I need your help in answering someone

[LibertyEagle]

I'm discussing things with some members of another board. Most are ex-military and at least one is active currently. I've made a lot of headway with them on the economic issues, but I hit a brick wall when I posted that article about 20K active military being stationed in America.

Here are a couple of the latest comments:

If there were mechanisms already in place, explain to us why we lost track of several thousand known sex offenders out of southern Louisiana immediately after Hurricane Katrina. They just vanished into thin air and no-one knows exactly where they went or if any of them lives across the street from me, you or anyone else. We also lost track of a lot of criminals on parole and some were turned loose. Soon after wards many larger cities and small towns had a dramatic increase in criminal activity, bank robberies, sexual assaults, store robberies and other crimes that they had not been having before Hurricane Katrina.

If we had proper checks and balances at that time, then we might have known where those sex offenders and parolees disappeared to.

I see that you are concerned, but my concern is, our country changed a bit immediately after Sept. 11, 2001 and we need to realize that we need to do things differently after that as we were not "up to par" before 911. If we had all the checks and balances in place before 911, then we wouldn't have seen over 3,000 innocent lives snuffed out like a candle in a windstorm. It has already been predicted by well known experts that we can expect another strike on us in the next few years and that it could possibly be a nuclear strike. Do we need to sit idly by and let it happen and "then change course" or do we get prepared so that we can save lives?

I don't believe you have any concept about what we are up against.
We have a threat of massive destruction and a complete breakdown of civil authority.
Having these teams trained and in place could be the difference between this nations survival or complete destruction.
As for our nation changing, your dang right it is. The difference is that the people are VOTING for the changes. Most of them are changes I disagree with but the MAJORITY of the people have voted for them.
I disagree with the direction that BO and the socialists party is going to take us, however, the majority of the population has chosen this path. The choice is of the majority of the people, that is the difference and it is a major one.
Here is an article from my local paper and it makes a lot of sense.
Please note the size of the events they are talking about. There is no civil authority/agency that has the capabilities of handling these types of attacks. ONLY the miitary has the manpower and recources to deal with it.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20081207/news_lz1ed7bottom.html

Pentagon homeland defense plans call for the ability to respond to “multiple, simultaneous mass casualty incidents.” The teams will be specifically trained to deal with domestic chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and high-yield explosive attacks. More than $556 million will be spent over several years to set up the teams, which are envisioned responding to disasters involving evacuations of 1 million people or more, with thousands of casualties and contamination of up to 3,000 square miles.

So, while we share some of the unease expressed by civil libertarians, we are confident that careful oversight can ensure that the use of the troops conforms with the law. With that issue addressed, it would be irresponsible not to have well-trained military units ready to assist local and state authorities in dealing with the horrifying prospects that confront us.

At some point, I've seen a good article that explained very well why we can't protect against rogue individuals wanting to do us harm. I've also seen an article that explains why even though freedom doesn't provide for the level of control that makes you believe you are "safe", it is much more desirable than being imprisoned and "safe" in a cell.

Has anyone seen the types of articles I'm talking about? My goal is not to insult these people's intelligence or lack thereof, but to get them to consider some things that they previously have not. This whole WOT thing is our big stumbling block with a whole lot of Republicans. I think it is our largest.

Any help you could give me would be much appreciated?

 

[LibertyEagle]

I already gave them this quote from Reagan

"And this idea that government is beholden to the people, that it has no other source of power except the sovereign people, is still the newest and the most unique idea in all the long history of man's relation to man.

This is the issue of this election: whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capitol can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.

You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down: man's old -- old-aged dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. And regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course."

I don't think they liked it too much.

You know, most Republicans just LOVE Reagan. Until you feed his words back to them. It really seems to make them squirm.

 

[acptulsa]

They are sworn to protect, preserve and defend the Constitution. Militias are constitutional and the National Guards used to fulfill that role. This was good and right as that way we are policed by locals, not strangers. This is important to our well-being.

Eliminate that distinction and you risk being just another military dictatorship.

Now, some may argue that a sense of country is a sufficient sense of community for this purpose. At this point, I'd just say that the Constitution calls for the standing Army to handle problems abroad, the militia/Guard to handle problems at home, the former to answer to the president and the Guards to answer to the governors. It worked for years until the Guard was perverted from its stated purpose, and if you've sworn to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution shouldn't you get an amendment passed before you serve in such an unintended capacity?

 

[LibertyEagle]

Thanks. When was it that the purpose of the National Guard was changed?

