Active Duty and Vets, Would You Follow an Order to Attack Civilians?

[Conscript 99]

I'm not going to go there. I will make the right decision when/if the time comes and nothing more can be expected of me. The end.

[lbsrdi 1,078]

Due to the fact that most would not admit it I feel that this poll could never produce accurate results, therefore pointless. OP, I don't mind the thread and I think it will make for interesting reading, I am merely making an observation about the validity of the results.

God bless all you guys who serve. Thank you.

[YOT 3,743]

I'm not going to go there. I will make the right decision when/if the time comes and nothing more can be expected of me. The end.

 

 

Instinct. Depend on it. It goes hand-in-hand with "To thine own self be true."

[socom688 217]

I went against the grain and said I would I would shoot anyone who got in the way



But seriously, a significant amount of military personnel would NOT fire upon US citizens on a mass scale for any reason less than something found in Scifi. Anyone who thinks otherwise, hasn't served and probably doesn't know anyone besides maybe one distant friend who is an enlisted guy who is just serving his 4 then getting out. (Nothing against enlisted at all, just saying pointing out career officers, the ones "issuing the orders of death", take upholding the Constitution just as seriously as most everyone on this forum).


I have mentioned it in previous posts, but I can guarantee the majority of Marine Infantry wouldn't stand for that shit, and would fight against our own oppressive government. Most, I'd take an educated guess of at least 9 out of 10, despise the current administration.

 

I cannot see our own military doing any of the enforcement, obtainment.. whatever the fuck would be going on. Those jobs would have to be done by a pseudo-military-police force, like the Nazi's SA or Gestapo... oh wait, isn't that what the DHS is kinda turning into???

[coronet 131]

+! ^^^^^

 

 

'bout Katrina,

Anyone ever track down if there were specific orders written/given to confiscate weapons?

Anyone ever find out what the command authority was between the authorities on the ground and the military units assigned to the area?

Anyone know how many units participated in the illegal acts?

Anyone know how many weapons were confiscated?

 

So OddMan, where are you goin with this???

I was not there when Katrina happened but I was there 2 months after and the damage was mind bogglingly catastrophic. It was hard to wrap my head around what happened. You all remember the police on the bridge shooting at people and the chaos in the stadium for days and the total lack of law and order all over don't you? Now don't take all this as my excuse for the illegal crap that went down -- I don't condone anything but what I am saying is that this was a one off situation, totally new and shit happened. It was not systemic and did not happen on a wide scale. For that reason I do not believe Katrina can be used as an example of what the military would do on a national level. From what I understand the Nat Guard units that were involved just came back from a tour in AFG -- if you have ever been on a combat tour you understand that a person just does not go from 110mph to cruise easily. Again, no excuses -- imo it was a big mistake to assign that unit.

 

Comparing a few small disjointed illegal acts done during a period of unprecedented chaos to a concerted long term planned campaign against the total population does not wash for me as justifiable...

I'm not military - but FUCK YOU AND THE HORSE YOU RODE IN ON - you keep discounting Katrina and keep making excuses. FUCK YOU asshole. THE shit happenned. Deal with it. Unconstitutional disarmament of civilian people trying to protect their property, FUCK YOU. You won't fucking admit it if your face was ground into the dirt with your arm twisted into your back, you fucker. FUCK YOU! From an AMERICAN. Not LEO NOT Military, Just an average fucking AMERICAN that believes in the Constitution and the Second Amendment. FUCK YOU! ADMIT IT HAPPENED and GET OVER IT and ADMIT it was GOV against Civilians.

[socom688 217]

+! ^^^^^

 

 

'bout Katrina,

Anyone ever track down if there were specific orders written/given to confiscate weapons?

Anyone ever find out what the command authority was between the authorities on the ground and the military units assigned to the area?

Anyone know how many units participated in the illegal acts?

Anyone know how many weapons were confiscated?

 

So OddMan, where are you goin with this???

I was not there when Katrina happened but I was there 2 months after and the damage was mind bogglingly catastrophic. It was hard to wrap my head around what happened. You all remember the police on the bridge shooting at people and the chaos in the stadium for days and the total lack of law and order all over don't you? Now don't take all this as my excuse for the illegal crap that went down -- I don't condone anything but what I am saying is that this was a one off situation, totally new and shit happened. It was not systemic and did not happen on a wide scale. For that reason I do not believe Katrina can be used as an example of what the military would do on a national level. From what I understand the Nat Guard units that were involved just came back from a tour in AFG -- if you have ever been on a combat tour you understand that a person just does not go from 110mph to cruise easily. Again, no excuses -- imo it was a big mistake to assign that unit.

 

Comparing a few small disjointed illegal acts done during a period of unprecedented chaos to a concerted long term planned campaign against the total population does not wash for me as justifiable...

