The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Politics & RKBA => Topic started by: Teresa Heilevang on April 18, 2010, 03:21:43 PM
-
http://www.examiner.com/x-37620-Conservative-Examiner~y2010m4d13-Special-army-unit-ready-to-be-deployed-on-American-soil-just-before-Nov-elections
Special army unit ready to be deployed on American soil just before Nov. elections
April 13, 5:16 PM Conservative Examiner Anthony G. Martin
Note: An update has been posted at the end of the article.
In October of this year, one month prior to the November midterm elections, a special army unit known as 'Consequence Management Response Force' will be ready for deployment on American soil if so ordered by the President.
The special force, which is the new name being given to the 1st Brigade Combat Team of the 3rd Infantry, has been training at Fort Stewart, Georgia and is composed of 80,000 troops.
According to the Army Times,
They may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control or to deal with potentially horrific scenarios such as massive poisoning and chaos in response to a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield explosive, or CBRNE, attack.
The key phrase is 'may be called upon to help with civil unrest.'
This afternoon a local radio talk show host reported that he had been in contact with a member of the military. This military source stated that the armed forces have been alerted to the strong possibility that civil unrest may occur in the United States this summer, prior to the midterm elections of 2010.
The source described this as 'our long, hot summer of discontent' that could be eerily reminiscent of the summer of 1968 when riots broke out in many of our largest cities.
However, the summer of 2010 could well be much worse due to the players involved. In 1968 the major players were war protesters. This time, the outrage simmering beneath the surface of American society involves a broad cross-section of the heartland, and most of them are heavily armed.
It is highly unlikely that these citizens would ever initiate armed conflict of any kind. In their view, gun rights are for self-defense--and for defense against tyrannical government, which our Founders regarded as the most dangerous force on earth.
However, it has become clear that other groups may well initiate violence in order to start an 'incident' that would give Obama and a rogue Congress a reason to implement martial law, confiscate the citizens' guns, enforce curfews, and suspend all future elections until such time as it is deemed 'safe' to proceed with human liberty as encapsulated in the right to vote.
Tea Party members, for example, have been warned in recent days that members of Andy Stern's SEIU union and members of the organization formerly known as ACORN plan to infiltrate Tea Party gatherings in order to incite some sort of incident that could result in armed conflict.
In addition, all indications point to a humiliating defeat for the Democrats and Obama in November. Not only will the House in all likelihood transfer to Republican control, but it is increasingly possible for the Democrats to lose the Senate as well.
And there are Leftwing groups in this country that would use whatever means necessary to prevent that from happening.
ACORN has already gone underground, changing its name so as to fly beneath the radar screen. How many people will the group register to vote illegally?
And with Obama's plan to naturalize between 10 and 20 million illegal aliens, a brand new voter base for the Democrats will be in place prior to November.
Add to this the growing unrest over continued high unemployment, the coming spike in interest rates and inflation, and the still-boiling outrage over the manner in which Obama and the Democrats shoved ObamaCare down the throats of the citizens, and all of the ingredients are present for a major F-5 tornado to sweep across the heartland.
To what extent would soldiers use deadly force during such 'civil unrest' should the Consequence Management Response Team be utilized? During the anti-war riots of the 1960s they killed student protesters. What about now?
The military source cited by the radio host today was asked this very question. He would merely say that the culture of the U.S. military is changing--half support Obama and the other half are dead-set against him.
His conclusion? There is no way to know for sure if they would obey an order to open fire on ordinary citizens.
Update: The Cato Institute published this warning when the program was launched in its first phase in 2008 (the program has been updated and expanded since 2008).
The Founders insisted that standing armies were never to be used against American citizens on our own soil, no matter what violations of this principle have occurred in the years following. In the spirit of the Patriots and of real journalists..... government must be questioned constantly and held to intense scrutiny in order to preserve liberty.
-
I am not surprised, I have heard reports (can't remember from where as it was a couple years ago) about U.S. Troops training for this under the guise of an attack on our soil. Who knows what can happen this November.