 

[MMolloy]

Terrorism as a political weapon

"Terrorism is the best Political weapon for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death. What luck for the rulers that men do not think."
~ Aldof Hitler

 

[acptulsa]

Thanks. When was it that the purpose of the National Guard was changed?

Well, if you'll recall, Dubya used the Air National Guard to avoid service in Vietnam and Dubya sent the Guard to Iraq. So, it was during his lifetime...

I don't remember if his daddy sent Guardsmen to Iraq as well, but I really don't think so. If the fact that Dubya pissed me off at the time by doing it is any indication.

 

[MMolloy]

I'd use the quote above and then just ask them how they thought Hitler USED Terrorism.

 

[klamath]

The guard has served in nearly every war the US has been in. With the draft during Vietnam most guard units never deployed because there was always an unlimited number of fresh troops to fill the RA's ranks.
One of the most decorated divisions of the WWI (the Rainbow Division) was an activated guard division. I served with this division in Iraq. The HQ is based out of NY state.
I haven't been following the 20,000 troops story so I don't know all the details but I can tell you that RA troops have been used in the states a long time. Even in Search and rescue there is a chain of command you follow to request military resources. The military assistence to safety and tranportation (MAST) mission is regular army units performing medevac missions for poorer locations. El Paso Texas used to rely on the military out of fort Bliss to do all aeromedical evacutions for the whole west Texas eastern NM area. Military RA units are used to fight major forest fires all the time. I have worked in all these areas.

I hope this helps.

 

[acptulsa]

I hope this helps.

Helped me stand corrected.

Oh well. I already was pissed at Dubya anyway.

I still think it stupid to deploy Guardsmen overseas in a regular war and regular troops here. Can't see how to make a case for it except that there's some nebulous advantage to TPTB to use out-of-staters...

 

[klamath]

Helped me stand corrected.

Oh well. I already was pissed at Dubya anyway.

Actually you aren't really corrected. People that joined the guard during the Vietnam war were intentionally taking advantage of the situation. If you got drafted, most likely you were going to see combat. If you volunteered for the guard you most likely would not see combat during that time.
It was during the '90's that the guard was strongly integrated into the war fighting planning. The military budget cuts during the "90's yet an increase in Optempo (Bosnia Kosovo etc.) forced the war planners to rely on reserve forces to carry out the missions at lower cost. Once a Guard unit or Army reserve unit finished an activation they were cut loose and the federal government didn't have to pay food, housing, family support, medical that is required for the Regular Army between deployments.
This continues to this day.

 

[libertarian4321]

Well, if you'll recall, Dubya used the Air National Guard to avoid service in Vietnam and Dubya sent the Guard to Iraq. So, it was during his lifetime...

I don't remember if his daddy sent Guardsmen to Iraq as well, but I really don't think so. If the fact that Dubya pissed me off at the time by doing it is any indication.

Guardsmen have always been used in wartime, including in the first Gulf War.

However, in the past, they were generally used for short duration and to backfill critical shortages, not as de facto regular army units that deploy time and time again.

 

[Elwar]

Just remind them that they are more than likely criminals. That there's no legal reason why they should not be the focus of those 20,000 soldiers.

Read Living the Outlaw Life by Claire Wolfe, it's a pretty good article.

...think you’re not a criminal?

Really. So you’ve never: “forgotten” to report a little extra income on your 1040, built an addition on your house without a permit, driven without a seatbelt (the Supreme Court says cops can throw you in jail for that), given a glass of dinner wine to your 17-year-old, smoked a joint, disconnected a pollution control device on your car, cut a friend’s hair without a license, installed an “outlaw” toilet, carried a pocket knife with a blade longer-than-legal (bet you don’t even know what length is legal, do you?), been in a room where friends were talking about doing something illegal (conspiracy!), put a dollar in a football pool, patronized a prostitute, taken a tax deduction you really weren’t “entitled” to, lied to a bureaucrat, “willfully” failed to file, built a pipe-bomb just to watch it go boom, carried money with traces of cocaine on it (like some 82 percent of the paper money in circulation today), put prescription medicine into one of those little daily dispenser containers, given one of your own prescription pills to a sick friend (search Title 21 of the U.S. Code and just see if you can figure out exactly what you can and can’t do with that itty-bitty bottle of Zoloft or Prozac you depend on to help you survive this modern madness), owned chemicals that might be used in bomb making (like the bleach and ammonia bottles under your kitchen sink), transposed the digits of your Social Security Number on a government form, or driven in a car with someone who might have been transporting contraband. Ever?