I'm not military - but FUCK YOU AND THE HORSE YOU RODE IN ON - you keep discounting Katrina and keep making excuses. FUCK YOU asshole. THE shit happenned. Deal with it. Unconstitutional disarmament of civilian people trying to protect their property, FUCK YOU. You won't fucking admit it if your face was ground into the dirt with your arm twisted into your back, you fucker. FUCK YOU! From an AMERICAN. Not LEO NOT Military, Just an average fucking AMERICAN that believes in the Constitution and the Second Amendment. FUCK YOU! ADMIT IT HAPPENED and GET OVER IT and ADMIT it was GOV against Civilians.

 

 

Just put down the keyboard... and walk away slooowwwlyy....

[coronet 131]

As soon as Odd man gets over his - oh , well it was just this, oh well that really was just an abnormality, oh well, that won't happen again - Fuck it It happened. deal with it. Fucking Government took peoples weapons by force, kicking them out of their homes, and handcuffing them, and body slamming old women and no on will ever get their weapons back again. EVER, And odd man keeps acting like this was some fucking abberation. EDIT= Would you like a fucking poptart with that so that you can chew it into a shape like a gun? yeah, he pisses me off.

Edited April 6, 2013 by coronet

[coronet 131]

OK. So maybe I'm not so pissed off at odd man. Maybe I'm pissed off at my nephews, grown up in the middle of the U.S. , and they seem to think that obama is the second messiah. There are quite a few dumb fucks out here that think that way. They aren't even on welfare. I keep my mouth shut and gently try to steer them to the light. But they are fucking complete retards. They bitch and moan about everything we do, but then turn around and say that sotero is doing the best he can. I can't help but laugh at the irony. I try to explain, but they are true fucktards. A guy I worked with today, actually said to get on you tube and watch Jim Carry, that he was hilarious. God damn. You can't fix ignorant.

Edited April 6, 2013 by coronet

[Dunedain 44]

The only Lawful orders are ones that adhere to the original intent of the Founding Fathers in the Constitution. Those that oppose that are the enemy, their orders are not to be followed and they, and anyone who supports them or gets in the way, are to be considered traitors and dealt with as such. That's the only thing the members of the military need to remember.

[avnate 335]

About Katrina. ....Slidell, LA within 48 hours of it passing. Then Pass Christian, Gulfport and Biloxi... You hear that shit about three days till society breaks..... try 24hrs after a natural disaster on the scale of Katrina. Hattiesburg, MS. A brother shot his sister in the face over a bag of ice. Another blew his ass up drilling gas tanks. The stories goes on and on. The smell of the bayou mud and bottom of lake Ponchartrain dredged up and left on everything was sickening. Dead animals and persons floating in water being eaten upon by what did survive. People were devastated. Society had it's back broken.

 

I was in a open top Jeep carrying fuel, water and food. One three occasions I had to draw my sidearm in defense, gave a portion of ration and creature comforts (candy bars) to those in real need while I attempted to reach my family. People were scavenging, looting and killing. Period. Make zero mistake about it. Any person/s prowling with firearms was a threat. Most were defending what little they had left and kept to themselves. Close knit neighborhoods set up armed watch and was left to themselves with no military intervention or weapon confiscation. Those ones who were up to no good were ratted out, detained and relieved of firearms if cause was found. I encountered many checkpoints and questioned, never once was I asked to surrender a firearm of the three I carried. This was even late at night past a mandatory curfew of sundown. I found every person from the military (active or reserve) to be nothing but professional and courteous. Most offered coffee and conversation of events going on while I was being cleared to pass. At each stop I was offered resupply to hand out. Cases of bottled water and MRE's.

 

Say what you want.... I am confident in our troops to do what is right in the eyes of our Creator.

[gunman1 1,753]

The only Lawful orders are ones that adhere to the original intent of the Founding Fathers in the Constitution. Those that oppose that are the enemy, their orders are not to be followed and they, and anyone who supports them or gets in the way, are to be considered traitors and dealt with as such. That's the only thing the members of the military need to remember.

^^^^^THIS +1

I would take this to another level though. Anyone in a paid position to "Serve and Protect" We The People, must be held to the same accounting.

[SHOTGUN MESIAH 855]

Judging from all the bickering between military and civilians on this message board pretty much answers the OP's original question.

[Voltia 375]

Judging from all the bickering between military and civilians on this message board pretty much answers the OP's original question.

 

Which is, yes we will, but we'll bullshit you so you don't see it coming until it's too late.

[Odd Man Out 1,283]

Judging from all the bickering between military and civilians on this message board pretty much answers the OP's original question.

