Jade Helm - US Military Operating Within the US

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
201

As an American I’m happy that threads like this exist. We need to be always questioning our government and what they do. It’s easy to become complacent and before you know it, the government is listening to all of your phone calls.

As a two branch veteran, both officer and enlisted, I’m very offended by threads like this. These servicemen and women are American’s just like you. And they aren’t mindless robots who blindly follow orders. Is the fear that these troops are practicing to round up American’s in their own country? It will never happen. No way that our all volunteer force is going to go against the Constitution like that. Don’t forget that their leaders are sworn to uphold that document.

The military conducts training exercises all the time on U.S. soil but I don’t see any big conspiracy theories about that. If they were really training for the purposes that some people are thinking then wouldn’t that be done in secret? Is it because these troops are actual visible that we’re suddenly scared? It’s as if we like our military but only if they are hidden from view either on closed bases or in harm’s way overseas. They are good enough to die for the country but we don’t want to see them.

I would think that the financially prudent of you would want them to train stateside. It’s much cheaper to conduct this here in the U.S. than it is to go to another country to do this.

james

202

[quote]atypical1 wrote:
As an American I’m happy that threads like this exist. We need to be always questioning our government and what they do. It’s easy to become complacent and before you know it, the government is listening to all of your phone calls.

[/quote]Unfortunately, that ship has sailed…[quote]

As a two branch veteran, both officer and enlisted,

[/quote]Thank you for your service, James and I hope this Memorial day gives you some peace knowing that we all appreciate what you and your brothers have done.[quote]
I’m very offended by threads like this. These servicemen and women are American’s just like you. And they aren’t mindless robots who blindly follow orders. Is the fear that these troops are practicing to round up American’s in their own country? It will never happen. No way that our all volunteer force is going to go against the Constitution like that. Don’t forget that their leaders are sworn to uphold that document.

[/quote]I don’t believe that ALL US forces will be “sent in to fight the American people”. Of course you and other service members would refuse those orders. Most of them would, anyway. But how about “terrorists”? THAT’S how they open that door. Because every good soldier wants to kill terrorists. The government starts some “Waco-like” or “Ruby Ridge-like” scenario, wags the dog and before you know it there are hundreds of “State Agents” holding a group of US CITIZENS in a siege. It should be noted that all of the federal agents involved in Waco and Ruby Ridge had sworn to uphold the Constitution, yet they managed to violate the civil rights of and KILL American Citizens. Following orders, of course…

I’ve also stated in this thread that I think MERCENARIES would be the “tip of the spear”, not conventional forces. Look at what’s going on in Greece with Academi right now. I also mentioned this before, but it bears mentioning again: the State Dept (and several other three letter agencies) have several multi million dollar contracts with “private security companies”. And that’s what we know about on public record…

I don’t think very many US soldiers would just follow orders and go to war on American citizens. I have not stated that, nor implied it. I do think that our government knows this and that whenever it’s time to bring their plan into fruition, they will manufacture and emergency, use whatever “pretext” necessary to set up their objective, and use deadly force to “pacify” whatever home grown resistance they encounter. Or something like that - it will be shades of gray, not black and white. Do you see my point here? [quote]

The military conducts training exercises all the time on U.S. soil but I don’t see any big conspiracy theories about that. If they were really training for the purposes that some people are thinking then wouldn’t that be done in secret?

[/quote]It WAS a secret. A right wing site published the map of JH15 showing Texas and Utah as “enemy states”. The Pentagon originally denied everything. Under increasing public pressure they then revealed it as a military exercise. They were NOT upfront about it - we had to learn about it the hard way, and they originally denied it. [quote]

Is it because these troops are actual visible that we’re suddenly scared? It’s as if we like our military but only if they are hidden from view either on closed bases or in harm’s way overseas. They are good enough to die for the country but we don’t want to see them.
[/quote]Now I’m the one who’s offended. I have NEVER said anything like that. I have nothing but respect and support of our armed service members and I resent any other implication. You are barking up the wrong tree there, James.[quote]

