REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Couple of army articles

POSTED BY: FREDGIBLET
UPDATED: Tuesday, February 5, 2008 10:29
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1426
PAGE 1 of 1

Friday, February 1, 2008 10:01 AM

FREDGIBLET

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 1, 2008 10:36 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


"Soldier (Army) suicides reach record level, study shows"

Thats because they arn't Marines.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 1, 2008 11:49 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by fredgiblet:
Many thanks to our fearless leader.


Way to think half empty.

First of all the suicide rate article is similar to the crime rate article a couple week back. The rate may be the highest ever, but its fractional when compared to the same demographic in the general population. The crime rate for Iraq veterans is far less then the same for non-vets in the same age group.

In fact, based on statistics alone, serving in Iraq, in particular, or the military in general makes someone far less likely to commit a violent crime then for a civilian (although it seems that gang and drug violence probably weigh heavily on those results).

As for the combat readiness argument. Fact is we have tens of thousands of battle hardened vets ready to serve in defense of this country. Faced with a conventional attack our military is very well prepared. The article argues that the military is unprepared for unconventional attacks. I disagree. Our nuclear deterrent would make successful unconventional attack by a foriegn invader completely impossible. Thus we are prepared to both deter and destroy hostile aggressors using both conventional and unconventional weapons which is the very essense of Defense and the central purpose of the military.

The article does point out that the US military is unprepared to assist in civil response to limited unconventional attacks, such as terrorist attacks. Since that is not the primary purpose of the military that is not surprising. Such roles must by law fall upon civilian authorities at the State, Local, and Federal level with the military role being that of a supporting actor.

In that regard the article outlines the military's plan to prepare a specialized force to respond to such incident to augment, support, or temporarily take the place of civil agencies. Such a force has been in the works since the failure of Louisina's State and Local authorities after Katrina and the President's lack of legal authority to simply 'take control' without permission of the Governor. The idea of a military Rapid Deployment Force, brigade sized, and authorized for use in those situations has been floating around since then.

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 1, 2008 12:02 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


"The rate may be the highest ever, but its fractional when compared to the same demographic in the general population."

And now for some unpleasant truths.

The suicide rate for 0-24 year old males in the US is about 6 / 100,000, for females 1 / 100,000.
http://www.cdc.gov/MMWR/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5415a1.htm

From the army's own figures: "Army reached an all-time high of 17.5 suicides per 100,000 active-duty soldiers in 2006."


***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 1, 2008 1:35 PM

GORAMMAN


GORRAMMIT HERO! There you go again!

Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
Quote:

Originally posted by fredgiblet:
Many thanks to our fearless leader.


Way to think half empty.

First of all the suicide rate article is similar to the crime rate article a couple week back. The rate may be the highest ever, but its fractional when compared to the same demographic in the general population. The crime rate for Iraq veterans is far less then the same for non-vets in the same age group.

In fact, based on statistics alone, serving in Iraq, in particular, or the military in general makes someone far less likely to commit a violent crime then for a civilian (although it seems that gang and drug violence probably weigh heavily on those results).

As for the combat readiness argument. Fact is we have tens of thousands of battle hardened vets ready to serve in defense of this country. Faced with a conventional attack our military is very well prepared. The article argues that the military is unprepared for unconventional attacks. I disagree. Our nuclear deterrent would make successful unconventional attack by a foriegn invader completely impossible. Thus we are prepared to both deter and destroy hostile aggressors using both conventional and unconventional weapons which is the very essense of Defense and the central purpose of the military.

The article does point out that the US military is unprepared to assist in civil response to limited unconventional attacks, such as terrorist attacks. Since that is not the primary purpose of the military that is not surprising. Such roles must by law fall upon civilian authorities at the State, Local, and Federal level with the military role being that of a supporting actor.

In that regard the article outlines the military's plan to prepare a specialized force to respond to such incident to augment, support, or temporarily take the place of civil agencies. Such a force has been in the works since the failure of Louisina's State and Local authorities after Katrina and the President's lack of legal authority to simply 'take control' without permission of the Governor. The idea of a military Rapid Deployment Force, brigade sized, and authorized for use in those situations has been floating around since then.