 

Your comment does not make sense, unless you mean that the mil will not fire on civvies... Interesting isn't it though that the ex mil person (me) was civil and the "civilian" was the childish boob throwin eff bombs left and right. Corny buddy, stop jumpin up and down and take some deep breathes. Sorry I pissed you off, -- yes I admit that the U.S. Military has done some evil things (don't forget about My Lai) but I posit that it has done MUCH more good during it's existance. You go ahead and worry about the military for all the good that will do you. The DHS is on my radar, a much more troubling developing sit imo.

[Voltia 375]

I'll agree to that. DHS sucks balls and needs disbanding.

[wasrNwarpaint 184]

DHS ....appears to me to be military ....just internal

[Rhodes1968 1,638]

Even though it doesnt amount to much in the long run;

 

NO was placed under Martial law or a form of it when reports of gunfire at the helicopters was reported.

People were disarmed as far east as Lake Pontchartrain, under threat of lethal and emanate force if any resistance was offered.

The mayor ordered police (HA) to confiscate weapons in all neighborhoods. Of course the only ones reachable were well to do mostly white ones.

Federalized National Guard Troops from as far away as Ohio assisted in the confiscation directly. Weapons at ready and authorization to shoot issued.

 

Shit you know what... freaking read or believe the delusion, my givacrap bottomed out.

[Odd Man Out 1,283]

You live in the past, I will continue to prepare for the future...

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry but that was just too easy

[Capt Nemo 882]

Depends on what the civies are trying to do!

 

If they're trying to destroy the country or The Constitution, or render it defenseless, YES!

 

If they're trying to reinstate or uphold The Constitution, and right the wrongs of our government, NO!

[Rhodes1968 1,638]

Question if a person came to the understanding the Constitution was a heavily flawed document that in reality enabled this mess should they protect it?

[thebuns1 4,323]

Ive been avoiding this thread for a bit, but can no longer do so. To be honest, I, like anyone, would shoot any fucker that poses a direct threat to me and mine. Since Im no longer in the service of this once great nation, its hard for me to speak on their behalf. I wouldnt shoot unarmed citizens, not many would, if any.

 

Good thread though.

[SHOTGUN MESIAH 855]

I wouldnt shoot unarmed citizens, not many would, if any.

but would you shoot a heavily armed citizen for not turning in his guns.......is what we are trying to figure out here.

 

and be it a law abiding mentally competent citizen with no criminal record.

Edited April 7, 2013 by SHOTGUN MESIAH

[MT Predator 2,294]

I wouldnt shoot unarmed citizens, not many would, if any.

but would you shoot a heavily armed citizen for not turning in his guns.......is what we are trying to figure out here.

 

and be it a law abiding mentally competent citizen with no criminal record.

I retracted my vote as the question is pretty vague. The Military has to follow very strict Rules of Engagement, even in Afghanistan and the Horn of Africa, which determines use of Deadly Force. "Against enemies, foreign and domestic". If they put it in the ROEs and you are "heavily armed", then decide to squeeze a trigger, it identifies you as a combatant and you are fair game. You are not going to get gunned down for nothing. Escalation of Force to get you to comply would have to happen, then you might decide to gun and run in which in contrary to everyone's fantasy of running around your neighborhood like the Wolverines on Red Dawn, you will lose. You will be bagged, tagged, and photographed like the countless souls we have killed in Iraq and Afghanistan plus catalogued so your family can flip through the pics to see if you are one of the many casualties in case you didn't have ID on you. (True shit, we do this to our enemy dead if we have to clean them up off the battlefield). I would imagine it is much easier to ID corpses in our own country.

[Remek 771]

I think there is a distinction here, w/r/t Katrina. The national guard is not the nation's military. They have shot people many a time. Kent state immediately comes to mind. However, the national guard is under control of the governor of the state to which they belong, and do not become our federal military until the governor signs the order.

 

I have a lot of faith in our nation's military, but not so much the national guard troops.

 

I therefore think the argument w/r/t Katrina is a bad one. As far as I know, the confiscations took place from LEOs, not the federal military. I also think from the other statements above that the national guard did not even take guns. It was only the LEOs.

 

This is also backed up by Bush's order w/r/t Katrina that any department would be defunded if they confiscate any guns. Only those offices that do not receive federal monies would be motivated to so-confiscate the guns.

 

Am I wrong here? If so, can you tell me who (federal military/nat guard/federalized nat guard/local, state and federal departments) participated in the confiscations?

 

Sorry if this is a slight derail, but it seems relevant to the point of argument w/r/t the military.

[gunman1 1,753]

I was told that a unit which had just returned from a year of "Hot Combat" was sent to NO for security. It wouldn't make any difference whether they regular Army or reserves, knowing those details.

 

The OP Question is:

Active Duty and Vets, Would You Follow an Order to Attack Civilians?