I would think that the financially prudent of you would want them to train stateside. It’s much cheaper to conduct this here in the U.S. than it is to go to another country to do this.

james[/quote]

I want our military to be trained to the highest level so that they are more likely to survive what ever is asked of them. Period. HOWEVER, the third and fourth Amendment to our Constitution makes it pretty clear what is expected. There are many of us who get very nervous when we see our military practicing a large scale war scenarios in our towns with entire states labeled as ENEMY (and when those states just “happen” to coincide with the political “enemies” of our current commander in chief). The same commander in chief who likes to violate the Constitution over and over and over again, with a Congress who is too afraid to stop him lest they be labeled as a “racist” by the left wing MEDIA that he has in his pocket. The same MEDIA who refused to report on any of this.

So yeah, I’m a little concerned - that’s why I started the thread. But rest assured, my concern is primarily about the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, namely, the executive branch and the agencies it controls, and not so much the Armed Services. Although I think you are kidding yourself if you don’t think that there are plenty of service members who will “follow orders”. Look at history and tell me that with a straight face.

203

AC: I agree with all points above.

As tasteless as it is to quote oneself, allow me to post a conversation Pushharder, Chushin and I were having earlier over on the Stupid Thread, in which I made a couple of similar points:

Varq: [do] you believe that the people of the United States do, at this time, have the ability to overthrow their government with the weapons they now possess?

Push:[quote]That’s kinda like wondering about the chances of a four year old with a Swiss Army knife going up against two dozen Crips vs you and the six cartridges in your Colt Python against the same hypothetical gang. Either way it’s not looking good but who’d you rather be?[/quote]

Varq: More like me and my Colt Python against the entire Los Angeles branch of the Crips, with the intent of replacing their leadership.

It’s a numbers game. I just don’t think that the number of qualified, mentally and physically proficient, politically aware, gun-owning American citizens is sufficient to prevail against the United States military and bring down the government, any more than the Colonists, all by themselves, could have prevailed against the entire might of the British army and navy, and replaced King George on the throne.

I mean, look: in the 1860s this country fielded the most credible opposition force against the central government in our nation’s history. It was led by senior military officers, many of whom were distinguished graduates of West Point and Annapolis. Its ranks held officers and enlisted men who were combat veterans from the Mexican War. It had a well-developed political structure, an elected leader, and even printed its own currency. It controlled the railroads and factories in its territory, and had the support of the people. Moreover, it was armed with the exact same weaponry as the Federal Government: armoured ships, howitzers, mortars, gatling guns (toward the end, anyway), single-shot and repeating rifles and pistols.

What about today?

How many West Point generals and Annapolis admirals do you know of who would unquestionably lead the Patriots’ rebellion today? Active field grade generals, mind you, not retirees. How many active duty NCOs and officers would risk losing their citizenship or even execution for treason by bearing arms against their lawfully elected government? How many state governors would risk the same by committing their National Guard units to fight the Federal Government?

How many Abrams tank battalions would you say the Patriots could field? How many bombers and fighter jets could they count on for air support? How many destroyers and battleships could they float to blockade the Hudson and the Potomac? And how many nuclear warheads could they launch against Washington?

And finally, how long do you think Joe Six-Pack Gun Owner would last in a real live shooting war before he scuttled back to his safe, comfortable middle-class life in front of his Plasma TV?

Sorry, Push. As much as I’d love to see a rag-tag rebel band of pot-bellied patriots with M4 Tacticool carbines take on the evil Imperial Stormtroopers of the Federal Government…and win, with or without Ewoks, I just don’t see it happening this decade.

Chushin: [quote]The probabilities of those things would climb sharply after the first few thousand American citizens were butchered by the US military. [/quote]

Varq: The US military isn’t going to start butchering civilians until those civilians are waaaay more disarmed, demoralised and, most importantly, demonised, than they are now.

Mutiny is serious business. How many ATF and FBI agents disobeyed their orders during Ruby Ridge and Waco? At least half of them? A quarter?

