Thread: Offered without comment

http://www.alternet.org/rights/10195...wd_control%22/

Members of Congress were told they could face martial law if they didn't pass the bailout bill. This will not be the last time.

Background: the First Brigade of the Third Infantry Division, three to four thousand soldiers, has been deployed in the United States as of October 1. Their stated mission is the form of crowd control they practiced in Iraq, subduing "unruly individuals," and the management of a national emergency. I am in Seattle and heard from the brother of one of the soldiers that they are engaged in exercises now. Amy Goodman reported that an Army spokesperson confirmed that they will have access to lethal and non lethal crowd control technologies and tanks.

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=HaG9d_...eature=related

There would be martial law if we voted no

It's not a clear clear statement.

Amy Goodman reported that an Army spokesperson confirmed that they will have access to lethal and non lethal crowd control technologies and tanks.

From Army Times

Beginning Oct. 1 for 12 months, the 1st BCT will be under the day-to-day control of U.S. Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command, as an on-call federal response force for natural or manmade emergencies and disasters, including terrorist attacks.....

The 1st of the 3rd is still scheduled to deploy to either Iraq or Afghanistan in early 2010, which means the soldiers will have been home a minimum of 20 months by the time they ship out.

In the meantime, they’ll learn new skills, use some of the ones they acquired in the war zone and more than likely will not be shot at while doing any of it.

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 1st BCT’s soldiers also will learn how to use “the first ever nonlethal package that the Army has fielded,” 1st BCT commander Col. Roger Cloutier said, referring to crowd and traffic control equipment and nonlethal weapons designed to subdue unruly or dangerous individuals without killing them.....

The package is for use only in war-zone operations, not for any domestic purpose....

Correction:

A non-lethal crowd control package fielded to 1st Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division, described in the original version of this story, is intended for use on deployments to the war zone, not in the U.S., as previously stated.

According to Army Times this domestic deployment is intended for training for crowd control in Iraq or Afghanistan. The idea that this Brigade is intended to be used for domestic crowd control would seem to be an extrapolation beyond the available evidence.

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/0...eland_090708w/

Bunbury: I'm happy with the idea that they're starting to look more into non-lethal weapons. I personally think it would tactically/politically smart to start trying to take insurgents alive instead of killing them.

I get the impression many of the ground level insurgents are being coerced against their will to fight us, and saving them alive would send a message to people about our intentions there.

I'd keep the cannon fodder in a relatively safe, huge fenced off camp, with no torture going on. Tell their mothers and fathers they can have their sons back *after* we win. (Something tells me we might start getting tips about where to find the weapons caches)

Anyone who looks like a leader or organizer, of course, still goes to Guantanimo. They can be identified easily because they'll go around trying to organize the cannon fodder. And, once we've removed the organizers from among them, the cannon fodder probably won't give us much trouble. (like trying to escape and stuff)

I interviewed Vietnam veteran, retired U.S. Air Force Colonel and patriot David Antoon for clarification:

"If the President directed the First Brigade to arrest Congress, what could stop him?"

"Nothing. Their only recourse is to cut off funding. The Congress would be at the mercy of military leaders to go to them and ask them not to obey illegal orders."

I'd say this is the most re-assuring part of the OP's article. I mean, they make it sound dismal, but I think it's reassuring. The question of whether GW even *could* use military force on members of congress rests a great deal in whether his officers would even be willing to carry out the order.

Do you think they would?

*after* we win

Please define.

Good point. The undefined nature of "victory" does leave the door open for the war to go on ad-infinitum.

Suppose we define victory as the point when US soldiers are all walking through the same neighborhoods they walk through today and not taking casualties? (IE. everyone who would ordinarily attack them has been subdued)

Originally Posted by kojax

Suppose we define victory as ... everyone... subdued

Have I boiled that down right?

Pan out a bit. Is this finally, then, the ultimate "purpose" of entering the country, and remaining there? Enter, occupy, and play whack-a-mole until there's nobody left standing who resents it?

Kojax,

There's no secret about "weapons caches". When the idiot Paul Bremer de-Baathified the government and disbanded the army, he sent home thousands of angry, unemployed civil servants along with thousands of trained soldiers with their weapons. This left no one to run the essential services of the country and plenty of armed, trained men to attack Americans. Then we put in place a hopelessly tiny group of American civil servants, who subcontracted everything to for-profit contractors.