H



You don't offer a shred of evidence to prove your point. Not that it would matter. I'm sure whatever dittohead repository of lies you gleaned that "information from" wouldn't stand up to 60 seconds of scrutiny. The article clearly states the the suicide rate for the Army has jumped to 17.5 per 100,000 active duty soldiers in 2006 (how much you want to bet inactive reserve soldiers that have served tours in Iraq and Afganistan don't get included in that figure when they kill themselves). The following link is to statistics from the CDC for 2004 (if somebody can find more recent numbers please post them):

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/hus06.pdf#046

Now let us stipulate that the average age for a soldier is 20 to 34. If you think its less that worsens the validity of your claim, if you think its just a little more that's not much help either, if you think its much more you have no idea what the faces of our military look like. In 2004, in the USA, the age group of 20-24 had a sucide rate of 12.5 per 100,000 people. For the age group of 25-34 it was 13.9.

Now follow the math here:
17.5 - 12.5= 5
17.5 - 13.9= 3.6
That is an INCREASE of 5 and 3.6 suicides per 100,000 over our stipulated age groups. Which works out to be:
5 / 12.5 = 40%
3.6 / 13.9 = 28.8%
An INCREASE of 40 PERCENT and 29 PERCENT over the average suicide rates of the USA. Now I don't know what the hell you were going on about with all the talk of the crime rate (didn't see that thread) but I assume you were implying it was lower therefore the suicide rate was lower. You are completely wrong.

You don't fix problems by ignoring them.

And all of that stuff about the battle hardened veterans. It is true we have a large force of experienced combatants. But with that experience comes brain injuries, lost limbs, psycological problems, flashbacks, alcoholism, and broken families. Some people say that we need war to keep our military experienced. No fucking way. The benefits of training for war far outway the harms of actually fighting a war for preparedness. And since this war (occupation really) did not make us safer (no WMD, no substantial link to Al Queda, no involvement in the 9/11 attacks) it would be best if we left.

*leans into Hero, sniffs neck, stands back*

Hero -- my ass! I SMELL CHICKENHAWK!

I take back my earlier apology for the SOTU thread.

WAKE UP!

I'M DONE!






NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 1, 2008 3:31 PM

GINOBIFFARONI


Hmmmmm

Thousands of " Battle Hardened Veterans " return after US policy fails completely in Iraq and Afghanistan...

Suffering from PTSD, general piss off, lack of support, etc

Then put these people in a crisis inside the US

Can you hear the gunfire ?




The Alliance said they were gonna waltz through Serenity Valley. And we choked 'em with those words. We've done the impossible, and that makes us mighty.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 1, 2008 5:12 PM

FREMDFIRMA


It's a war, bad shit happens, that's why folks with any sense never want one to begin with.

And sometimes using a tool means using it up, and that goes for people too - who agreed, whether they truly understood that or not, to be that tool, to be used, to be used up.

Not every casualty is caused by enemy fire.

These folks are just part of the same butchers bill, is all, and one they agreed to pay when they signed on the dotted line.

And anyone expecting the military to keep it's promises to them when they have not ever since 1850 even made a pretense of doing so isn't gonna get a whole lot of sympathy from me.

And maybe, just maybe, if folks were really that worried about such a damn small percentage of folk having so much power over the rest of us - they might start considering not giving it to em in the first place, eh ?

Pardon me for not really having a lot of sympathy for folks who volunteered to be the cabals strongarm, awright ?

I might sound callous about it, but before you get out the flamethrower try thinkin it though and understanding that I see little, if any difference between these folk and the ones who DID catch a bullet, right... they volunteered to do a lethally dangerous job, and it killed them.

The how of it is meaningless to my way of lookin at it, they gave their life to something they believed in, and while I can respect that - I do not respect how that belief was obtained from them.

The job sucks, and it may kill you, and if you don't have peace with that beforehand, the time to have thought about that was before you signed on the dotted line.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 1, 2008 5:37 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


I'm sure the main stream media,movondotrog and lib Democrat members of Congress calling them NAZIS or likening them to the Khmere Rouge isn't helping matters either.

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 1, 2008 5:47 PM

FREDGIBLET


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
Quote:

Originally posted by fredgiblet:
Many thanks to our fearless leader.


Way to think half empty.



The customary insult to start things off.

Quote:

First of all the suicide rate article is similar to the crime rate article a couple week back. The rate may be the highest ever, but its fractional when compared to the same demographic in the general population. The crime rate for Iraq veterans is far less then the same for non-vets in the same age group.


