Posted on 12/08/2011 2:41:37 PM PST by George Varnum
...3 companies of infantry were polled by questionnaire about the drill and it’s purpose. One of the questions was, will you as a member of the Nat. Guard use lethal force against the American public if ordered to do so? One of the men stepped forward and refused to take the poll and explained that it was a moral judgement on his part and that he could not do so. He then placed his weapon on the ground and fell in behind the formation. Devon said it was like a waterfall, Every member layed their weapons on the deck and fell in beside the one lone specialist. ...
(Excerpt) Read more at oathkeepers.org ...
It was irresponsible for Oath Keepers and anyone else to report this without confirmation.
People can only form an opinion with all the information. There are too many that get riled up, only to find the story untrue. If this proves to be true, then I will be as upset as anyone else, and join action against this purported tyranny.
US Army, Sgt, 1976-1984
Not the same thing.
If my memory serves, the Guardsmen thought they were being fired on.
I am a Army vet.
Most counties have their inmate list online.
As the author of the article at Oath Keeper states, the story is unconfirmed. The story shouldn’t have been posted here or anywhere until it was confirmed, because of the backlash from people going off half-cocked.
So if the General says it never happened then he must be lieing, right?
Untrained troops forced to deal with radical, violent and naive, marxist directed students.............chaos
As in every Marxist movement, deaths of the participants aren't mourned but celebrated since they died for the cause.
I was just trying, in my mind, to compare Kent State with the OWS crowd.
I cannot imagine a situation where a good baton would not send the 99% crying home to their mommies and their lawyers.
Even the quality of our hippies has gone into the trash these days.
Just looked it up. Seems there was someone there with a pistol. http://www.cleveland.com/science/index.ssf/2010/10/analysis_of_kent_state_audio_t.html
The inner city screws lose on both accounts.
So are you saying the National Guard was wrong for firing?
This sort of question always came up from time-to-time over the years in several different units I was in, usually preceeded by many adult beverages.
General consensus was that nothing was bad enough to get us to the point of shooting American citizens but such an event would cause working the way up the chain of command to find from where such an order originated.
Reserve units in that era were a comedy. If it were regular Army, it wouldn't have happened.
In the 1960's, regular Army units were practicing riot control. We drilled with several types of formations with fixed bayonets. We were told there were seven levels of escalating use of force. Shooting bullets was the last. If we were sent into the streets, I doubt they would have issue more than four rounds apiece.
This was the era of racial strife and commie war protests. No one ever polled if we would have fired upon Americans. I'm guessing it would have went down the same way as the Army led by Douglas MacArthur broke up the Veterans "Bonus Army" protest in Washington DC. The regular Army is going to obey orders. Count on it.
Bush the First ordered Army and Marines into Los Angeles during the 1992 Rodney King riots. Once the troops arrived the riots stopped. Count on it.
Keep in mind these two uses of US military were not against citizens standing up for basic freedoms. In both cases, the military was used against mobs. Citizens organized to defend basic constitutional freedoms presents a different moral dilemma for our soldiers. What they will choose is a guessing game. What the military leaders would choose too is a guessing game.
There are no Marines in the National Guard. Only Army and Airforce.
But they weren't. They fired into the crowd indiscriminately.
The National Guard requires its members take an oath saying that they will defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. The Constitution gives Congress the power to call up the militia to execute the laws of the union and to suppress rebellion. If the National Guardsman isn't willing to do their duty as soldiers under the Constitution then maybe they shouldn't be National Guardsmen?
Oh,the Kent State where National Guard troops were fired at first.
There were/are reports that college activists and radical fired at the guard and the guardsmen fired back in response.
If you ask me, kent State only proved that the NG needed to spend more time at the range.
How about you save your shame for a confirmation of the story. Same with your disgust. We have the greatest and best people in the military, and you have vilified them. The shame is on you.
As for taking the Lord’s name in vain. It means not carrying the Lord’s name in a false manner. People swear the oath and do their best to keep it, just as you try to uphold all the commandments. Have you kept every one? Probably not. God appreciates that you tried, and he knows that none of us are perfect.
Just looked it up. Seems there was someone there with a pistol. http://www.cleveland.com/science/index.ssf/2010/10/analysis_of_kent_state_audio_t.html
Thank you for your service, and for your wise, calm words in this insanity over a unsubstaniatity story.
Isn’t it intersting to consider how so many who claim to support the military can be railing against them here?
Thanks again, from a fellow Army vet.
See my home page.
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.