User login

You DO NOT need to register to VIEW articles and comments. To add a comment you need to register. Registration is FREE!

Visit BuzzFlash on:

Facebook

and

MySpace

click here

See All The BuzzFlash Premiums

Do Americans need or want soldiers deployed on US streets to fight terrorism?

Submitted by christine on Mon, 12/01/2008 - 1:09pm.

Analysis

A BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS
by Christine Bowman

Do American citizens realize that active-duty U.S. troops are now charged with serving domestically? They are currently funded and prepared to fight, if asked to, in the streets of the U. S. of A. according to a recent report from The Washington Post:

The Pentagon's plan calls for three rapid-reaction forces to be ready for emergency response by September 2011. The first 4,700-person unit, built around an active-duty combat brigade based at Ft. Stewart, Ga., was available as of Oct. 1, said Gen. Victor Renuart, commander of the U.S. Northern Command.
If funding continues, two additional teams will join nearly 80 smaller National Guard and reserve units made up of about 6,000 troops in supporting local and state officials. All would be trained to respond to a domestic chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield explosive attack.
Defense Department to expand role inside U.S. Troops to respond to terror disaster (Washington Post/Chicago Tribune)

These troops have been "trained to help state and local officials respond to a nuclear terrorist attack or other domestic catastrophe ..." according to the Pentagon.

NORTHCOM personnel based in Colorado monitor "all land, sea and air approaches within the continental United States, Alaska, Canada, Mexico and the surrounding water out to approximately 500 nautical miles." They also "are in charge of responding to any threats that arise within the United States and have prepared detailed plans for responding to situations that range from pandemic influenza to chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear events."

NORTHCOM: Guarding the nation's borders (Air Force Link)

Many Americans vividly recall that even the domestic deployment of National Guard troops resulted in the deaths of American citizens engaged in protest at Kent State University in 1970.

Kent State 1970

It raises many questions, among them:

Do Americans want this?
Is it lawful?
Is it necessary?
What has President-elect Obama said about it?
Is this how the United States should fight terrorists?
Are other democratic countries taking such measures?
What are the precedents?
Are effective safeguards in place or will this move America toward establishment of a police state?
What about Bush's pledge to "fight them over there" so as to not have to fight "them" here?

Share what you know about this very significant development. Help expand the debate. Register and comment at BuzzFlash.org.

Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS) Panel, 11/19/08: Homeland Defense and Homeland Security for the Next Administration

Video: http://8.7.97.206/081119_homeland...

President-elect Obama's 12/1/08 Statement and National Security Team Announcements

A BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS

.

Submitted by bettysdad on Wed, 12/03/2008 - 3:26am.

The first question on the list should be...

Submitted by TJAmericanWay on Tue, 12/02/2008 - 5:43pm.

The first real question posed at the top of the article, and by my judgment the most important one, missed the list...'

How many Americans even realize this is happening?

As is usually the case when something happens that is of major impact to our "American Way of Life", or unalienable rights, the MSM has been virtually devoid of any reporting on this issue. That "My friends" (sorry) should be enough to indicate the importance of this issue.

When I first heard about this months ago I wondered, exactly what would these solders be doing? Handing out gas masks in the event of a chemical attack? Passing out vaccines in the case of a pandemic? Sorry if I play the cynic here but I sincerely doubt it. More than likely they'll be charged with "Keeping the Peace." which will translate to enforcing curfews, manning checkpoints and doing whatever else necessary to keep the Sheeple in line. Unfortunately given 'our governments' past history of dealing with major disasters, this line will lead directly off this mortal coil for thousands if not more.

It's Been Made Legal

Submitted by neoconned on Tue, 12/02/2008 - 2:14pm.

Glenn Greenwald explains how Bush is getting around the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 via the Democratically-assisted Defense Authorization Act of 2006. So if you don't like the violation of the Fourth Amendment's ban on a standing army within our borders, you can blame both parties for forgetting what the Constitution says.

Sadly, I begin to fear that Obama will use his Constitutional knowledge to continue to follow the neocon path away from our traditional laws while appearing to adhere to them. He will likely demonstrate that Ralph Nader was right about how neither party is particularly different from the other. The end goal will remain the same no matter who is in power.

Ta ta, troopies

Submitted by willymack on Tue, 12/02/2008 - 12:20pm.

Active duty army personnel as police? Another nutty idea from an insane "administration", whose brutal methods will keep things screwed up for decades to come. Professor Obama KNOWS what's allowed and forbidden by our Constitution. Whether or not he intends to return us to a "nation of equals under the Law" remains to be seen. Americans from all walks of life should be demanding the prosecution of the most evil regime ever, and a promise from the incoming administration to never let what's been going on for the last eight years happen again. Anything short of that will lead to ruin.