-
Marhallette,
I have worked with both the Marine CBIRF and many of the National Guard CST teams.
They have been around since Clinton was in office.
They show up to provide technical support to high profile events like NASCAR races, Super Bowl, NCAA Final Four and such if invited.
The USMC teams are very good. The National Guard teams vary very quite a bit from state to state.
The term 'Consequence Management' is dealing with the aftermath of an attack. Your fire department, rescue squad, police department and road crews would all be the first responders to the event. The National Guard and State Police would come next, followed by the federal folks. US law makes any terrorist attack a federal crime but the locals have control od the incident until they ask for help.
The same email goes out about every six months.
There are lots of thing that get my blood boiling but this is not one of them.
http://www.usmc.mil/unit/cbirf/Pages/default.aspx
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/army/wmd-cst.htm
-
This is one of those things that if every one knew their actual mission they would be saying "Why only a Brigade ? "
-
80K troops is more than a brigade ain't it?
I thought that was a couple of divisions!
-
I have to agree with Ratcatcher. CBIRF is just up the road from me and I've done training with a few of them on different occasions. Good bunch of guys.
A vast majority of the military isn't going to go shooting into a crowd without provocation. Could it happen, yes, look at Kent State. No matter what the orders start as, if the leadership puts them in a situation that is illegal most are smart enough to question it. There is a LOT of training on Posse Comitatus powers being done, and the ROE is VERY specific to avoid a confrontation at all costs.
80K troops is more than a brigade ain't it?
I thought that was a couple of divisions!
I'd write that off as dramatic flair. 80K is a typical FIELD ARMY made up of 8 Divisions. Even if you included ALL of th National Guard and Reserve, that's 10% of the total standing Army. That is half the number of personnel deployed in CENTCOM.
-
I'd write that off as dramatic flair. 80K is a typical FIELD ARMY made up of 8 Divisions. Even if you included ALL of th National Guard and Reserve, that's 10% of the total standing Army. That is half the number of personnel deployed in CENTCOM.
What he said ;D
-
As I've said in the past, it would be a shame for the military to be taking orders and working for the same ilk of people that spit on them and then follow their orders to shoot people in an uprising who actually supported the military.
-
Lions led by lambs. The bad thing about these lambs are killing our country.
-
Well, a brigade is 3,000 to 5,000 men. Assuming the 'brigade' referenced in the original post is an amalgamation of ACORN and other Obama supporters, it may need 80,000 members to equal the fighting capabilities of a standard brigade, and even then the Salvation Army may give it a run for its money.
-
This is pure tinfoil "brigade" nonsense. Sadly, the numbers of these folks are at division level strenghth. Katrina and 911 taught us that having ready to go troops was a good idea. The 3,500 is enough to restore law and order in a post disaster city or set up a command and control point and erect tents for storm or earthquake refugees.
Beyond that, its useless. Look at Iraq. How many thousands did it take to shut down violence in Faluja or Nassariaya? And there the insurgents were just going through the motions. They just didn't like armed forieners on Iraqi soil and were scared of the majority Shiites they'd oppressed. No way in hell we need to worry about one brigade imposing tyranny on the US, even if the soldiers were willing to fire on their own. Freedom in this country won't end with a bang, but with a whimper. We will give the governent lawful authority based on fear and be glad they took it from us. The battle is not one of guns, but ideas, and we must engage on this front. Anything else is macho posturing. To paraphrsase Lincoln, we won't die at the hand of of foriegn foe, but rather at our own hands. If the US falls, it won't be murder, but suicide.
FQ13
-
FQ, the number given in the Article wasn't 3500. It was 80,000, not counting air power that is more than double the number of troops who took Iraq..
Otherwise I pretty much agree with you for the 3rd time in one day.
Glad I bought Lotto tickets today ;D
-
I wondered about that 80k number.
It appeared they were talking about a part of the 1st Brigade of the 3rd Inf. Div?
When I was on active duty, a Division was 30k max unclassified but closer to 20k actual and classified.
Have these numbers changed so much that a Brigade, one third of a division, now has 80k troops?