Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 shasolenzabi wrote:
I recall a time, back when news was actually hard hitting journalism...

Why I recall when negroes kept in line, and you could smack up a woman for getting uppity. Yep, them's the good days when everyone had a job and the government was just peaches.


Seriously man, that world you're imagining? It never existed, and what we have now is much closer to what you want than the reality of the age you're reminiscing about. We've gone from wallowing in muck to standing atop a hill, and you're complaining that we can't fly like we used to (you know, when we also couldn't fly).

Sir Pseudonymous wrote:

 shasolenzabi wrote:
I recall a time, back when news was actually hard hitting journalism...

Why I recall when negroes kept in line, and you could smack up a woman for getting uppity. Yep, them's the good days when everyone had a job and the government was just peaches.


Seriously man, that world you're imagining? It never existed, and what we have now is much closer to what you want than the reality of the age you're reminiscing about. We've gone from wallowing in muck to standing atop a hill, and you're complaining that we can't fly like we used to (you know, when we also couldn't fly).

The news methods of which I speak helped also topple such things as segregation and helped makes strides in exposing and shaming domestic abuse, nowadays the news is more a rating maker for the sake of the ratings. So, hard hitting journalism used to exist, it was and still is needed, now we get to know what is worn by celebrities, over some needed news. Not much is heard of after effects of oil spills like the Gulf anymore as it is out of sight, out of mind.

As to how this is part of the Original topic, well, whether Manning did know full well of the war crimes he was exposing, or was eh just a hurt person lashing out? the government loves to discredit as it does more harm then outright killing you. The news on wikileaks indicates that Mannings' trial is basically a Kangaroo Court, no defense witnesses allowed, no evidence for the defense allowed and some sessions in utter secrecy, When I served in the 1980's we had the Cold War, but we also had given to us the difference between lawful and un lawful orders and to think not blindly obey. That was almost 30 yrs ago, not sure what they teach nowadays.

As for Snowden, it seems corporations are all giving the exact same points to make sure the public does not see them as culpable with the PRISM as the case of the new X-Box-One is also capable of allowing itself to be used by PRISM so we would be paying for the privilege of installing spy gear into our homes under the guise of a gaming/entertainment system? I love how the Big Brother Government we have allowed to come to be has it so that we would be watchable at all times and we foot the bill to install the crap, bad enough the cable companies and phone companies also do this.

That hill you speak of, well, it is part of the "Warm fuzzy Bubble" that has been crafted by the Corporate=Government=media hype to help keep people passive and under docility as the eduction system is being geared to dumb down people as far as civil lessons and political realism are also left undone is that it is easier to vote for the loudest rather than the issues. Too many want to go with the flow as it is the easiest fo rthey fear the hammer nailing down the nail that sticks it's head up and all of that. I am not advocating violent overthrow, but for educating ourselves to make our decisions based on careful, observations, we can vote at the booths, vote at the store with our wallets, we can make changes but only if we do so, sitting and watching the talent and reality shows is how they keep us all under control here in America. That and all the pharmaceuticals prescribed for those who start to notice the flaws and say something or are overwhelmed by it all.

America was not superb but it definitely made a dark turn at 9/11/2001 and now we need to turn around and regain a more Democratic Course than we are on now.

KalashnikovMarine wrote:I'm saying 50% based on personal experience with a large body of members of the U.S. Armed Forces. Most of us are in it for the country, not the government, and if the government turns on the country you get the military turning on the government. Maybe they spend all the money they save by rationing health care in Canada on brainwashing your military into good little drones but that's just not how it works down here.

My point is that it won't look like the government is turning on the people. At no point will the president laugh maniacally and shout "haha now tremble before my presidential might and despair! It's time to round up the masses and send them to work camps, haha!" Any change like that would come very slowly, and it wouldn't look like you're turning against the country -it'd look like you were doing what's right, which is what you're told to do, which is the entire mentality of the military: follow orders.