Then we opened up reconstruction bidding to the multinational companies, and opened the borders, ensuring that existing Iraqi engineering firms, machine shops, concrete manufacturers etc. could not possibly compete, so all the reconstruction was done with foreign firms hiring labor from all around the world, while skilled Iraqis had no work and Iragi businesses went down the tubes.

This is the very opposite of successful reconstruction plans, such as the Marshall Plan, which was thought out by decent, pragmatic people, not by tunnel-visioned ideologists.

Is it any surprise that violence erupted? The best thing we can do now is pull the troops out and let Iraqis have their country back.

Yeah, most ideologues' ideology usually centers on how to ideally fill their pockets. It's funny how important it is to our national ego to insist that Iraq has no infrastructure except what we build for them.

Originally Posted by Pong

Originally Posted by kojax

Suppose we define victory as ... everyone... subdued

Have I boiled that down right?

Pan out a bit. Is this finally, then, the ultimate "purpose" of entering the country, and remaining there? Enter, occupy, and play whack-a-mole until there's nobody left standing who resents it?

It's the American way. It worked ... um.... great? ... in Vietnam, and now I'm pretty sure we expect it will work in Iraq as well.

In truth, I wonder sometimes if we're still stuck in the 1800's mentality when dealing with foreign cultures. If our goal is to simply kill every last Iraqi and take the land for ourselves, well, that would explain why our soldiers are getting so upset about the restrictions on who they can kill and why.

Originally Posted by kojax

Yeah, most ideologues' ideology usually centers on how to ideally fill their pockets. It's funny how important it is to our national ego to insist that Iraq has no infrastructure except what we build for them.

Please don't confuse the ideology, the stupidity and the corruption of Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz and co. with any sort of "national ego". If there is such a thing as a national ego in the USA it is based on the founding principles of the Constitution, a document which the above mentioned regard as a mere inconvenience to be sidestepped at will.

Originally Posted by Bunbury

Originally Posted by kojax

Yeah, most ideologues' ideology usually centers on how to ideally fill their pockets. It's funny how important it is to our national ego to insist that Iraq has no infrastructure except what we build for them.

Please don't confuse the ideology, the stupidity and the corruption of Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz and co. with any sort of "national ego". If there is such a thing as a national ego in the USA it is based on the founding principles of the Constitution, a document which the above mentioned regard as a mere inconvenience to be sidestepped at will.

trampled, you mean.

Yeah, now that you mention it, that is what I mean.

The absolute hillarious joke with Buck Fush is that this incompetent nincompoop really reached the exact opposite he intended to
Instead of giving the economy more freedom the US is closer to communism than ...... e.g. China. I mean from free market to state controlled banks.......MUHAHAHAHAHA
And total controll over telecommunication, giving a fuck about people's rights, using torture. If it weren't so sad I'd laugh my ass off.
One might think that this 800 Billion package GWB handed over to his buddies in the banks is a ploy to keep the Nigga' out of the White House (after all, it's not called "White House" for no reason, dontcha think, Bubba?). Nobody in his right mind except McCain would take over a nation so bankrupt and try to turn it around. And if I take a look at the polls I see Americans are really (I mean REALLY) considering to go on like this for four more years.

It's the problem with having stupid leaders. They go try to ask someone "smarter" than them what to do, who immediately see their opportunity, and start giving him advice that "just so happens" to profit them.

The temptation must be overwhelming. You've got this idiot coming to you who will literally do whatever you say, and he's in charge of a whole country. Any repercussions from your greed will come down on his head instead of yours, and the gains could number in the billions of dollars.

The only thing these people are forgetting is: where are you going to spend all that money after the economy collapses? Europe? Sure, until Europe collapses too. Then where? Outer space?

There seems to be a statement from the chappy who first made the statement that there could be martial law.

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/78892

So, perhaps a bit overblown, still an interesting look inside the machinations in Washington.

Originally Posted by kojax

It's the problem with having stupid leaders. They go try to ask someone "smarter" than them what to do, who immediately see their opportunity, and start giving him advice that "just so happens" to profit them.

The temptation must be overwhelming. You've got this idiot coming to you who will literally do whatever you say, and he's in charge of a whole country. Any repercussions from your greed will come down on his head instead of yours, and the gains could number in the billions of dollars.

The only thing these people are forgetting is: where are you going to spend all that money after the economy collapses? Europe? Sure, until Europe collapses too. Then where? Outer space?

When US sneeze the rest of the world stumble, economicaly speaking