Two irrelevant comments in one paragraph, mildly impressive but I've seen much better. Ignoring for a second the posts by Rue and Chris, even if they are wrong about the comparisons it's still irrelevant, saying that since the suicide rate is lower than the general populace that there's no problem is like commenting on a rich-raping-the-poor article by saying "yes, but the the middle-class is doing just fine". Second, neither of these articles are about the crime rate.

Quote:

In fact, based on statistics alone...


Relevance again.

Quote:

As for the combat readiness argument. Fact is we have tens of thousands of battle hardened vets ready to serve in defense of this country. Faced with a conventional attack our military is very well prepared.


Bullshit, we have tens of thousands of battle-hardened and battle-weary veterans who aren't here. In the unlikely event of a conventional attack it would be weeks before we could bring back the heavy artillery. Additionally most of our units are already damaged and worn out, fine for fighting an occupation against an insurgency, not so fine for fighting fresh professional armies.

Quote:

The article argues that the military is unprepared for unconventional attacks. I disagree. Our nuclear deterrent would make successful unconventional attack by a foriegn invader completely impossible.


Non-sequitur, the presence of our nuclear arsenal has no effect on the capability of an enemy to attack us, it does not make an attack impossible, merely stupid and\or irrational, and if you doubt that there's irrationality out there...

Unfortunately in the most likely scenario we wouldn't have anyone to strike back against as our target wouldn't be a country in itself but rather a group that crosses boundaries and isn't officially supported by anyone, which makes nukes useless.

Quote:

The article does point out that the US military is unprepared to assist in civil response to limited unconventional attacks, such as terrorist attacks. Since that is not the primary purpose of the military that is not surprising.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Guard_of_the_United_States

The primary job of the National Guard for decades has been disaster relief, they are counted on by state governments to fill that role, but now they are unavailable because they are being overused in Iraq.

Quote:

Such roles must by law fall upon civilian authorities at the State, Local, and Federal level with the military role being that of a supporting actor.


All those government entities have come to rely on the National Guard, beefing up local and state disaster relief forces to compensate for the loss of the guard would cost an large amount of money and is probably untenable.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 1, 2008 6:35 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
Hmmmmm

Thousands of " Battle Hardened Veterans " return after US policy fails completely in Iraq and Afghanistan...

Suffering from PTSD, general piss off, lack of support, etc

Then put these people in a crisis inside the US

Can you hear the gunfire ?

The Alliance said they were gonna waltz through Serenity Valley. And we choked 'em with those words. We've done the impossible, and that makes us mighty.




That's my point all along. A housing market that the FED propped up and will crash 25% over the next 3 years and a country that looks more and more like Mexico every year. Glad we're spending trillions overseas....

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 1, 2008 8:25 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Rap, my only answer to that.. is thus.

"If you have taken the King's shilling, than you are the King's man, and as such, no friend of mine..."

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, February 2, 2008 2:30 PM

GINOBIFFARONI


Quote:

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
It's a war, bad shit happens, that's why folks with any sense never want one to begin with.

And sometimes using a tool means using it up, and that goes for people too - who agreed, whether they truly understood that or not, to be that tool, to be used, to be used up.

Not every casualty is caused by enemy fire.

These folks are just part of the same butchers bill, is all, and one they agreed to pay when they signed on the dotted line.

And anyone expecting the military to keep it's promises to them when they have not ever since 1850 even made a pretense of doing so isn't gonna get a whole lot of sympathy from me.

And maybe, just maybe, if folks were really that worried about such a damn small percentage of folk having so much power over the rest of us - they might start considering not giving it to em in the first place, eh ?

Pardon me for not really having a lot of sympathy for folks who volunteered to be the cabals strongarm, awright ?

I might sound callous about it, but before you get out the flamethrower try thinkin it though and understanding that I see little, if any difference between these folk and the ones who DID catch a bullet, right... they volunteered to do a lethally dangerous job, and it killed them.

The how of it is meaningless to my way of lookin at it, they gave their life to something they believed in, and while I can respect that - I do not respect how that belief was obtained from them.

The job sucks, and it may kill you, and if you don't have peace with that beforehand, the time to have thought about that was before you signed on the dotted line.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it



My problem with your statements, is the bullshit that has gone down was not what most of the people in the military volunteered for.

While everyone has there own reasons to sign up, most have a feeling they are to contribute to the benefit of their friends and neighbors, especially those who signed up for the national guard. Search and rescue, helping flood or fire victims, combat if an enemy attacks and there is no reasonable option.