Ours is not to reason why / ours is but to do and die

(I probably misquoted that)

It was "do or die" in that poem

 shasolenzabi wrote:

The news methods of which I speak helped also topple such things as segregation and helped makes strides in exposing and shaming domestic abuse, nowadays the news is more a rating maker for the sake of the ratings. So, hard hitting journalism used to exist, it was and still is needed, now we get to know what is worn by celebrities, over some needed news. Not much is heard of after effects of oil spills like the Gulf anymore as it is out of sight, out of mind.

As to how this is part of the Original topic, well, whether Manning did know full well of the war crimes he was exposing, or was eh just a hurt person lashing out? the government loves to discredit as it does more harm then outright killing you. The news on wikileaks indicates that Mannings' trial is basically a Kangaroo Court, no defense witnesses allowed, no evidence for the defense allowed and some sessions in utter secrecy, When I served in the 1980's we had the Cold War, but we also had given to us the difference between lawful and un lawful orders and to think not blindly obey. That was almost 30 yrs ago, not sure what they teach nowadays.

As for Snowden, it seems corporations are all giving the exact same points to make sure the public does not see them as culpable with the PRISM as the case of the new X-Box-One is also capable of allowing itself to be used by PRISM so we would be paying for the privilege of installing spy gear into our homes under the guise of a gaming/entertainment system? I love how the Big Brother Government we have allowed to come to be has it so that we would be watchable at all times and we foot the bill to install the crap, bad enough the cable companies and phone companies also do this.

That hill you speak of, well, it is part of the "Warm fuzzy Bubble" that has been crafted by the Corporate=Government=media hype to help keep people passive and under docility as the eduction system is being geared to dumb down people as far as civil lessons and political realism are also left undone is that it is easier to vote for the loudest rather than the issues. Too many want to go with the flow as it is the easiest fo rthey fear the hammer nailing down the nail that sticks it's head up and all of that. I am not advocating violent overthrow, but for educating ourselves to make our decisions based on careful, observations, we can vote at the booths, vote at the store with our wallets, we can make changes but only if we do so, sitting and watching the talent and reality shows is how they keep us all under control here in America. That and all the pharmaceuticals prescribed for those who start to notice the flaws and say something or are overwhelmed by it all.

America was not superb but it definitely made a dark turn at 9/11/2001 and now we need to turn around and regain a more Democratic Course than we are on now.

What I'm saying is all of those problems were the same or worse before, and there were a whole lot of other problems too, many of them even worse. We see things in a different light because no one bothers to remember the problems, and sees only a few isolated events we've since come to regard as positive in relative isolation.

I'm not about to say we don't have problems today, but these problems have haunted us for generations in one form or another, and we're slowly wearing them away and fixing them. It's still worth working towards their solutions, but we can't try to hold a fantasy idea of yesterday as an ideal we should strive for.

Sir Pseudonymous wrote:

 shasolenzabi wrote:

The news methods of which I speak helped also topple such things as segregation and helped makes strides in exposing and shaming domestic abuse, nowadays the news is more a rating maker for the sake of the ratings. So, hard hitting journalism used to exist, it was and still is needed, now we get to know what is worn by celebrities, over some needed news. Not much is heard of after effects of oil spills like the Gulf anymore as it is out of sight, out of mind.

As to how this is part of the Original topic, well, whether Manning did know full well of the war crimes he was exposing, or was eh just a hurt person lashing out? the government loves to discredit as it does more harm then outright killing you. The news on wikileaks indicates that Mannings' trial is basically a Kangaroo Court, no defense witnesses allowed, no evidence for the defense allowed and some sessions in utter secrecy, When I served in the 1980's we had the Cold War, but we also had given to us the difference between lawful and un lawful orders and to think not blindly obey. That was almost 30 yrs ago, not sure what they teach nowadays.