None at all?

The Army and the Marines (and more likely, the Air Force, using drone strikes) would easily kill a million civilians if their higher-ups told them they were targeting “domestic terrorists” or “insurgents”. If tomorrow the President issued an executive order declaring martial law in every major city, commanding the military to fire on all looters and rioters, I can assure you those orders would be carried out. Would there be a civilian backlash? Probably. But not nearly as severe as the counter-backlash by the military against the civilians.

Why should any high-ranking combat officers jeopardise their careers, disobey orders, and commandeer personnel and materiel to fight against their own side? On principle? Because they feel sorry for the poor civilians? Because they care about Freedom? Don’t make me laugh.

The only reason…the ONLY reason a general would turn and bear arms against his masters is if he thought he had a chance of seizing political power for himself once they were deposed.

History tells us this is inevitably so. America is no exception.

Thoughts?

206
  • Edit - posted in wrong thread.
207

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Chuck Norris Warns that US Special Forces is a Threat to Texans

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/05/07/chuck-norris-warns-that-us-special-forces-is-threat-to-texans/?intcmp=ob_article_footer_text&intcmp=obnetwork[/quote]

A 1,200 man strong force - constituted mainly by Army Green Berets, in addition to a small group of Navy SEALS, Air Force special operations forces, and conventional Army infantry - all light forces - are a threat to a state of nearly 27,000,000 - nearly half of whom gun owners. Seems plausible.

208

Counterinsurgency (COIN) experts argue for a ratio of minimum of 20 troops per 1,000 of the population to achieve successful stabilization. In the case of Texas, a state with a population of nearly 27,000,000, that amounts to 540,000 troops. The 20 per 1,000 rule is a revision of the 10 per 1,000 rule that was previously influential in the COIN literature. Even under the more modest figure for force requirements in stability operations, 270,000 troops at a minimum would be required.

209

[quote]Bismark wrote:
Counterinsurgency (COIN) experts argue for a ratio of minimum of 20 troops per 1,000 of the population to achieve successful stabilization. In the case of Texas, a state with a population of nearly 27,000,000, that amounts to 540,000 troops. The 20 per 1,000 rule is a revision of the 10 per 1,000 rule that was previously influential in the COIN literature. Even under the more modest figure for force requirements in stability operations, 270,000 troops at a minimum would be required. [/quote]

Here’s the problem with statistics: numbers don’t account for all the variables of an individual scenario. You just said there were 1200 GREEN BERETS AND SEALS… In case you haven’t noticed, that’s a hell of a can of whoop ass… Probably more than has been deployed against our enemies in any major conflict we’ve had in the last 30 years. I could be wrong, but I do know that Green Berets and SEALs don’t need huge numbers to be effective, so spinning the conversation with statistics isn’t really staying in touch with reality (IMHO). I think that 1200 US Special Forces soldiers could do just about anything they wanted with any primarily civilian population on the planet - including ours.

211

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

The only reason…the ONLY reason a general would turn and bear arms against his masters is if he thought he had a chance of seizing political power for himself once they were deposed.

History tells us this is inevitably so. America is no exception.

Thoughts?
[/quote]

I’ll just toss out some random thoughts.

  1. I think you under estimate the effectiveness of a bunch of rag tag fat fucks that are actually angry and fear for their lives and freedom. (What little we have left.) Not a drastic underestimation, because no, many of these “3%'ers” couldn’t fucking run 100 yards without a coronary, however, one doesn’t have to run to be effective in all situations.

It comes down to desire. I know it’s fiction, but rebels vs a regular army - Godfather II - YouTube Don’t make the same mistake Roth did.

  1. Let’s assume James is over estimating the number of troops that will refuse orders, and you’re under estimating them. All else being equal, even a 30% attrition rate of highly trained and competent soldiers makes a huge difference in wining over the support of the public, which the Federal government NEEDS in order to win.

I’ve listened to enough Vietnam stories to fully and 100% believe, that when you don’t know who is friendly or foe, and each and every person you meet can be one or both at any given moment, the dynamics change.