It was not the military who broke the faith, Today, Vietnam, never in any democracy. It is always the arseholes who feel the need to invent the reasons to make bad decisions. From the Gulf of Tonkin incident to Niger Yellowcake...

It is those people and their ilk who need to feel the worlds collective contempt... not the Military.

They always break the faith, but are they every held accountable ?

Maybe at Nuremberg, but only the arseholes on one side seen justice that time...




The Alliance said they were gonna waltz through Serenity Valley. And we choked 'em with those words. We've done the impossible, and that makes us mighty.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, February 2, 2008 3:12 PM

FINN MAC CUMHAL


Quote:

Originally posted by fredgiblet:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22923548/
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080131/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/guarding_america

Many thanks to our fearless leader.

More like many thanks to Jim Bean and Jose Cuervo.



Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, February 2, 2008 7:45 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Gino, that's kinda one of the points I was makin there, though.

The military lies, and doesn't hold to any of those promises, and it's demonstrable fact that they have not effectively done so since 1850 at least...

So why would anyone with a lick of sense expect them to do so ?

As for not being what they signed up for, I said..

"The how of it is meaningless to my way of lookin at it, they gave their life to something they believed in, and while I can respect that - I do not respect how that belief was obtained from them."

I'm all for holding the Command Staff accountable - the grunt on the ground, he just takes orders, doesn't know a damned thing but what they tell him, and places his faith in them to make the right decisions when issuing those orders.

And they betray that faith, in every way possible, always have - and while I do think they should indeed be held accountable for it, why for cryin out loud didn't they consider that fact before they signed up ?

It's like buying a used car from the same guy that ripped off your father and grandfather, and expecting not to get ripped off THIS time, isn't it ?

Just sayin...

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, February 2, 2008 9:31 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


My dad was really pushing for me to join the army about a year or two before we went to Iraq. I'd been out of any job of substance for quite some time and the chips were down. Although I never saw a recruiter, I did really consider it. My dad's the type that does extensive research for his kids and their prospects (all the more reason I regret being pushed out of a relationship with him the last couple of years I lived with my mom and step-dad, my last few years before college). I had to admit that it looked a whole lot better than what I was making at the time and any other prospects I had at the time. Back then I didn't have such a bitter taste in my mouth either. I was supportive of George Bush, I never heard of the Patriot Act or the Real ID act.... I was also in the physical shape of my life and I weighed in at nearly 200 lbs and I'm only about 5'7"... I could have done whatever physical tests in store for me in my sleep. Shortly after war began though my Dad told me he was happy that I chose not to join.

In this sense I do feel bad for people who really didn't have a whole lot of options. I'm probably smarter than a lot of the bunch that joined up, but I won't try to pretend that there aren't smarter people than me that signed up and continue to this day to sign up. 2000-2005 was a pretty tough time for job finding and I'd imagine that it's about to get pretty damn rocky again. As much as I think college is a waste of time for most people going there as far as learning anything meaningful is concerned, once the layoffs start again it's going to be hard for folk like me without a degree to find a decent job without health insurance elsewhere. Then there's always the kids getting busted for pot that sign up for lack of any better options after the background search. I call that the "drug draft".....

I wish that the powers that be were serving the interests of the people as they were originally designed to be doing by the men who founded this Democratic Republic instead of using us to forward their own agendas, but when has it ever been any different since the dawn of mankind... A piece of paper, no matter how sacred it is to people like us who believe in it, just isn't enough it seems to change the MO of the puppet masters.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, February 2, 2008 10:33 PM

GINOBIFFARONI


Quote:

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Gino, that's kinda one of the points I was makin there, though.

The military lies, and doesn't hold to any of those promises, and it's demonstrable fact that they have not effectively done so since 1850 at least...

So why would anyone with a lick of sense expect them to do so ?

As for not being what they signed up for, I said..

"The how of it is meaningless to my way of lookin at it, they gave their life to something they believed in, and while I can respect that - I do not respect how that belief was obtained from them."

I'm all for holding the Command Staff accountable - the grunt on the ground, he just takes orders, doesn't know a damned thing but what they tell him, and places his faith in them to make the right decisions when issuing those orders.

And they betray that faith, in every way possible, always have - and while I do think they should indeed be held accountable for it, why for cryin out loud didn't they consider that fact before they signed up ?

It's like buying a used car from the same guy that ripped off your father and grandfather, and expecting not to get ripped off THIS time, isn't it ?