As for Snowden, it seems corporations are all giving the exact same points to make sure the public does not see them as culpable with the PRISM as the case of the new X-Box-One is also capable of allowing itself to be used by PRISM so we would be paying for the privilege of installing spy gear into our homes under the guise of a gaming/entertainment system? I love how the Big Brother Government we have allowed to come to be has it so that we would be watchable at all times and we foot the bill to install the crap, bad enough the cable companies and phone companies also do this.

That hill you speak of, well, it is part of the "Warm fuzzy Bubble" that has been crafted by the Corporate=Government=media hype to help keep people passive and under docility as the eduction system is being geared to dumb down people as far as civil lessons and political realism are also left undone is that it is easier to vote for the loudest rather than the issues. Too many want to go with the flow as it is the easiest fo rthey fear the hammer nailing down the nail that sticks it's head up and all of that. I am not advocating violent overthrow, but for educating ourselves to make our decisions based on careful, observations, we can vote at the booths, vote at the store with our wallets, we can make changes but only if we do so, sitting and watching the talent and reality shows is how they keep us all under control here in America. That and all the pharmaceuticals prescribed for those who start to notice the flaws and say something or are overwhelmed by it all.

America was not superb but it definitely made a dark turn at 9/11/2001 and now we need to turn around and regain a more Democratic Course than we are on now.

What I'm saying is all of those problems were the same or worse before, and there were a whole lot of other problems too, many of them even worse. We see things in a different light because no one bothers to remember the problems, and sees only a few isolated events we've since come to regard as positive in relative isolation.

I'm not about to say we don't have problems today, but these problems have haunted us for generations in one form or another, and we're slowly wearing them away and fixing them. It's still worth working towards their solutions, but we can't try to hold a fantasy idea of yesterday as an ideal we should strive for.

I agree, we do have a ways to go, and in many ways, 9/11 made us back pedal to an nigh McCarthy-esque era, I say we get away from such a deal and head forwards and regain democracy and civil liberties and dismantle the burgeoning Police State that has been happening with Corporate spurring on.

 azazel the cat wrote:

KalashnikovMarine wrote:I'm saying 50% based on personal experience with a large body of members of the U.S. Armed Forces. Most of us are in it for the country, not the government, and if the government turns on the country you get the military turning on the government. Maybe they spend all the money they save by rationing health care in Canada on brainwashing your military into good little drones but that's just not how it works down here.

My point is that it won't look like the government is turning on the people. At no point will the president laugh maniacally and shout "haha now tremble before my presidential might and despair! It's time to round up the masses and send them to work camps, haha!" Any change like that would come very slowly, and it wouldn't look like you're turning against the country -it'd look like you were doing what's right, which is what you're told to do, which is the entire mentality of the military: follow orders.

Nah, it's pretty obvious that that's something the Vice President would do.

 azazel the cat wrote:

KalashnikovMarine wrote:I'm saying 50% based on personal experience with a large body of members of the U.S. Armed Forces. Most of us are in it for the country, not the government, and if the government turns on the country you get the military turning on the government. Maybe they spend all the money they save by rationing health care in Canada on brainwashing your military into good little drones but that's just not how it works down here.

My point is that it won't look like the government is turning on the people. At no point will the president laugh maniacally and shout "haha now tremble before my presidential might and despair! It's time to round up the masses and send them to work camps, haha!" Any change like that would come very slowly, and it wouldn't look like you're turning against the country -it'd look like you were doing what's right, which is what you're told to do, which is the entire mentality of the military: follow orders.

Ours is not to reason why / ours is but to do and die

(I probably misquoted that)

No you quoted it right, but you'd be shocked how much actual THINKING this country's military does as individuals. Yours too. There's plenty of idiots in the military but there's a delineation you're not grasping in all of this. The popularity of the Oathkeepers movement in the U.S. military is proof enough of that.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

KalashnikovMarine wrote:I'm saying 50% based on personal experience with a large body of members of the U.S. Armed Forces. Most of us are in it for the country, not the government, and if the government turns on the country you get the military turning on the government. Maybe they spend all the money they save by rationing health care in Canada on brainwashing your military into good little drones but that's just not how it works down here.