Unconstitutional

Submitted by deegee99 on Tue, 12/02/2008 - 10:52am.

Unless I'm mistaken our constitution forbids the US armed forces policing the United States.

Why do Conservative HATE everyone?

Submitted by Kevin Schmidt S... on Tue, 12/02/2008 - 9:29am.

Some of the comments in this thread written by Conservatives are appalling. At first, one might feel anger towards them.

But on second thought, one must realize they have a much greater anger within themselves that eats away at their eternal souls.

They are indeed a very unhappy lot because they hate themselves the most. Their lives are truly a living Hell.

It's because.

Submitted by bettysdad on Wed, 12/03/2008 - 3:28am.

Conservatism is not an ideology. It's a syndrome of just about every negative trait humans can have. They are not normal; they are in opposition to the mores of every indigenous group from day one of history. Right-wing radio is popular because it gives validation to all the hate these people have for others. That way they can live with themselves. Just a tiny example: When someone doesn't hold a door for me at a store or building, I catch up to them and ask "Excuse me, you're a Republican, aren't you?" I've never gotten a "no" response.

Kent State Photo

Submitted by DarthNils on Mon, 12/01/2008 - 10:29pm.

That is one of my favorite pictures of all time. I laugh thinking about the dirty hippy gasping for air. Saw an interview with the slut crying over the dirtbags body. What a waste of air that whore is.

Keyboard Warriors...

Submitted by VettaKing on Wed, 12/03/2008 - 5:36am.

are such badasses. You go tough guy. Speaking the "real shit" anonymously on a message board really impresses the ladies.

You'd Know,...

Submitted by neoconned on Mon, 12/01/2008 - 11:52pm.

I laugh thinking about the dirty neocons gasping for air at the end of a rope at the Hague. Saw an interview with the First Slug crying over how unprepared he was to do the things he bragged he would do before SCOTUS selected him. What a waste of air that whore is - as are his scumbag followers.

Hi, neoconned

Submitted by willymack on Tue, 12/02/2008 - 12:29pm.

I'm with you on this one. That girl crying over a fallen student was a fifteen year old runaway, and in several ways, still a CHILD. Those shot by trigger-happy kids were UNARMED students, exercising their First Amendment rights. It's tragic how the neocons and their parrots value other people's lives so little while sounding so righteous at the same time.

I would love to have the

Submitted by Paul Revere on Mon, 12/01/2008 - 6:58pm.

I would love to have the troops deployed here if they would fight the REAL TERRORISTS!

Linke the Bloods, Crips,

Submitted by DarthNils on Mon, 12/01/2008 - 10:22pm.

Linke the Bloods, Crips, Black Panthers, CAIR, ACLU, NAMBLA, DNC, MSM, Ted Turner, Death Row Records, Nancy Pelousy, Harry Reid, Keith Ellison, Billy the Molester Ayers, Barry-BOY Hussein Obongo, Section APE Housing Residents, Welfare whores, Abortionsts, Diversity trainers, Anti-8 Terrorists, Bawney Fwank, ActUP, Hell all libtards ar eterrorists.

DARTH REVEALED

Submitted by RenoMike on Tue, 12/02/2008 - 2:09pm.

FFor the benefit of those of you who indulge in the unique pastime of actually reading these comments, there is good news. As anyone who understands the English language can easily tell, incoherent correspondent Darth Nils suffers from an ill-fated obsession with Neology, the practice of creating entirely new words and phrases. For your dining and dancing pleasure, below are some clues to his (or her) most recent literary train wrecks: "NANCY PELOUSY" (Get it? That's what you call your wordplay. What it means is, the Speaker speaks words he doesn't want to hear. Like, "Diversity," and, "Who's your mommy NOW, Darthy Baby?") "BAWNEY FWANK" (This is to let you know that he, Darth Nils, is terrified by slurred speech. Which, they told him at the Klan picnic, sounds suspiciously like how them terrorists talk.) "Barry-BOY Hussein Obongo" (This one's tricky because it's a three-fer. The "BOY," in caps, tells you he knows how to talk to one of them ni...you know. The "Hussein" tells you he knows all about where there's sand and camels and stuff like that which is why gas costs so much and so it's okay to torture them because if you don't they won't tell you their shicksabob recipe. And by writing, "Obongo," of course, Darth cleverly employs the code for, "Bongo," which is the drum them spicaninnies and other foreigner terrorists play at gay weddings.) I hope this helps.

Spell check...

Submitted by Malgoska on Tue, 12/02/2008 - 10:18am.

...and how to use it. When you're done typing, click on "help" button, Ms. DarthNils.

Lead On, Lambbo!

Submitted by neoconned on Mon, 12/01/2008 - 11:53pm.