[SHOTGUN MESIAH 855]

I wouldnt shoot unarmed citizens, not many would, if any.

but would you shoot a heavily armed citizen for not turning in his guns.......is what we are trying to figure out here.

 

and be it a law abiding mentally competent citizen with no criminal record.

I retracted my vote as the question is pretty vague. The Military has to follow very strict Rules of Engagement, even in Afghanistan and the Horn of Africa, which determines use of Deadly Force. "Against enemies, foreign and domestic". If they put it in the ROEs and you are "heavily armed", then decide to squeeze a trigger, it identifies you as a combatant and you are fair game. You are not going to get gunned down for nothing. Escalation of Force to get you to comply would have to happen, then you might decide to gun and run in which in contrary to everyone's fantasy of running around your neighborhood like the Wolverines on Red Dawn, you will lose. You will be bagged, tagged, and photographed like the countless souls we have killed in Iraq and Afghanistan plus catalogued so your family can flip through the pics to see if you are one of the many casualties in case you didn't have ID on you. (True shit, we do this to our enemy dead if we have to clean them up off the battlefield). I would imagine it is much easier to ID corpses in our own country.

So we take this as a YES.....the U.S. Military would attack it's own people if ordered to do so regardless of an oath to defend the constitution.

Edited April 7, 2013 by SHOTGUN MESIAH

[Odd Man Out 1,283]

Only in case of zombies or outright civil war... Oh I forgot also for those that can't seem to remove the tinfoil attached to their heads.

BE AFRAID, BE VERY AFRAID!!!

[gunman1 1,753]

Damn shame it has actually come to this shit. Free people should not fear their government.

[Rhodes1968 1,638]

I think there is a distinction here, w/r/t Katrina. The national guard is not the nation's military. They have shot people many a time. Kent state immediately comes to mind. However, the national guard is under control of the governor of the state to which they belong, and do not become our federal military until the governor signs the order.

 

I have a lot of faith in our nation's military, but not so much the national guard troops.

 

I therefore think the argument w/r/t Katrina is a bad one. As far as I know, the confiscations took place from LEOs, not the federal military. I also think from the other statements above that the national guard did not even take guns. It was only the LEOs.

 

This is also backed up by Bush's order w/r/t Katrina that any department would be defunded if they confiscate any guns. Only those offices that do not receive federal monies would be motivated to so-confiscate the guns.

 

Am I wrong here? If so, can you tell me who (federal military/nat guard/federalized nat guard/local, state and federal departments) participated in the confiscations?

 

Sorry if this is a slight derail, but it seems relevant to the point of argument w/r/t the military.

 

Well you would be wrong in every assumption you have made. Rationalize what you wish if it makes you feel better. We know what happened down here if you choose not to believe it what does it matter?

 

If you really want to know for yourself its not like this went undocumented in the law suits that followed.

[Remek 771]

I think there is a distinction here, w/r/t Katrina. The national guard is not the nation's military. They have shot people many a time. Kent state immediately comes to mind. However, the national guard is under control of the governor of the state to which they belong, and do not become our federal military until the governor signs the order.

 

I have a lot of faith in our nation's military, but not so much the national guard troops.

 

I therefore think the argument w/r/t Katrina is a bad one. As far as I know, the confiscations took place from LEOs, not the federal military. I also think from the other statements above that the national guard did not even take guns. It was only the LEOs.

 

This is also backed up by Bush's order w/r/t Katrina that any department would be defunded if they confiscate any guns. Only those offices that do not receive federal monies would be motivated to so-confiscate the guns.

 

Am I wrong here? If so, can you tell me who (federal military/nat guard/federalized nat guard/local, state and federal departments) participated in the confiscations?

 

Sorry if this is a slight derail, but it seems relevant to the point of argument w/r/t the military.

 

Well you would be wrong in every assumption you have made. Rationalize what you wish if it makes you feel better. We know what happened down here if you choose not to believe it what does it matter?

 

If you really want to know for yourself its not like this went undocumented in the law suits that followed.

Dude, all I did was ask for pointers. I am open minded. I can research it, but if someone can point to a link or a document to read, it would save me time. Part of why we are here is to share information, not to call each other names or make unwarranted assumptions about people.

 

That said, I do believe Mao's plan is one that will leave us with little option but to hide our guns or give them in when the time comes. The best hope we have is a military that takes issue with it. Like has been pointed out above, if the military goes after you, you have no chance. I would venture to say with the militarization of the various LEO departments, massive expansion of the department of fatherland security, and complete control of all mass media by Mao at his will, even the non-military can easily mount a witch hunt on any of us at any time, and they will win.

 

I personally would not fire upon another, unless I was in eminent danger, my family or friends were in danger, or, if I completely understood the circumstances, and another was in danger, if that helps anything.