and THAT, is putting it mildly... thank you
Posted on 06/04/2012 2:42:54 PM PDT by Nachum
The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) proposes that the U.S. Army be used to plan, command, and carry out (with the help of civilian law enforcement) domestic police missions. So says a story appearing in the May/June issue of the influential organization’s official journal, Foreign Affairs. The article lacks a single reference to the Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits such actions. In an article penned by Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army, General Raymond T. Odierno, the CFR would see the Army used to address “challenges in the United States itself” in order to keep the homeland safe from
(Excerpt) Read more at thenewamerican.com ...
The list, Ping
Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list
Odierno needs to be taken out and tarred and feathered.
What a despicable jerk. Another of the perfumed princes.
He is a very dangerous man.
POS!
Why does everybody still believe we’ll have free elections for very long?
Does anyone need more evidence that the CFR is an enemy organization made up of traitors?
bookmark
The first use of the military would be scheduled for the day after this November’s vote...if things don’t go Zero’s way.
It is the Governments intent to keep America safe from the citizens not for the citizens
Odierno and Petreous made a great team in rag-head territory, and I had not realized until recently that he’s been elevated in command. Good on him - but what’s this bullshit he’s spewing.
Does Odierno suffer from stress syndrome, to come up with such a stupid suggestion during Zer0’s administration? Slap this boy across the head!
Nope. That law prohibits state or local officials from using the Army in such a way. It does not prohibit the president from using federal troops to enforce the laws, as indeed presidents have often done throughout our history.
And which, in many circumstances, they should do. Or does anyone claim that if a Bombay-style major terror attack were launched on an American city, we should not use the US military to fight back? Or that if the drug cartel wars spill over into the USA, only local and state forces should respond?
Obviously, use of federal troops to enforce the law can be abused. But the concept is not of itself wrong, it is in fact necessary.
The PCA also does not prohibit governors from using National Guard troops to enforce the law.
I note that the article spends a bunch of time ranting about the Iraq and Afghanistan wars being illegal.
They're not. You can argue, and I'll probably agree, that they were ill-advised. But they are perfectly legal under the Constitution.
Continued: from domestic disasters, including terrorist attacks.
I think the odds would be 100%, that it could be, and would be abused.
The police Mirandizes; the military vaporizes.
and THAT, is putting it mildly... thank you
here we go...
Does this mean I can now go down to the Inner Harbor in Baltimore and not be attacked by gangs of roving youths from the hood?
Can we please get someone back in a position of power with a effin' AMERICAN NAME?
Smith? Jones? Hello? Shoot, I'll go for a Bobabowitz!
“Another of the perfumed princes.”
He was military adviser to Sec. of State Colin Powell. He learned from the perfumed best. One of Ragan’s bad choices. I think he is the primary reason we had to go back to Iraq.
Some people were predicting that the one world gubmint was gaining ground so rapidly that GHW Bush might be the last freely-elected POTUS.
We-e-e-e-el, it didn’t happen THAT quickly, but it surely seems a lot CLOSER now, in light of this kind of stuff. According to many Bible prophecy teachers, one-world gubmint is how things wind up just before Christ returns, takes over and starts knocking heads together; a la Revelation 2:27 “And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.”
And Revelation 19:15 “And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.”
In the light of what lies ahead, the wise person would take advantage of the complete and FREE Salvation that is being offered to “whosoever” right now.
John 3:16 “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.”
Romans 10:13 “For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.”
Have a nice forever. ;o)
That is an American, yes? Therefore an American name, asshole.
In most countries in the world, the military exists primarily to maintain order within the country, as a back-up to police agencies that are usually ineffectual against any well-armed gang, to maintain order when there is civil strife, to maintain order after natural disasters, to handle rescue operations, anything requiring specialized skills and equipment.
They perform the functions that our national guard and swat teams perform. Not many militaries in the world are really configured for foreign operations.
But this is the US. All the things CFR and Odierno are talking about have traditionally been handled in the US by the National Guard for most of a century. I don’t see why that is insufficient.
I think we need to be very clear with ourselves, under what conditions are we prepared to see our military deployed on our own soil.
