

Port Angeles and Miami are not the right place to conduct such training, for a variety of reasons.

During Vietnam, USArmy had a simulated Vietnamese village down at Fort Polk, and I think there are some simulated Afghan cities in the desert southwest of this country. That's fine.

But training in actual US cities is not a good thing. Our military was meant to DEFEND this country from invaders. In the spirit of the Third Amendment, it was not meant to be turned in on our people. So too the spirit and letter of Posse Comitatus Act.

The Global War On Terror is a magnificent hoax on the american people, and it's no surprise that it would bring "training exercises" in our cities.

[shrooma]

http://www.infowars.com/florida-nurse-terrorized-by-us-marshals/

I am pointing out that the lady in the above story is more likely to have been killed had that officer undergone the "no more hesitation" training, this is surely obvious to everyone.

.

yup, obvious to me she'd've been dead alright.

anyone pointed a gun at me, theyd've had a 9mm ventilated forehead, regardless of age, gender, or reproductive habits.

you never point a gun at someone unless you mean to use it, and in a "me or them" scenario, they'd have the fastest case of lead poisoning on record, even if we were stood in a manger & the virgin mary herself was holding it.

.

*edit to add*-

didn't see the link to the story until i reposted it. sometimes links don't show up on my phone, and i thought you were referring to the cardboard target of the armed pregnant woman, sorry.

Edited July 20, 2013 by shrooma

[Stellar]

I have no objections to MOUT per se, but I do object to such training taking place in CONUS cities, in our own cities.

Port Angeles and Miami are not the right place to conduct such training, for a variety of reasons.

During Vietnam, USArmy had a simulated Vietnamese village down at Fort Polk, and I think there are some simulated Afghan cities in the desert southwest of this country. That's fine.

But training in actual US cities is not a good thing. Our military was meant to DEFEND this country from invaders. In the spirit of the Third Amendment, it was not meant to be turned in on our people. So too the spirit and letter of Posse Comitatus Act.

The Global War On Terror is a magnificent hoax on the american people, and it's no surprise that it would bring "training exercises" in our cities.

You object to it. Unfortunately for you, there are other people in the country, so you don't always get the final say.

Also, how exactly does training violate Posse Comitatus?

[Babe Ruth]

I don't get the final say?!!

I am shocked I tell you, shocked that the President doesn't call me to ask my advice.

Just kidding Stellar. I figured that out back in about 1960. It's one of those 'rules of life' that one cannot escape.

Posse Comitatus was passed to restrain USArmy troops from harassing civilians after the Civil War, mostly in the south. But the term PC precedes that piece of legislation, but quite a few years because of its Common Law heritage. In that case, PC obliges every citizen to assist the local sheriff if he asks. And I think that's a good idea. 3rd amendment is directed against military troops, and for the dignity of the home of the citizen.

[RaptorBites]

http://www.infowars.com/florida-nurse-terrorized-by-us-marshals/

I am pointing out that the lady in the above story is more likely to have been killed had that officer undergone the "no more hesitation" training, this is surely obvious to everyone. there is no sensible reason to train police to shoot 8 year olds, pregnant women and geriatrics. a scenario where the police would encounter one of those situations where a pregnant woman, child or pensioner would be the aggressor against an armed police officer is extremely unlikely, but such training will lead to innocents being unlawfully killed as would have happened in the situation above. the implementation of such training only makes sense if a top down decision has been made to ignore the 4th amendment, as happened in the above story and after the boston bombing, where it seems to now be policy for armed police to aggressively raid homes without probable cause and without warrants. it's a pity for the moral majority that some people seem to enjoy this situation.

Great that you pointed that out. However, what you still fail to understand is the difference between when to use deadly force and when not to.

Your assertion to the targets purchased is that they are trained to use deadly force regardless of the situation. Oh my, what a jump to conclusion that is.

Have ever stopped to think that the targets are only used to train in situations where deadly force is warranted? That the use of unconventional targets to train police officers to use deadly force regardless of the target's gender or age?

Oh you didn't did you? Much easier to claim that police are being trained to act like its the wild west all over again, since that does fit your and apperantly infowar's theory.

Edited July 23, 2013 by RaptorBites

[preacherman76]

Great that you pointed that out. However, what you still fail to understand is the difference between when to use deadly force and when not to.

Your assertion to the targets purchased is that they are trained to use deadly force regardless of the situation. Oh my, what a jump to conclusion that is.

Have ever stopped to think that the targets are only used to train in situations where deadly force is warranted? That the use of unconventional targets to train police officers to use deadly force regardless of the target's gender or age?

Oh you didn't did you? Much easier to claim that police are being trained to act like its the wild west all over again, since that does fit your and apperantly infowar's theory.