I’m not saying you’re wrong and the “rebels” would win. I’m saying this isn’t going to be a cakewalk for either side.

  1. I think it is ultimately a pointless conversation. The money is going to run out before we frogs are boiled by the ever increasing flames that bring us to this point of “rebels vs Government”. The battle will be between the “Haves” and “Have Nots” in the streets of the worst neighborhoods first, local LEO and national guard watching the suburbs.

  2. Things aren’t as happy and pretty as some would leave you to believe, and your comments elude to with the plasma TV. People arent’ happy, people are angry, spiteful and afraid. Call it death by comfort or what you will, but things are a powder kegs right now. Maybe not in SOCal or other hippy enclaves, but in the rest of the country, people are pretty on edge in general, and we are one or two major instances away from a pretty bad time. (No, not a 9/11 type, that actually brought us together.)

And yet still, no one that says people are wrong or insulting in this thread can answer my simple question… Again, to anyone saying being cautious of Jade Helm is wrong, insulting or Tin Foil hat, please tell me when I’m okay to being to question, even if those questions are harsh, when I won’t be called names because I dont’ want the same fate as a European Jew in the 1940’s.

I won’t get on the train, so I’d like to know when I won’t be called names for understanding the whole of human history, which dictates we aren’t special, our troops aren’t all going to decline the order to murder their own people, and no government is benevolent for very long…

212

[quote]atypical1 wrote:
Is the fear that these troops are practicing to round up American’s in their own country? It will never happen. No way that our all volunteer force is going to go against the Constitution like that. Don’t forget that their leaders are sworn to uphold that document.

james[/quote]

History, even our own, says otherwise.

http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5154

It’s all about marketing.

Yeah, “no one” huh? Dude fucking shot a woman holding her ten month old… Graduated West Point, and a 15 year FBI vet…

I’m not moved by the fact his case being dropped 3 fucking days after 9/11 doesn’t ring of “never let a good crisis go to waste.”

Also, lmao at “his rifle was rebarreled, so we can’t match the shells”… I’m not munitions expert, but that is utter bullshit.

I can link a bunch of cops shooting people for no apparent reason, dogs too.

While, ultimately you are more likely than not, more correct about this than I am, I think your a wee bit projecting YOUR personal feelings about doing these acts onto other people who are serving who may not feel the same way you do.

213

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Chuck Norris Warns that US Special Forces is a Threat to Texans

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/05/07/chuck-norris-warns-that-us-special-forces-is-threat-to-texans/?intcmp=ob_article_footer_text&intcmp=obnetwork[/quote]

A 1,200 man strong force - constituted mainly by Army Green Berets, in addition to a small group of Navy SEALS, Air Force special operations forces, and conventional Army infantry - all light forces - are a threat to a state of nearly 27,000,000 - nearly half of whom gun owners. Seems plausible.[/quote]

As sophisticated as you purport to be it’s kinda ironic how you don’t seem to get it. Erudite with little common sense – is that you? Methinks it be thataway. [/quote]

I don’t purport to be anything. Predictably, when you run into an argument you’re unable or unwilling to address according to its merits, you attack the man who put it forth. Force requirements for various military operations are a very empirical aspect of military science, and come about through assiduous study. Please illuminate the “common sense” that applies to Jade Helm 15 that I’m unable to grasp.

214

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

And yet still, no one that says people are wrong or insulting in this thread can answer my simple question… Again, to anyone saying being cautious of Jade Helm is wrong, insulting or Tin Foil hat, please tell me when I’m okay to being to question, even if those questions are harsh, when I won’t be called names because I dont’ want the same fate as a European Jew in the 1940’s.

I won’t get on the train, so I’d like to know when I won’t be called names for understanding the whole of human history, which dictates we aren’t special, our troops aren’t all going to decline the order to murder their own people, and no government is benevolent for very long… [/quote]

I think it’s ok to be cautious of Jade Helm.