Bloodthirsty, are ye? Then sound the charge and lead the assault!

Quis custodiet INDEED...

Submitted by TOMsubG on Mon, 12/01/2008 - 6:35pm.

Posse Commitatus was gutted by the Military Enabling and second Patriot Acts- both of which passed handily through both Houses of Congress. To date, the SCOTUS doesn't seem to have any issues with either law.

97% of the private wealth in the US is still owned by less than 2% of its population. De-regulation has flat-lined the credit industry in both Real Property and Card credit, soon to be followed by the entire Auto industry. The taxes you pay benefit that 1% even more than the dollars you've already given to them directly, and I've yet to hear any plan providing you people relief as either a consumer or taxpayer!

Your Regular Army is being deployed in your streets because your Guard and Reserve units are deployed overseas.

So, to sum up: You donate roughly 30-40% of your workweek to that 1%; which means all 97% of us are slaves on a part-time basis- with record numbers of you having your houses taken back by the same banks you paid to have them in the first place.

Meanwhile, Massa' is consolidating his military forces nearby, "to assist in quelling local disturbances". Pretty much the definition of an occupying army, and it sounds like they're preparing for mercenary war.

I humbly suggest you do, as well.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Submitted by neoconned on Mon, 12/01/2008 - 5:04pm.

In other words, who will protect us from the protectors? If Malgoska's proposed action were taken, then no recognizable authority would remain. The opportunist with the strongest cohort would rule - and there is no guarantee that liberty will reign.

Anarchy? Nah...

Submitted by Malgoska on Mon, 12/01/2008 - 5:29pm.

We may ask United Nations to keep an eye on the sheeple for a while. And of course to take care of the seized terrorists and their assets. We would quickly inaugurate Obama, add some true representatives and see how it goes from there.

I am NOT kidding. The world is much worse off with Bush, his puppeteers and enablers, than without them. It would just about be worth a try.

RE: Anarchy?

Submitted by DarthNils on Mon, 12/01/2008 - 10:17pm.

Yes Send in the U.N. Those blue helmets make very good targets.

O Me Of No Faith!

Submitted by neoconned on Mon, 12/01/2008 - 5:43pm.

While I agree with your intended goal, I cannot subscribe to your method.

The UN is far too diverse an organization to be able to define just how they are going to "police" us while our government is in a state of flux. Few of the world's nations have even a semblance of our original checks and balances, and those who were closest (Britain, Canada, Australia) have made serious cutbacks in theirs in the name of "security".

And just who is going to force the UN to leave when they aren't needed anymore? Are we to trust that they would just go away quietly by us merely asking nicely? Not even in our own history of national occupation have we ever departed a foreign land without leaving a little something friendly (to us, not the citizens of that land) behind in their government. Are you willing to risk this? I am not.

UN occupying US?

Submitted by Malgoska on Mon, 12/01/2008 - 5:51pm.

Oh, come on. We the sheeple can't be much worse off under UN than under Busheviks...

Coup

Submitted by sulphurdunn on Mon, 12/01/2008 - 4:51pm.

It is ironic and disturbing that National Guard units are deployed for long rotations overseas while regular Army troops take on domestic guard responsibilities for public safety here at home. Regardless of what anyone may say to the contrary, the regular Army remains properly designed to fight wars and to occupy territory. Armed soldiers on the streets are always an occupying force, here or anywhere else.

Yeah..Congress first..then the White House

Submitted by Chabuka on Mon, 12/01/2008 - 4:43pm.

K-street, Wall street..etc., However, I suspect that the troops have been brought in to protect the extremely wealthy (a minority, really) from us peasants that have been picked clean, robbed blind, and left to riot over (food) the crumbs that have fallen off the wealthiest plates..any body ever read about the Russian Revolution (in the first world war?).. and what happened to the Czar, his family and the other wealthy aristocrats....did you see "Dr. Zhvago"..?

The nest of terrorists

Submitted by Malgoska on Mon, 12/01/2008 - 4:09pm.

I don't mind the soldiers deployed in the USA to fight terrorism here. In fact, I would be very much obliged if they descended on Washington DC, surrounded the White House and the Capitol Hill, and took into custody all the terrorists hiding there in various offices, included the Oval Office. Afterwards, we the sheeple could celebrate the victory over global terrorism.

Who's with me?

Only if Nancy Pelousy and

Submitted by DarthNils on Mon, 12/01/2008 - 10:27pm.

Only if Nancy Pelousy and Harry reid are the first to be tied to a post. Then get that freak Bawney Fwank and the entire DNC. After that Empty out all the liberal "Proffessors" Special needs for the Molester Billy "I've Got some popsicles in the Basement" Ayers, perhaps gang rape by the Brothas in prison?

Get FREE BuzzFlash News Alerts