My point is that it won't look like the government is turning on the people. At no point will the president laugh maniacally and shout "haha now tremble before my presidential might and despair! It's time to round up the masses and send them to work camps, haha!" Any change like that would come very slowly, and it wouldn't look like you're turning against the country -it'd look like you were doing what's right, which is what you're told to do, which is the entire mentality of the military: follow orders.

Ours is not to reason why / ours is but to do and die

(I probably misquoted that)

No you quoted it right, but you'd be shocked how much actual THINKING this country's military does as individuals. Yours too. There's plenty of idiots in the military but there's a delineation you're not grasping in all of this. The popularity of the Oathkeepers movement in the U.S. military is proof enough of that.

This ^

Azazel... you're dangerously close to insinuating that Military folks can't think for themselves.

What he's saying is that the situation wouldn't be the clear cut "welp, the people are revolting, get in there and butcher the sumbitches," but more "domestic terrorists are attacking [wherever], get in there and keep the peace/save the hostages/protect the infrastructure" or "people are rioting [wherever], go provide backup/moral support to the police".

Remember that things don't go from good to armed revolt overnight; if things started going downhill and the state became more and more repressive, do you really think the people who'd be morally opposed to cracking down on dissidents would be enlisting? Do you think the military wouldn't alter its training to make its soldiers more damaged and blindly obedient rather than maintaining the comparatively healthy state of affairs it has now?

The whole "what would the military do if the people revolted" question can't be regarded in isolation from the issues that would be requisites for such a revolt.

Sir Pseudonymous wrote:
What he's saying is that the situation wouldn't be the clear cut "welp, the people are revolting, get in there and butcher the sumbitches," but more "domestic terrorists are attacking [wherever], get in there and keep the peace/save the hostages/protect the infrastructure" or "people are rioting [wherever], go provide backup/moral support to the police".

Remember that things don't go from good to armed revolt overnight; if things started going downhill and the state became more and more repressive, do you really think the people who'd be morally opposed to cracking down on dissidents would be enlisting? Do you think the military wouldn't alter its training to make its soldiers more damaged and blindly obedient rather than maintaining the comparatively healthy state of affairs it has now?

The whole "what would the military do if the people revolted" question can't be regarded in isolation from the issues that would be requisites for such a revolt.

And when those service men hit the grounds and starts seeing what's going on, they'll put 2 + 2 together.

Besides, only the National Guard can intervene domestically. That's what we're talking about.

I see quite a few here went to the "deep end" unsupervised.....

Whembly....The National Guard unit can be run by the state for up to 30 days. After that they go on Title 10 order for up to 392 days and then own by the Federal Government. Individuals National Guard members can go full time on separate orders for the State they're in.

Sir Pseudonymous

Remember that things don't go from good to armed revolt overnight; if things started going downhill and the state became more and more repressive, do you really think the people who'd be morally opposed to cracking down on dissidents would be enlisting? Do you think the military wouldn't alter its training to make its soldiers more damaged and blindly obedient rather than maintaining the comparatively healthy state of affairs it has now?

We had this major thread awhile back. The OWS thread where we went over this. Doesn't matter what training or doctrine that's involve. If we, as in the military, are deployed on home soil. It comes down to two type of orders. Lawful or Unlawful Orders. Individual troopers are not going to make the final decision for the unit. Its up to the Unit Officers and NCO's to either execute the mission with little impact as we can or simply say "No" depending on the order that is giving. This is a thread all to itself. This is a topic that will cover a lot of ground as we go over what is a lawful order and what is a unlawful order and why. Also we have to go down into the "UH Fudge Me Running" avenue to


Azazel
My point is that it won't look like the government is turning on the people. At no point will the president laugh maniacally and shout "haha now tremble before my presidential might and despair! It's time to round up the masses and send them to work camps, haha!" Any change like that would come very slowly, and it wouldn't look like you're turning against the country -it'd look like you were doing what's right, which is what you're told to do, which is the entire mentality of the military: follow orders.
Ours is not to reason why / ours is but to do and die

(I probably misquoted that)

Lawful and Unlawful Order for the bold.