I can think of three. In the event of a major terror attack within the US, such as a nuclear attack. In the event of an insurrection that overwhelms the state national guard and the local police agencies. And to secure the borders.
In these cases I think the president already has the authority to deploy the military, no new law is required. There is no additional authority required for the military to aid in disaster relief. So why is CFR suddenly interested?
Consider who some of thier members are, Rush, Sean, just to name a few, and these are the same people who won’t report on the birther issue.
Statement, question mark, another statement and then an insult. Was that a-hole remark intended for me????
A guy I went to college with retired from the USAF as a Colonel.
As did his father.
Their last name is "Yasuhara".
American enough for you?
I’m not playing. I made a dry humor remark. Get a chuckle out of it or turn the channel.
NWO. We’ve been headed this way since 1989. The ‘R’ and the ‘D’ are just for decoration.
Big brother rises his ugly head. Libertarians have been warning about this for generations.
Yes they have. But enough people keep thinking that “their guy” will “use power wisely”, so no more than half of the American people get mad at one time as their liberties are systematically diminished or eliminated by the Washington government.
My point is that there is nothing at all new about federal troops being used to enforce the law.
Without researching it in the least:
Federal troops, or possibly federalized militia, were used to suppress the Whiskey Rebellion during Washington’s presidency.
Federal troops were used in the early 1850s to enforce the return of Anthony Burns from Boston to his master under the Fugitive Slave Act.
Federal troops were used to suppress the fighting in Bloody Kansas in the 1850s.
Federal Marines were used to storm the Harper’s Ferry Arsenal when occupied by John Brown.
Federal troops were used to suppress the NYC draft riots.
Federal troops were used to suppress the KKK under President Grant.
Federal troops were repeatedly used to enforce the law (or to break the strike, depending on your POV) in labor disputes during the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
Federal troops were used to enforce the Supreme Court’s desegregation rulings in the 1950s.
That’s off the top of my head. I’m sure there are a great many more. You may claim troops should not be used this way, but you can’t claim it’s a new thing.
Makes me wonder what the CFR has planned for us.
Nobody will do anything about this.
It’s just time to leave and start over.
A John Galt solution would be preferable.
O’dierno
Sounds Irish to me.
Beware of NGOs in wolf clothing.
*****************
Now, what would be the effect if Obummer put the military on high alert and activated ALL National Guard units on the weekend BEFORE the elections? With orders to deploy near all major cities.
Scared yet?
Nothing good, I’m fairly certain...
I say we return the favor.
Americans with Italian heritage are pretty American to me.
go f dirtbag. I am Italo American and have family who fought in WW2 etc etc.
disgusting.
Another thing historically illiterate pofs , guess who America was named after?
The Act prohibits the use of the military to enforce any federal law. Force Bills passed later on permitted the use of federal troops to protect civil rights and liberties when the state and local govt has abandoned such protection. This would be the 101 Airborne in Little Rock.
The Act prohibits the use of the military to enforce any federal law. Force Bills passed later on permitted the use of federal troops to protect civil rights and liberties when the state and local govt has abandoned such protection. This would be the 101 Airborne in Little Rock.
Most of the examples cited were during the Civil War or very near to it when the times were characterized by a pre civil war or post civil war state while this Nation was at war with itself.
I believe that the others were actually National Guard units of the respective states themselves, not regular Army units, although the clearing of the bonus marchers may have been done by regular Army since it was on or near the Capital Grounds and the District of Columbia has no National Guard to speak of.
The President can call out the State(s) National Guard(s).
Deploying and using regular military forces within US soil during peacetime is a whole other turning of the worm.
isn’t there a law against the military being used as cops?
Would that be the Republicrats and the Demublicans?
We lost our country when Obama was elected even though the entire political elite knew Obama was a fraud and allowed him entrance into the White House anyway.
That law is utterly useless. Its only purpose is to lull people into a sense of safety.
US Constitution Art 1, Sec 8 [portions]As you can see, the Constitution explicitly allows for military enforcement of domestic laws.
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.