I think it’s not ok to call people names for having an opinion.

I’m still going to think that it’s tin-foil hatish to think the military is going to take over parts of the U.S. through the directives of the government, for a number of reasons.

-What united head government? Last I checked Congress is held by the Republicans, who really really do not like the current head of government. This is the issue I have with your comparisons to Nazi Germany and the Jews.The Nazis had gained near total political dominance by that point, and could really do whatever they want to. Plus, they had spent a long time fostering intense animosity between the Germans and the Jews.

No such animosity exists between normal Americans, besides possibly the really angry black people and the really angry politically-inclined people.

-1,200 men to take over states with millions of people? Those thousands comprised of people who tend to be the most patriotic and hard-core about loving the U.S., to the point of joining very selective groups where your chance of coming out alive is, frankly speaking, quite slim?

I don’t agree with angry_chicken’s argument that they’ll do things if the american citizens are branded terrorists or some such. I think one needs to have a very cynical view of government to believe that, and I don’t have such a cynical view.

-Why isn’t the assumption that they’re training to take over a very hostile nation easier to accept? Like, maybe, Iran.

215

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
While, ultimately you are more likely than not, more correct about this than I am, I think your a wee bit projecting YOUR personal feelings about doing these acts onto other people who are serving who may not feel the same way you do.

[/quote]

Well, ya. Isn’t that the entire point of holding an opinion? Our life experiences and whatnot color the way we see the same event. Different colored glasses and all that shit.

Seriously, I think this is an non-argument. If we go purely by what the Wikipedia article suggests, Lon Horiuchi wasn’t even aiming for Vicki Weaver. Even so, we have no idea what the man was thinking. Unless you bring up some reasonable evidence for us to actually believe the man had malicious intent behind what soldiers are normally taught, I think this really is just you doing the same thing you’re “accusing” atypical1 of doing.

219

[quote]magick wrote:

-What united head government? Last I checked Congress is held by the Republicans, who really really do not like the current head of government. This is the issue I have with your comparisons to Nazi Germany and the Jews.The Nazis had gained near total political dominance by that point, and could really do whatever they want to. Plus, they had spent a long time fostering intense animosity between the Germans and the Jews.[/quote]

We aren’t Nazi Gemany by any stretch, and neither party is particularly close to being as dominant. However, a closer look at Hitler’s rise will show, it wasn’t like he walked in and put his beer down and crowned king. It was a slow and tremulous journey.

Secondly I think you confuse why our government is so “divided”. It certainly isn’t because any of them actually give two shits about the citizens, it’s because one team is getting more votes and more money than the other. It’s really that simple. It’s about the cash, not about the laws they want to pass, their philosophies or any of the other stuff they put on for show to win votes. C.R.E.A.M.

o_0

You need to look around a bit more. There is plenty of animosity. Doesn’t present much one on one, but groups of people start getting together…

15 mins ago, you KNEW getting on the train would never happen in America.

Would you feel this same way if your political beliefs were always called “extremist”? If you’re political leanings were persecuted by the IRS? If your understanding of economics and civics got you ridiculed in movies, TV, songs and by almost every major celebrity and social icon? Are you not worried about the fact that if these same people you’re speaking about openly displayed the same patriotism as a civilian they would be grouped with the KKK and watched as “domestic terrorists”?

Hearts and minds. You don’t need as many guns when you have the hearts and minds of the majority.

Because your leftism is the hip thing right now. Being in your political spectrum is cool, accepted and the “right” thing in today’s world.

You wait until your world view falls out of favor, and read some history, then tell me what is and isn’t a cynical view.

It is easier to accept and is 99.9999999999999999999999999999% likely the real reason why they are doing it. Again, I just want someone, anyone who thinks my questioning is “stupid” or “insulting” or “you don’t know anything about our military” to tell me what to look for so Go Time doesn’t jump up and surprise me like a Jack Boot Thug in a Box.

No one seems to want to give me that little tid bit of info, but rather rail on about how I lack in the “reality” spectrum.