The odds that a pregnate women would be using a gun for anything but self defense is next to nothing. They are being trained as an agressor, against Americans defending themself against tyrants. How could it be explained any other way? Why spend millions on targets that 99.999% of officers will never encounter? Unless of course you are going to force them to make such encounters, for say gun confiscation.

[Space Commander Travis]

If, in, say, 10 or 20 years, they never actually have Taken Away America's Guns, or imposed Martial Law or rounded the people up into FEMA Camps, will people still be saying They're about to take Away America's guns, etc? i mean, they (people, that is, not They) were saying 10 years ago that 9/11 was staged in order to give a pretext for Martial Law and to Round the people Up, etc, and that never actually happened. if it still hasn't happened in another 10 years, will people still be saying the same thing, I wonder?

[RaptorBites]

The odds that a pregnate women would be using a gun for anything but self defense is next to nothing. They are being trained as an agressor, against Americans defending themself against tyrants. How could it be explained any other way? Why spend millions on targets that 99.999% of officers will never encounter? Unless of course you are going to force them to make such encounters, for say gun confiscation.

Again, a rapid jump to conclusions.

What about in cases where a pregnant woman holds people hostage and has executed innocent civilians. Or maybe shot several officers?

They are uncommon situations, yes, however they are not beyond the realm of impossible.

Like I said before, whatever situation fits YOUR personal theories is the only correct one yes? I mean you and LF seem to want to throw out every OTHER scenario that may fit situations where use of deadly force is warranted by claiming it is impossible.

[RaptorBites]

If, in, say, 10 or 20 years, they never actually have Taken Away America's Guns, or imposed Martial Law or rounded the people up into FEMA Camps, will people still be saying They're about to take Away America's guns, etc? i mean, they (people, that is, not They) were saying 10 years ago that 9/11 was staged in order to give a pretext for Martial Law and to Round the people Up, etc, and that never actually happened. if it still hasn't happened in another 10 years, will people still be saying the same thing, I wonder?

Of course they will. The alternative media such as Infowars is all about fear ,mongering. The are willing to take ANY situation and put their own personal spin to it.

If you haven't heard Alex Jones's Y2K radio broadcast, you should. It was quite the circus show I was expecting someone with his crude imagination could cook up.

Fear is such a powerful and mesmerizing tool, and people such as Alex Jones and Infowars run the business like the catholic church runs religion.

Fear the government as it has the liberty to give and take your freedoms.

Fear God as he/she has the liberty to admit or decline your entrance to heaven.

Sound familiar?

[Babe Ruth]

Of course they will. The alternative media such as Infowars is all about fear ,mongering. The are willing to take ANY situation and put their own personal spin to it.

If you haven't heard Alex Jones's Y2K radio broadcast, you should. It was quite the circus show I was expecting someone with his crude imagination could cook up.

Fear is such a powerful and mesmerizing tool, and people such as Alex Jones and Infowars run the business like the catholic church runs religion.

Fear the government as it has the liberty to give and take your freedoms.

Fear God as he/she has the liberty to admit or decline your entrance to heaven.

Sound familiar?

Bingo! Fear is indeed a powerful and mesmerizing tool, but it's silly to claim or suggest that somehow Alex Jones has a monopoly on such tactics.

May we use 'terror' to mean the same thing as 'fear', and consider it too a powerful tool to manipulate the individual and public psyche?

Boston Bombing, WTC attacks, Newtown. These are events that have permanently damaged the public psyche, and allow manipulation. Anthrax attacks were a powerful and mesmerizing tool, so powerful that our elected representatives gave away the rule of law and constitutional governance as a result.

The american people are scared silly of anybody with a turban or burka, because they have been successfully terrorized, and Kowalski's thread regarding the media and propaganda covers it. The media is an essential tool to keeping the american people in a cowardly and fearful state.

[RaptorBites]

Bingo! Fear is indeed a powerful and mesmerizing tool, but it's silly to claim or suggest that somehow Alex Jones has a monopoly on such tactics.

May we use 'terror' to mean the same thing as 'fear', and consider it too a powerful tool to manipulate the individual and public psyche?

Boston Bombing, WTC attacks, Newtown. These are events that have permanently damaged the public psyche, and allow manipulation. Anthrax attacks were a powerful and mesmerizing tool, so powerful that our elected representatives gave away the rule of law and constitutional governance as a result.

The american people are scared silly of anybody with a turban or burka, because they have been successfully terrorized, and Kowalski's thread regarding the media and propaganda covers it. The media is an essential tool to keeping the american people in a cowardly and fearful state.

Uh...maybe you should stop putting words in my mouth. At no point did I say Alex Jones has a monopoly on fear mongering tactics.

I clearly made a comparison between fear mongering made by fanatics such as A Jones and the Catholic church. People gravitate towards those kinds of rhetoric because fear is such a powerful tool and both A Jones and the Catholic church do it so well.

