Posted on 03/27/2010 12:59:55 PM PDT by worst-case scenario
It's been said that the military is always preparing for war. That is true. We prepare for combat every day. We ran 5 miles today to the rifle range and shot nearly 200 rounds a piece at targets and then ran back. However, we also pray for peace. I would love one day to be completely unnecessary. But alas, I am a realist, and I know that day will never come.
The headlines of the last week have reminded me more of glimpsing at the S2 Daily Briefing Sheets while in theater or the Al-Jazeera than the NY Times or the Washington Post. Think about that for a moment, let it sink in.
Before I get into the main premise of this article - I need to make two statements here.
First and foremost , when it comes to the back and forth of who did what to whom and why - I don't give a @!$%#. It doesn't change the action. In life we're judged by our actions, nothing more, nothing less. One of the greatest things of the military is when it comes to an enemy, the politics behind the situation - don't matter in accomplishing that mission. For the military , life is simple in that regard.
Secondly, Regardless of your political ideology, you've earned the right as US Citizens to say your piece - no matter how wrong it may be. That is your right, and I will give my life to protect it.
(Excerpt) Read more at christopher-calbat.newsvine.com ...
So, the military is to defend any ambiguous notion of a U.S. Constitution or “the” U.S. Constitution? Seems to me the Founding Fathers didn’t think abuses of the government should be born the the American citizen in perpetuity. Then what?
Won't happen - his allies are in Afghanistan, his enemies are here.
Utter bull$#!+ unless he's one of the handful of Force Recon, and the recon guys I knew were all to the right of Attila.
In the first place, ours is NOT a democracy. The US is a Constitutional Republic. It’s a HUGE difference. In the second place, the majority of the US military would fight on the side of the American PEOPLE, not on that of Hussein. I’m 58 and couldn’t run 50 feet without damned near keeling over. But when I’m joined by 50 million other, armed, actual Americans, the Marine who wrote this article will either be running AWAY from the American people or running to join us. And by the way. It would NOT be a “civil” war. That term implies a fight against other Americans. The leftist thugs who passed/supported HusseinCare are FAR from Americans. Ours would be a 2nd American REVOLUTION!!
Of course the intended implication is that Conservatives are calling for a civil war. Everybody ought to just sit back and enjoy the rape, it’s inevitable, right?
No one wants any violence, but I will not walk peacably into the Democrat’s boxcars! I don’t care what the corrupt MSM says, we’re way past that, they’re going to demonize us no matter what we do, as this artice demonstrates. They are the arm of the DNC.
“But wouldn’t they also be worried that this piece would be discussed and debunked all over thoughtful Conservative websites like this one, and completely rebutted therefore?”
You miss a key point - only FReepers know that this site is thoughtful...to the left, it’s totally HATE-FILLED. So, to them, posting here makes PERFECT sense.
You bring up an interesting point. We could see military units loyal to the president fighting units loyal to the Constitution. We could see racial divides within units with mutinities galore. We could see the Army versus the Navy -- and I'm not referring to football.
But there would be enough military men loyal to the man who pays them to make this Marine's statements a reality, unless of course the US dollar becomes as worthless as the Zimbabwe dollar.
In other words we outnumber them in the vicinity of 200:1.
But the use of WMD's could equalize that. Lincoln had only two WMD's at his disposal -- Grant and Sherman -- and he used them both.
Something else comes to mind. You may have noticed that at the Capitol rally the Capitol police had assault weapons on open display. Had the Tea Party members attempted to storm the Capitol, I have no doubt those weapons would have been turned on the demonstrators. I suspect they had a shoot-to-kill order if things got openly violent. I also suspect that Pelosi's walk with her gavel was intended to provoke that violence.
I'd be willing to bet that there were army units on alert at various bases outside DC, and those troops had been briefed that morning with the words, "Gentlemen, today you may be called upon to kill American citizens." As one who was an army officer from '71 to '73, I know those troops would have followed those orders.
I remember all too well, at Ruby Ridge and Waco, what happened to people who dared to raise their hands in defiance to the federal government. Upon receiving resistance, it is government policy to escalate and escalate until the government wins. Ever since 1865, the federal government has insisted on the last word in the use of violence, and I don't see that changing.
I am a little surprised that someone claiming to be active military would get so much attention. There are millions that have served. And they are not trying to be provocative, just good citizens. I question this Sgt.
For "could," the troops in the missile silos, the bomber cockpits, and the nuclear subs, trained regularly, and the Soviets knew it.
For "would," every President from Eisenhower on declared his firm intention to order retaliation for an attack. The Soviets believed them.
Since November 2008, Americans have bought enough NEW guns to equip the combined Chinese and Indian armies. That's "could." But we still have to convince our government of "would." No one wants a revolution, least of all me, but somehow we have to convince our government of the "would," so they'll back off.
He11, 0 wouldn't think a thing about having American civilians wasted if he could get the U.S. military to do it. The only people that he pull the military up short on are his phakin' muzzi relatives in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Well, what sort of historical and what we used to call “civics” reading matter is provided gratis to our troops by Conservative institutions, and in what format? How many films or educational DVDs are given away? I would think that simply providing the entertainment and educational materials that they would enjoy would be enough to sway them to our side. Maybe some teachers giving free HS or College credit classes to the troops could be arranged.
After all, the best reason for them to true to our nation’s heritage is through knowing it in its entirety.
multiplied by TEN
“If he’s a real Marine, then I am Chesty Pullar.”
No matter. Wars are bad, civil wars are worse. Even if the armed forces do not follow the orders of what they see as an illigitimate commander in chief, some will, and there will be professional soldiers on most, if not all, sides.
Please note that John Murtha and Jeremiah Wright are also Marines. In that context . . .
You are correct and it was McArthur that was in charge of that.
But you will note I sad “May Not” not “has not”.
They may make hem run out to Hathcock or the other ranges when they are at school. But every time I ever went to the range you dd armory draw and WALKED to the range. Ther is no running on the range because of safety reasons. Even movement to contactare only done at MAYBE 50%. And the certainly aren't no 5 mile runs.
The most I could see is a 5 mph hump at the K ranges on Lejeune (or 29 stumps), but that ain't running.
I say its either either a BOOT, a POG (our wonderful hideouts in supply) trying gain cool points, or complete BS.
Yeah and I,m Marvin the Martian.
Some bed wetting ,thumpsucking liberal reporter wrote this
On the internet you can claim to be anything but that does not make it true
If the Court was so troubled by the extension of Congress' Commerce Clause reach to ACTIVITY as egregious as a bombing involving a private residence, it should be a fortiori even more troubled by the extension of that same regulatory authority to the INACTIVITY (i.e.-the desire to be left alone) of private individuals. Unlike private residences, with regard to which the court labored so hard in Jones, private individuals (and the states) are clothed with all rights under the Ninth Amendment (and Tenth) Amendments not specifically granted to the federal government. Only a complete redefinition of the terms "commerce" and "activity", a redefinition to which the unanimous court in Jones would seem hostile, would save the individual mandate from the ash heap of constitutional history.
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.