Your quote...."Do or Die" we prefer Patton quote. DO not dare go SPQR on me.....

Read this bit again:

Sir Pseudonymous wrote:

The whole "what would the military do if the people revolted" question can't be regarded in isolation from the issues that would be requisites for such a revolt.

You can't think of it in terms of what the current military would do if tomorrow they were ordered to crush some mass popular uprising that also just magically sprung from nowhere. The ridiculously improbable chain of events that would be required for the US to suffer a revolution would necessarily fundamentally change how the military recruited and indoctrinated soldiers. The intelligence agencies also aren't stupid, and if things entered the death spiral wherein revolt becomes an inevitable outcome they would surely cull potentially problematic officers (if the military wasn't doing the job for them).

 Jihadin wrote:
I see quite a few here went to the "deep end" unsupervised.....

Whembly....The National Guard unit can be run by the state for up to 30 days. After that they go on Title 10 order for up to 392 days and then own by the Federal Government. Individuals National Guard members can go full time on separate orders for the State they're in.

Woah there cowboy... yeah, I know that.

Also, folks keep forgetting That Posse Commitatus Act.

Are we off on another US Civil War tangent again?

 Jihadin wrote:
Are we off on another US Civil War tangent again?

I think that's what others have surmised...

*shrugs*

Well first off......State loyalty doesn't exist anymore.

 Jihadin wrote:
Well first off......State loyalty doesn't exist anymore.

Texans would disagree, but then they are a bunch of dirty squatters that can't decide on what they want to be.

 Ahtman wrote:
Texans would disagree, but then they are a bunch of dirty squatters that can't decide on what they want to be.

Never ask a man if he's from Virginia. If he is, he'll tell you. If he's not, you don't want to embarrass him.

As for the other conversation, 50% sounds about right. We can look at places like Libya and Syria, where presumably these magical indoctrination techniques that have been talked about were used, and still see the military defecting to the rebel cause in great numbers.

How many of them would fight for the state though?

Yeah, I don't think we'd ever have a civil war along state alignment again. Too many people live in too many states over the course of their lives.

KalashnikovMarine wrote:
I'm saying 50% based on personal experience with a large body of members of the U.S. Armed Forces. Most of us are in it for the country, not the government, and if the government turns on the country you get the military turning on the government.

And what will the military do after it turns on the government? Rule until the country is what it wants it to be?

I mean, that's fine, it is a tradition of the Americas; especially South America. But I'm not sure how well military dictatorship would go over with the US populace.

 whembly wrote:

And when those service men hit the grounds and starts seeing what's going on, they'll put 2 + 2 together.

Or they will feel legitimately threatened, and open fire.

 whembly wrote:

Besides, only the National Guard can intervene domestically. That's what we're talking about.

In the event of rebellion law does not matter.

The military has displayed it's willingness to open fire on peaceful, unarmed civilian protesters before, so I don't think it would be much of a stretch to imagine them being willing to do the same in the event those civilians had guns.

As previously mentioned, die-hard state loyalty is a thing of the past. For every person willing to die for their state, there are ten people who don't really care. Gone are the days when most people lived and died in the same state, without once crossing state lines.

Also, a widespread rebellion would never happen, as most people actually aren't interested in dragging the country into an armed conflict on American soil, believe it or not. They may not like the president, or Congress, but they aren't going to grab the ol' 12 gauge off the mantle, quit their job and go die because of it. The only people that would actually consider going to war against the US government are a vocal minority. The rest of the citizenry is a tad more sensible.