[Babe Ruth]

Glad you made that clear RB.

[Stellar]

The odds that a pregnate women would be using a gun for anything but self defense is next to nothing. They are being trained as an agressor, against Americans defending themself against tyrants. How could it be explained any other way? Why spend millions on targets that 99.999% of officers will never encounter? Unless of course you are going to force them to make such encounters, for say gun confiscation.

Please... show me the "odds" first of all. I've already posted in this thread an example of a pregnant woman robbing a bank.

Furthermore, law enforcement's job is to be prepared to deal with all situations. The "millions they spent" on these targets would have been spent on targets of some sort regardless.

The "odds" that there is an outbreak of some deadly disease killing millions in the US is quite low aswell (arguably lower than the odds you're referring to). Do you want medical facilities to not be prepared to deal with the situation because its unlikely?

[Likely Guy]

Bingo! Fear is indeed a powerful and mesmerizing tool, but it's silly to claim or suggest that somehow Alex Jones has a monopoly on such tactics...

No kidding. I can witness that right here by the title and tag lines attached to this thread!

[Dougward5]

I notice that the woman in the target in question is in a nursery ...I can not for the life of me think of anything I have ever heard of about a pregnant woman in a nursery who did anything so horrific that she needed to be gunned down with " no hesitation'" looks to me like a home invasion practice kit....someone please give me a scenerio who a pregnant woman should be shot without question...and then tell me why it is such a widespread problem we need targets for it....

[Babe Ruth]

Well, didn't the feds shoot a pregnant woman at Ruby Ridge? Or was she just with a very young child?

[Stellar]

I notice that the woman in the target in question is in a nursery ...I can not for the life of me think of anything I have ever heard of about a pregnant woman in a nursery who did anything so horrific that she needed to be gunned down with " no hesitation'" looks to me like a home invasion practice kit....someone please give me a scenerio who a pregnant woman should be shot without question...and then tell me why it is such a widespread problem we need targets for it....

Let me ask you this: If you are a police officer and a bank robber pulls a gun on you, do you shoot or do you not shoot?

[preacherman76]

Please... show me the "odds" first of all. I've already posted in this thread an example of a pregnant woman robbing a bank.

Furthermore, law enforcement's job is to be prepared to deal with all situations. The "millions they spent" on these targets would have been spent on targets of some sort regardless.

The "odds" that there is an outbreak of some deadly disease killing millions in the US is quite low aswell (arguably lower than the odds you're referring to). Do you want medical facilities to not be prepared to deal with the situation because its unlikely?

You think medical facilities are prepared for a deadly out breaking killing millions?

Let me ask you this: If you are a police officer and a bank robber pulls a gun on you, do you shoot or do you not shoot?

What the hell do police have to do with this?

[Stellar]

What the hell do police have to do with this?

Answer the question.

[preacherman76]

Answer the question.

The question has no relevence to the conversation. The police didnt buy these targets. DHS did. And why was home land sercurity founded? To stop terrorist attacks on American soil. So basicaly they are saying pregnate American women are going to become terrorist. Or already are. That tells me that a situation will be created where its possible that a American pregnate women is going to find her self in a situation where she feels she needs to defend herself against a tyrannical government. But the main stream wont show her as a defender of liberty, but instead will try to convince the people that she was a terrorist. How many white American pregnate women are currently plotting terror? Them along with kids, and elderly people. Seems like a serious waste of money, considering the FBI cant even find a real terrorist plot without radicalizing funding, and striaght giving them the planfrom a to z. A a few of those people they set up are half mentaly handycapped. The only thing we shouldnt be hesitating is firing these clowns who have over the last 12 years labled every person in this country a possible terrorist. And none of this was ever heard of till suppossedly OSBL in a cave half way around the world got our entire national defense to stand down, so he could have other people fly planes into major US targets.

Add all this to the fact that every single electric comunications from hundreds of millions of Americans who have nothing to do with terror are being recorded and stored. And that we have been conditioned to litteraly be molested by TSA agents. And have people who have openly expressed the will to completly disarm every American in the past, now pushing for all kinds of gun control. And are arming to the teeth with billions of rounds of ammo, and you'd have to be a fool to think everything was ****s and giggles

So I will answer your question soon as you can tell me what it has to do with this conversation.

Edited August 1, 2013 by preacherman76

[Stellar]

The question has no relevence to the conversation.

The question has plenty of relevance. You refuse to accept its relevance because if you did, you'd hurt your own argument. Answer the question and we can discuss the subject. I'm not going to sit here and entertain you by answering all of your questions and you answering none of mine.

[Dougward5]

Once more I would lke to point out that the woman on the target is not robbing anything...she is standing in a nursery .. Another of the targets in that series has a woman pointing a gun with about a 9 year old child behind her...