Posted on 03/14/2013 9:54:41 PM PDT by Perseverando
Dear Mainstream Media,
Back in 2008, candidate Barack Obama went off his teleprompter and added a couple of sentences to the text of a speech about expanding the Peace Corps and AmeriCorps. Over rolling applause, the soon-to-be president of the United States said: “We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”
At the time, Joseph Farah of WND.com wrote a column calling on you to help shine a light on what this shocking statement really meant. In a permanent state of vapors over Obama’s candidacy, you were of no use when it came to extracting anything but press releases from Team Obama.
Nearly five years later, it hardly matters that candidate Obama’s promise to double the Peace Corps and the rest has come to naught. But the president’s unscripted determination to empower a civilian national security force is a different story. As far as you’re concerned, though, it’s also a nonstory.
This complacency or complicity has to stop. During the last 10 months, the Department of Homeland Security has purchased 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition, including millions of hollow-point bullets. The department also has purchased 7,000 fully automatic assault rifles, and it has overseen the retrofitting of more than 2,000 light tanks, which, of course, were originally designed to resist the mines and ambushes of the battlefield. Why does DHS need such offensive and defensive firepower?
Remember, DHS stands for Department of Homeland Security, and “homeland,” just to be extremely clear, means the USA. Obama must be asked against which domestic enemy he is arming nonmilitary forces. It sounds incredible, to be sure, but are we watching administration battle
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
See my #39.
I have never actually heard or seen them listed, but I believe they're being put in place daily, i.e. gun control, drones, etc.
"Is the government, as some suggest, depleting ammunition stocks as a means of gun control?The left has nothing on conservatives evidently when it comes to the lack of interest in honesty and accuracy in reporting, the only thing that counts is that it sounds great to the low knowledge types and hits the emotional keys.
That's just it, so far we still don't really know the truth of these purchases, I haven't yet seen a good article on them that I have confidence in.
It is not an established tradition for US LEOs to bravely catch bullets just so a few homeless people in another street can be saved. When riots begin the law enforcement ends. The timeline of LA riots (1992) shows that the police fled the streets. The Koreans were holding the fort because 911 did not answer, not because they wanted to get a few murders under their belts. Wikipedia offers this quote:
"I want to make it clear that we didn't open fire first. At that time, four police cars were there. Somebody started to shoot at us. The LAPD ran away in half a second. I never saw such a fast escape. I was pretty disappointed."
The riots of 1992 were put down by the National Guard, without use of force. Wikipedia does not mention the police as a major peacemaker. Police is not an army, and a supervisor cannot send a police officer to death because it is strategically advantageous. If one shooter is holed up somewhere, the police needs 100 officers and air support because they are very safe operators. If mass riots are in progress, the police simply doesn't have enough officers to achieve such an overwhelming force. Individual officers will not survive in a riot. That's why they are not a player. They are not trained, not conditioned, and not expected to die for their country. They can maintain law and order only when the local majority supports them.
If the riots are calming down, the police will be cautiously making their appearance, "supporting" the troops. Riots will be calming down if they have a finite cause, like a beating of one guy, or a hurricane, or an earthquake. Riots will not be calming down if the trigger situation remains active. The crash of US financial system is not something you can repair overnight. This means the riots will not be that easy to stop, and the police will be exactly where I'd expect them to be - with their families, and hopefully with their neighbors, taking part in the mutual defense.
Those MRAPs will not be a wunderwaffe either. They are resistant to IED, but they are not resistant to anti-tank weapons; they cannot pass over trenches or barricades; they can be buried under demolished buildings. They don't seem to have effective weapons that can be operated from the inside; they only have gun ports for small arms. They appear to be very vulnerable to incendiary weapons - they have too many crevices, and the rubber of the tires is certainly going to burn. The vehicle has neither the efficient (carbon) filters nor the positive air pressure inside - this makes the passengers dependent on clean ambient air, which is in short supply if there are fires all around (especially if it's their own MRAP that is burning.)
In essence, this MRAP is only usable for delivery of troops. Once they are there, they have to disembark and become vulnerable on their own. It is not a fighting vehicle like a tank; it has no integrated weapons. It's just an armored carrier.
If you're too ignorant to know what was being referred to because it wasn't spelled out to your satisfaction it's not my problem that's your problem.
A profanity throwing idiot would be the person who doesn’t know anything about the military or armaments and just doesn’t care as long as the writing is made more fun in their mind because of it.
Adults require something better, that is why this publication gets so little respect among thinking people.
Apparently you are too dense to grasp the fact that when military equipment is used against civilians which have nothing even close to it, the civilians might not have the exact same designation for the equipment as is used by the military. That was the point they were trying to make, sorry if you missed it.
It’s civilian terms verses military terms numb nuts.
Compared to what the American people have at their disposal, it’s a tank, even if it’s just a generic term.
No it isn’t my foul mouthed child, an armored car is an armored car, a tank is a tank, a truck is a truck, an attack helicopter is an attack helicopter, a fighter jet is a fighter jet.
My AR-15 is not a heavy machine gun, or even a light machine gun, my pistol is not a machine pistol or even an assault pistol.
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.