I my 22 yrs in the military...I cannot remember or recall any of us willing to fire on a open peaceful protest...unless your saying we are the same military types from Kent state of...what....30 plus yrs ago? When the National Guard open fire at a possible shooter. If the military is still judge that way from 30 plus years ago then by Gawd then we blindly follow orders from the President....frog march everyone into the FEMA Death Camps. Throw the protester against the wall and shoot them then put a round into their head to ensure their dead. Hang possible/suspected/unlucky soul I can claim as a partisans up by piano wire. Start executing partisan families and friends. Have mass burning of literature that's not on the proscribed reading list of the government. Declare what property is commercial or residential....and Gawd forbid if you live in a designated commercial area that was consider residential yesterday. Its a good way to start the day with a commercial/residential cleansing day at a mass grave deep in the woods. Since we're a modern military we do not care what race or ethnicity you are you still get the same laugh as your kicking in the wind. Also the US Military value initiative so if the death camps are getting full we just round up a couple hundred unlucky souls and have a mass police call at a recent democratic political rally and then burn and bury the trash and non conformist in one area and call it a day. All this and more if we're judged from 30 plus years ago.....its easy to slide back another 30+ yrs.

 rubiksnoob wrote:
The military has displayed it's willingness to open fire on peaceful, unarmed civilian protesters before, so I don't think it would be much of a stretch to imagine them being willing to do the same in the event those civilians had guns.

I'm guessing you're referring to Kent state? that's just the natural result of sending individuals trained poorly for one job (National Guard infantry) to go do another job that requires a fair amount of guts and experience to handle properly (counter protest/riot control)

Good thing they didn't have a full basic load on them.

 Jihadin wrote:
I my 22 yrs in the military...I cannot remember or recall any of us willing to fire on a open peaceful protest...unless your saying we are the same military types from Kent state of...what....30 plus yrs ago? When the National Guard open fire at a possible shooter. If the military is still judge that way from 30 plus years ago then by Gawd then we blindly follow orders from the President....frog march everyone into the FEMA Death Camps. Throw the protester against the wall and shoot them then put a round into their head to ensure their dead. Hang possible/suspected/unlucky soul I can claim as a partisans up by piano wire. Start executing partisan families and friends. Have mass burning of literature that's not on the proscribed reading list of the government. Declare what property is commercial or residential....and Gawd forbid if you live in a designated commercial area that was consider residential yesterday. Its a good way to start the day with a commercial/residential cleansing day at a mass grave deep in the woods. Since we're a modern military we do not care what race or ethnicity you are you still get the same laugh as your kicking in the wind. Also the US Military value initiative so if the death camps are getting full we just round up a couple hundred unlucky souls and have a mass police call at a recent democratic political rally and then burn and bury the trash and non conformist in one area and call it a day. All this and more if we're judged from 30 plus years ago.....its easy to slide back another 30+ yrs.

I'm thinking it has more to do with human nature than with anything inherent to the military. The military has certainly changed in the past 30-40 years, but have people? The Guardsmen at Kent State claimed they opened fire because they feared for their lives. And that was against a bunch of unarmed student protestors! My point was that, if a perceived threat to your (general "you", not specific) life is enough to make you open fire on people who are unarmed, would it not be just as easy, if not easier, to open fire on people who are armed, and clearing presenting a much greater threat?

Not if you are sympathetic to their viewpoint.

Especially when if you weren't on duty you'd probably be over there with them. Our armed forces are made up of people too. They aren't the mindless drones of the government.


During the Civil War, the army split. It didn't remain completely loyal to the government. If anything, it was way less pronounced then and the defection was more along officer vs enlisted lines(large reason why the South did so well initially was because the majority of the experienced officers defected to the South)

Now it would be a much larger chunk of the army going to the other side.

Plus there would be sections that wouldn't defect but would refuse to fire on Americans citizens.

Oh yes, and Whembly: I think you're severely limiting the effect that orders from authorities can have. Everything in Milgram's study is only compounded by the institutionalizing effects of the military.

Be hardcore and hold the trigger down......eerrrr button.....not over even when the screaming stops