Just sayin...

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it




While I'll likely be flamed for the comparison, how about the Germans who joined the military while the country was being run by Paul von Hindenburg. Should they have expected the consequences of Hitlers rise to power ?

And as well in Iraq, look how many senior officers have departed service in outright rejection of the crap their elected government is shoveling at them... it is the executive branch that should shoulder responsibility.

If your comparing the US government ( all US governments... hell all governments ) to crapy used car salesmen, I'd say you were insulting used car salesmen...

But to what end, nobody should work for the government in any capacity without deserving the consequences..

Expanded maybe all Americans are directly and individually responsible for US foreign policy,

Would eliminate the " innocent civilian " context, they knew their country was doing wrong, they should have left. By continuing to feed the machine with their tax dollars and their silence, are they accessories to that policy? Extended is that rational a justification for terrorism ?





The Alliance said they were gonna waltz through Serenity Valley. And we choked 'em with those words. We've done the impossible, and that makes us mighty.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 3, 2008 1:40 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK


But if we were to all shoulder our responsibility and leave the country then who would pay for the Mexican's medical care and education while our soldiers are away?

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 3, 2008 4:41 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Rap, my only answer to that.. is thus.

"If you have taken the King's shilling, than you are the King's man, and as such, no friend of mine..."

-F



That's your choice, not mine, and the basis for any rift which lies w/ the country. The origin belongs with you and you alone.

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 3, 2008 9:40 AM

FREMDFIRMA


It's very simple.

You can say "No."

Military or Civilian, when pressed to perform or support an immoral act, even under threat of violence or retaliation, you can still say "No." and refuse to do it.

Way back in the days of yore when I put in some time for unca sam, they surveyed us as to whether we'd be willing to confiscate arms from american citizens or even fire on them if ordered.

I told them that any superior officer who ordered such a thing would then qualify as a domestic enemy and would be removed from command and taken into custody as per UCMJ Article 807.7 and rendered immediately to the custody of civil authorities as per UCMJ 814.14

To say they were displeased with that answer is a penultimate understatement, especially when it was correct under both military and civilian law.

Taking the Oath doesn't mean being a yes-man to anything you're told, in spite of intense conditioning to do just that - they pay lip service only to the concept of refusing illegal orders, and make abundantly clear the consquences of doing so, like the trooper from 1st platoon who was charged with insubordination for refusing an order to perform oral sex upon her platoon sergeant - since they could not bust her for refusing the order, they busted her for the manner in which she did so, a rather common side dodge to prosecute folk who don't mindlessly obey and set an example for the rest.

And those that choose the course of mindless obediance, be it to the military, the government, or a corporation, are no friends of mine and never will be - in my eyes they are just an extension of that system, willing servitors and instruments of it's abuse upon us.

Look at what happened during Katrina, with those agents of the state confiscating peoples only means of defense against looters and criminals in spite of that being as illegal an order as one could imagine, and they did it, didn't they ?

Sieg-Heil, Yes-Sir, Hoorah and all that, without so much as a twitch of conscience about it.

Without that, without the people who willingly surrender their humanity, their morals, and their conscience to do it, the state HAS no method of enforcing their will upon us, do they ?

Every gun that fires the state's bullet, has a human being being the trigger, who COULD have said "No, I will not do this."... and didn't.

And if you wanna blame me for seeing that, hate me for not respecting the folks without the moral courage to NOT perpetuate these abuses, then I will wear that hatred as a badge of honor.

F.IW.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 4, 2008 9:13 AM

FREMDFIRMA


Just for clarification, I went digging in my fileboxes and found the original survey, as I swiped a copy just in case some day I needed to cover my ass about it.

EXACT TEXT - this is typed verbatim.
====================================
The United States government declares a ban on the possession, sale, transportation, and transfer of all non-sporting firearms. A thirty (30) day amnesty period is permitted for these firearms to be turned over to the local authorities. At the end of this period, a number of citizen groups refuse to turn over their firearms. Consider the following statement:

`I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government.'

Circle One

YES NO
====================================
This copy is dated 08-06-1986

Apparently, from researching the text, it was given again in 1991, and 1994, which drew some media attention at the time, and I would lay odds it's been given at least one more time since.

If you answer NO to that question, your career is over, on the spot, to my knowledge no one who has done so has EVER been promoted again, time in grade notwithstanding.

And that tells you all you need to know, doesn't it ?

