Uh OH!!!!

[Arlo]

I think one of the concerns some may feel over this is a political perception of domestic enemy. There's a lot of rhetoric political extremists resort to in our country today (something I never thought would be as widespread or seriously taken as it is). "Traitor" is flung at anyone who disagrees with a rival party platform.

With all the non-binding house resolutions and senate resolutions over the last five years that are filled with nothing much more than political truth or dare under the presumption that a passed or failed NBR might or might not bring public shame to a rival party or party member, I'm not surprised this binding one causes concern. Especially riding on the coat-tails of one that made a point to mention what's unacceptable behavior politically (innocent enough in itself, it seemed, as much as it assured no individual rights would be subverted).

The political terrain of this country, at present, represents a battleground waiting to transform itself to a physical reality (much like it did before the civil war). It's almost as if both parties think they're positioning chesspieces to assure the whackos on the other side are easily dealt with should the other side decide politics is no longer an option.

Sounds like a great basis for a Clancy novel. Scary part is much of Clancy's stuff ended up being somewhat prophetic.

[Tumor]

Originally posted by Tigeress
This is all just my opinion so bear with me...

I see a growing tendency by the federal government (Administrative Branch) to misuse the NG of each of the 50 States and slowly federalize the 50 National Guards instead of drafting enough people into the federal armed services to get the job done outside the United States.

We need a 50 State National Guard as a 50 State National Guard for state by state domestic missions who are specifically trained and equipped for such missions and are guarding their own state's people and property.

We also need federal armed services for non-domestic missions.

In the event of a declaration of all out war the state militias (National Guard of each State) would join forces with the federal armed forces.

The two are being functionally merged into one and that is what is so scary.

The role of guarding one's own state's citizens and their property is VERY DIFFERENT than the application and role of the federal armed services.


In view of Islamic terrorism threats to domestic life and property, perhaps the command and control structure of each State National Guard needs to be adjusted and streamlined between each of the states and between each state and the federal government.

Unless the United States homeland is attacked and invaded by the armed forces of a foreign government, I don't see justification for the application of federal combat troops in a domestic situation.

There are valid reasons the United States is structured as 50 Independent yet United States, united for common goals federally, but this country is not one big state with one single big government controlling everything there is to control.

A case in point where federal combat troops were used to defend against domestic enemies was the American Civil War.

In a case where the federal government goes out of control the individual states must defend themselves from the federal government. In that situation the 50 State National Guard would defend against misused and misapplied federal combat troops. This is virtually an unthinkable scenario but the founding fathers thought about it and for just cause.

Why do you think it is that the United States Constitution provides for freedom to bear arms? To provide the National Guard, the state militias, with arms to protect against a federal government that has gone rabid.

These checks and balances exist because of lessons learned in the past. To protect the country from itself in the event one or more misguided political leaders or military leaders goes against the interests and welfare of the collective people of this country.

This is also a reason I choose not to be a political partisan; I am a middle of the road Moderate. I view political extremism as dangerous, thus I vote in a way to maintain a power balance between the two political parties not wanting either political party power base to have too much political control of the federal government relative to the other one.

If a few of you think women don't pay attention in history classes, think again.

TIGERESS

I smell a rock.

[lazs2]

as tigress said.. the military has priests soo...in an emergency.. they can send priests... they have doctors too.. send those.. send the equipment...

All the equipment except the guns.   no arms for them... no power.. they should be under civilian command.

Those simple things would be enough to make them useful without being a threat to the people..  

marines want to leave the guns at the barracks and help fight a fire?   fine with me.  just like convicts do now.. you don't put the warden in charge of fighting the fire tho.

You don't put a general in charge of a relief effort or "security".

lazs

[AquaShrimp]

Lazs you contradict yourself.  You talk about people going 'feral' during times of emergency and preying on the weak and sick.  Yet you don't want our military to be able to protect us during these times?

[Bronk]

Originally posted by AquaShrimp
Lazs you contradict yourself.  You talk about people going 'feral' during times of emergency and preying on the weak and sick.  Yet you don't want our military to be able to protect us during these times?

Great and when a feral rioter fails to follow a command and is shot...
Well now , that will give lefties one more reason to hate the military.

[Hornet33]

Originally posted by Bronk
Great and when a feral rioter fails to follow a command and is shot...
Well now , that will give lefties one more reason to hate the military.

Who cares if they have one more reason, they hate the military regardless. If they had been used large scale after Katrina the lefties would have complained about all the noise from the helicopters and transport jets, and someone would be trying to sue them because some private backed his duece an half over the only rose bush left standing after the storm.

[lazs2]

aquashrimp.. I do not contacdict myself on this in any way.

I am quite capable of defending myself against the feral rioter.. so long as the lefties don't send in the military to go house to house and take away my second amendment rights.

If you believe that the military can defend you from other citizens then... why do we even need a second amendment right?

Just like we don't need guns because the police will stop the bad men from ever hurting us.  right?

No.. I fear the armed military in such a situation far more than I fear the rioters.

lazs

[uberhun]

All of these problems and notions will go away soon enough. We won't have to worry about them anymore. When the last of our rights are taken away and martial law is declared, all our problems will be solved. Of course I will be armed to the teeth and migrating to Ottawa Thrawn........LOL!:t

[lazs2]

I might go south instead.    you can do about anything in mexico if you have some money..  their laws are more like "suggestions" for the well to do.

I pray to gawd that things never get so bad here that canada politics look good.

lazs

[Tigeress]

Originally posted by Tumor
I smell a rock.

I have no idea what that means... but if we aren't in agreement that is ok.
Everyone is entitled to their personal opinions.

Just out of curosity, what do you do for work Tumor?

TIGERESS

[Tigeress]

Originally posted by lazs2
I might go south instead.    you can do about anything in mexico if you have some money..  their laws are more like "suggestions" for the well to do.

I pray to gawd that things never get so bad here that canada politics look good.

lazs

I have been thinking Canada if this thing keeps going the way it has been.
Seems a lot of people missed one hell of a lot in American History and  Government classes relative to what I learned when I was in school.

Wow... perhaps it's a generational thing... I don't know... what they are teaching people these days, Lazs?

TIGERESS

[Shuffler]

Originally posted by Thrawn
That's because you have little imagination and don't understand the concept of unintended consequences.
I mean hey, if the military can do a better job than the police, why not replace the police with the military?

The Military is setup to move large amounts of supplies in a timely fashion. Show me a police department that can do that.