 

[John of Des Moines]

Quote:
...think you’re not a criminal?

Really. So you’ve never: “forgotten” to report a little extra income on your 1040, built an addition on your house without a permit, driven without a seatbelt (the Supreme Court says cops can throw you in jail for that), given a glass of dinner wine to your 17-year-old, smoked a joint, disconnected a pollution control device on your car, cut a friend’s hair without a license, installed an “outlaw” toilet, carried a pocket knife with a blade longer-than-legal (bet you don’t even know what length is legal, do you?), been in a room where friends were talking about doing something illegal (conspiracy!), put a dollar in a football pool, patronized a prostitute, taken a tax deduction you really weren’t “entitled” to, lied to a bureaucrat, “willfully” failed to file, built a pipe-bomb just to watch it go boom, carried money with traces of cocaine on it (like some 82 percent of the paper money in circulation today), put prescription medicine into one of those little daily dispenser containers, given one of your own prescription pills to a sick friend (search Title 21 of the U.S. Code and just see if you can figure out exactly what you can and can’t do with that itty-bitty bottle of Zoloft or Prozac you depend on to help you survive this modern madness), owned chemicals that might be used in bomb making (like the bleach and ammonia bottles under your kitchen sink), transposed the digits of your Social Security Number on a government form, or driven in a car with someone who might have been transporting contraband. Ever?

Well to be quite frank, no I've lived a clean and wholesome life.

 

[dr. hfn]

the National Guards which are organized militias, were nationalized in 1916 by the Federal gov't. They ultimately are not under State control.

 

[Anti Federalist]

If there were mechanisms already in place, explain to us why we lost track of several thousand known sex offenders out of southern Louisiana immediately after Hurricane Katrina. They just vanished into thin air and no-one knows exactly where they went or if any of them lives across the street from me, you or anyone else. We also lost track of a lot of criminals on parole and some were turned loose. Soon after wards many larger cities and small towns had a dramatic increase in criminal activity, bank robberies, sexual assaults, store robberies and other crimes that they had not been having before Hurricane Katrina.

Because the "mechanisms" were too busy confiscating firearms from lawful firearm owners and looting Wal Marx.

I see that you are concerned, but my concern is, our country changed a bit immediately after Sept. 11, 2001 and we need to realize that we need to do things differently after that as we were not "up to par" before 911.

Hundreds of billions of dollars was not enough? More spending on defense than any other nations on earth was not enough?

Well the fact is, it was enough, more than enough.

9/11 was an inside job. (Yeah I know, I know )

As for our nation changing, your dang right it is. The difference is that the people are VOTING for the changes. Most of them are changes I disagree with but the MAJORITY of the people have voted for them.
I disagree with the direction that BO and the socialists party is going to take us, however, the majority of the population has chosen this path. The choice is of the majority of the people, that is the difference and it is a major one.

Some things are not subject to a plebiscite, even if the vote is 299,999,999 to 1.

So, while we share some of the unease expressed by civil libertarians, we are confident that careful oversight can ensure that the use of the troops conforms with the law. With that issue addressed, it would be irresponsible not to have well-trained military units ready to assist local and state authorities in dealing with the horrifying prospects that confront us.

See: Katrina and gun confiscations.

Completely outside the law, the courts have demanded that the illegally seized arms be returned, and AFAIK, three years later, government is still stonewalling and the people's property not returned.

Sorry, your promises of "careful oversight" ring hollow with me.

The historical record, both in this country and abroad, prove one thing to me: the military involved in domestic law enforcement is a bad idea, and will do more to destroy the country than any "terrorist" possibly could.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Well to be quite frank, no I've lived a clean and wholesome life.

Bet you a Benjamin that I could find a law you broke today.

 

[John of Des Moines]

Ha, ha, ha. A-F you obviously need one of these: for you to determine sarcasm in a post.

 

[dannno]

...think you’re not a criminal?

Really. So you’ve never: cut a friend’s hair without a license

Oh man, I should have been arrested for that one

 

[LibertyEagle]

Anyone know of any great foundational articles that might be helpful to explain to these guys why even though we can't control everything in a free society, it is much preferable to a tyranny? You know, along those lines. Explaining the basics in a non-threatening manner.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Because the "mechanisms" were too busy confiscating firearms from lawful firearm owners and looting Wal Marx.

heh.

About this looting WalMart thing, what are you saying here? Are you saying the gummit was looting WalMart, or what exactly?