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 5, 2008 6:14 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


Quote:

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Just for clarification, I went digging in my fileboxes and found the original survey, as I swiped a copy just in case some day I needed to cover my ass about it.

EXACT TEXT - this is typed verbatim.
====================================
The United States government declares a ban on the possession, sale, transportation, and transfer of all non-sporting firearms. A thirty (30) day amnesty period is permitted for these firearms to be turned over to the local authorities. At the end of this period, a number of citizen groups refuse to turn over their firearms. Consider the following statement:

`I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government.'

Circle One

YES NO
====================================
This copy is dated 08-06-1986

Apparently, from researching the text, it was given again in 1991, and 1994, which drew some media attention at the time, and I would lay odds it's been given at least one more time since.

If you answer NO to that question, your career is over, on the spot, to my knowledge no one who has done so has EVER been promoted again, time in grade notwithstanding.

And that tells you all you need to know, doesn't it ?

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it



It most certainly does.

The truth of the matter is this. Those who join the milatary are triggermen, nothing less.

You are expected to follow orders NO MATTER WHAT. You have given up your rights as a citizen in all respects.

I find it terrifying that the government would put this down as a prerequisite to joining. When the government uses the milatary as a police force on its own people, then the governments enemies become the milataries enimies.

However. Many join up to protect us. They are heroes of the highests order.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 5, 2008 10:29 AM

FREMDFIRMA


Nah, it's not a pre-req at all, that's the thing.

Not everyone in the army is "on board" with the whole Rex-84/Conplan004/Garden Plot idea of rounding up all them pesky Cits and taking over.

General Odom, as I recall was staunchly against it, as was an officer I will refer to only as "Two-Star" for his own protection.

This survey was handed out amongst us out of the blue at Ft Lee VA quartermaster school right in the middle of our AIT classes, with no proper explaination for it ever given.

Those who answered no were however, without fail offered, and encouraged to take, a training seperation, and two of them did, one was drummed out of service for a puffed up medical concern, they put him on CQ* till he went stark raving mad and then sent him off to Walter Reed, and of the latter two, also given CQ* one committed suicide and one is typing this post.

While certain elements within the military do believe that way, and attempt to remove anyone who doesn't, it's thankfully not the entirety of the military - but that such an element is strongly present is undeniable.


*CQ = Charge of Quarters, but not exactly as you would think - this was a torture trick specifically designed to get rid of "undesireables", as practiced.

Lemme explain: They seat you at a desk near the front door of the company building, the desk is absolutely, utterly empty save for a phone with no dial on it - if that phone ever rings you are to pick it up, read a memorized script into it and hang up, failing to do so is a courtmartial offense.

If you have to use the restroom, you must find someone to cover the desk, failure to do so is a courtmartial offense, as is falling asleep on the job.

Oh, did I mention this is done 21/3 ?

21 hours on, 3 hours off, and in that 3 hours you must do laundry, maintain your wall locker, eat, and what have you, sleep if you can, but failure to show up on time is a court-martial offense.

21/3 five days a week, till you go insane, suicide, awol or die - or till they realize they cannot break you and give up.

If you think imma stubborn jackass, imagine what they thought when they put me back in class after a couple weeks of that shit.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Russian losses in Ukraine
Mon, March 18, 2024 23:45 - 982 posts
Punishing Russia With Sanctions
Mon, March 18, 2024 23:44 - 496 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Mon, March 18, 2024 19:27 - 3338 posts
I'm surprised there's not an inflation thread yet
Mon, March 18, 2024 19:09 - 709 posts
Elections; 2024
Mon, March 18, 2024 19:08 - 1982 posts
Grifter Donald Trump Has Been Indicted And Yes Arrested; Four Times Now And Counting. Hey Jack, I Was Right
Mon, March 18, 2024 19:06 - 753 posts
MO AG Suing Large Nationwide Child Sex-slave Trafficker
Mon, March 18, 2024 15:24 - 2 posts
New Peer-Reviewed Research Finds Evidence of 2020 Voter Fraud
Mon, March 18, 2024 15:21 - 7 posts
RCP's No Toss-Up State Map (3-15-2024)
Mon, March 18, 2024 15:19 - 2 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Mon, March 18, 2024 08:03 - 6091 posts
Israeli War
Mon, March 18, 2024 01:27 - 31 posts
CNN: Is the US on the brink of another civil war?
Mon, March 18, 2024 01:22 - 1 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL