What would martial law in America be like?

[robertpaulsen]

I'm starting to get my PNAC threat level up to red again, with all the chatter here on DU regarding the possibility of indictments coming out in the Plame case. This includes the possibility that Bush and Cheney could be named as unindicted co-conspirators, which would most certainly result in the end of the reign of Dumbya.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1812114

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1824829

There's also threads about the possibility of border lockdown and Bush screening US citizens for "mental health".

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1822699

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1824884

Most of the people here that I have polled believe that the October Surprise that Bush/Cheney have planned is LIHOP/MIHOP: WMD attacks on US cities, martial law, complete totalitarian clampdown.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1570194

But I'm not sure what to believe. The tinfoiler in me thinks that with the threat of scandal unfolding to the point of threatening Bush/Cheney with political extinction, martial law could come at any time. But the other part of me is asking how? How, with our armed forces stretched across the globe to the point where Senators are raising the possibility of a draft to maintain our global commitments, could we possibly maintain martial law in this country? Which armed forces would do it? Is border lockdown even feasible? How many terror suspects would be rounded up and is there enough room in Gitmo? Who would enforce curfew, patrol neighborhoods, keep uppity liberals like myself from getting on the streets and protesting the nonsense?

How bad is it going to get?

[BigDaddyLove]

1. It will never happen..........

A great many people need to log off of DU, go outside and get some fresh air.

[skooooo]

2. lol..word BigDaddyLove

I don't think our local cops will ever be seen shooting at citizens for being out after curfew.

[RC]

3. Remember Florida? And the peaceful demonstrations?

[skooooo]

6. All kinds of examples of bad things...

..on relatively small scale, going way back. There's no evidence that something like that could be coordinated on a large, national level.

[Stew225]

5. BigDaddy, you da

Big Daddy! Happy Big Daddy's Day!

[robertpaulsen]

7. Will NEVER happen?

It's happened in America before, 1863, during the Civil War. If Lincoln could suspend habeus corpus throughout the entire nation, why do you think Bush would never attempt something similar?

Sorry, no fresh air in downtown LA. :)

[jmowreader]

24. There was a lot less America in 1863

And the whole freakin' Army wasn't in Iraq fighting an illegal war.

[robertpaulsen]

25. True, but I don't think Bush would let that stop him.

Not because he's dumb as dishwater, but because he's already used one terrorist attack in this country to pursue the agenda of the PNAC. Why not use another to save his political life?

Without a Bush/Cheney theft repeat, the completion of the PNAC agenda would be put on at least a four year hold. I don't think they'll let that happen and I don't think Bush would allow anyone to take him out of office without a fight. Martial law might not be sustainable, but the possibility of it happening today is not farfetched.

[libhill]

56. One thing you folks are over looking

are the "armed citizenry" that the Repukes and the N.R.A. are always harping on. If these jerks declare martial law, their "armed citizenry" might just turn on them. And they claim the Democrats are gonna take the guns. Yeah, right. Could just be that `ole Joe Sixpack and Gary Gun Nut have been backing the wrong horse. Well, let `em find out the hard way.

[robertpaulsen]

60. There are ways to "pacify" Repukes and the N.R.A.

Depends entirely on the focus of the enforcement of martial law, as well as the presentation. Post 35 talks about how the enforcement of it can be focused on high-risk (to Bush) areas and leave the heartland of America alone, while post 50 paints an interesting scenario of the corporate Media taking control of the patriotic presentation.

I don't doubt that Brownshirts wouldn't stand for martial law if it inconvenienced them. But what if it didn't? One thing Bush is good at is looking out for his own. If the Brownshirts start forming vigilante groups in the aftermath of another terror attack, my bet is that they won't be forming them to go after our troops, they'll be doing it to go after Arabs, liberals and everyone else who poses a threat to their idea of freedom. And if their government is throwing these traitors the Brownshirts are hunting into American Gitmos, they won't feel inconvenienced by martial law. They'll feel rewarded.

[libhill]

61. Then maybe -

we`ll have to start arming ourselves. If wingnut vigilantes come hunting me, they`re going to get as good as they give.

[robertpaulsen]

63. Damn straight!

My Dad is a survivalist who bought guns in the event of Y2K chaos. I thought it was foolish at the time, but now I'm glad he did. In the event of the Constitution dissolving, I'll be ready.

Gotta log off for the night. All this talk of martial law is wearing me out! :)

[Just Me]

26. Oh, that pic is priceless!!!

I agree,...even if they have plans for such things,...forget it.

Our people and all the security-related population would reject it outright.

[Just Me]

53. However, I might add,...

,...that, notwithstanding it would be rejected,...does NOT mean that I do not believe this administration would TRY to impose it.

[disinfo_guy]

32. the US would look more like Brave New World than 1984

Mass, voluntary drugging of the population for one. Oh, wait.

[donhakman]

33. When I go outside...

to take my wife to work my car gets serched twice and I have to drive over 4 pop up barracads and through steel gates.

all since Bush

Where have you been?

[robertpaulsen]

37. Great cartoon!

I put it on my background. Very clever and very scary!

[spanone]

62. Thanks that's a great toon!

[bill grasso]

4. Not Necessary..

It's easier to steal another election than declare martial law..

[mmonk]

8. I would think it would

induce violence. There is no need for it.

[Cat Atomic]

9. Well, it'd never be *called* martial law.

They'd call it a "Liberty Schedule" or something.

[Disturbed]

10. "Is there enough room in Gitmo? "

There are plenty of secret prison camps, so that is not a concern.

Martial Law will be administered with another major attack within the USA.

BushCo has repeated that there will one. This is a strange warning because they also say that America is safer with Saddam in custody. Will there be one?

[no_hypocrisy]

13. FEMA camps . . . .

[ArkDem]

31. Clearly and concisely stated.

[King Of Paperboys]

14. LOL

"Hey, you! Dirtbag! Why aren't you inside? We're on American Freedom Time, asshole! Don't make me put you in the naked pile!"

[robertpaulsen]

15. "Operation Homeland Salvation" is my guess.

I think we all realize how Orwellian Dumbya and Friends can be. Liberty Schedule is a good one. I think Afghanistan and Iraq are going through that right now.

[disinfo_guy]

48. they'd call it "Freedom Law"

"Today Bush declared the Constitution suspended and the US placed under Freedom Law."

[TexasProgresive]

11. Rotate the battle hardened troops out of

Afganistan and Iraq reassemle them to maintain civil order and they would shoot the police if ordered to. I'm not saying this will happen, I'm more concerned about a military coup as the leaders of the armed forces are taking a drubbing and not liking it. These are men and women who saw their capital with the public go south in the aftermath of Nam.

[robertpaulsen]

20. That would be an interesting scenario.

I suppose, in the event of a WMD attack in America, there would be a temporary withdrawal of Afghanistan and Iraq troops to enforce martial law, while Bush gets the draft ball rolling for our subsequent invasion of Syria, Iran et. al. But when retired four star generals like Clark and Zinni are speaking out at how Bush is exploiting the military in the name of imperialism under the Rumsfeld mismanagement, there may indeed be a military coup, but against Bush. A counter-coup, if you will, to correct the injustice of the December 12, 2000 coup.

[TexasProgresive]

22. The worry is when you let the military coup

genie out of the bottle - there is no predicting the outcome.

[robertpaulsen]

23. Good point.

We could get lucky and have someone like Clark or Zinni take over. Or we could end up with General Curtis LeMay and watch America get bombed back to the stone age. Not a crapshoot I want any part of.

[grasswire]

12. first..........

....they'll have to grab the guns.

And that ain't gonna happen in America.

A large part of Bush's base would be on him like ticks on a hound if there's an attempt to force citizens to turn in their guns.

There IS still a large part of conservative America that would stand with the Bill of Rights.

[Rex]

16. Exactly, Americans are to violent and we own a lot of guns!

Those two ingredients (violence & guns) alone mean that a military rule is out of the question. OTOH the media would LOVE it! 24/7 of nothing but sensational death reports!

[RedSock]

17. easier to do it through the fake democracy we have now

i put nothing past these war criminals but it's much easier for them to do their dirty work under the veneer of the fake democracy we have now

[uptown ruler]

18. never get that bad...

americans wont stand for it in the end...


Spreading The Word
The Irony Curtain Shop

[NEOBuckeye]

19. Martial Law is Unsustainable

Local and State governments are already buckling under the financial strain of Bush's* tax and budget cuts. There was a LOT of griping from police departments, many of which have recently had to lay-off officers, when Asscroft, Ridge and Co. decided to raise the alert level to "Ernie" (i.e. Ernie = Orange, Bert = Yellow, Elmo = Red, etc.) forcing them to put more cops on the street, meaning more personnel running ops at the station, more money spent on fuel and vehicle maintennance, etc. All the little things that no one ever considers really start to spiral into big gaps in the budget. And this is just in a week of Code Orange. A Code Red/Martial Law-type situation for any extended period of time would stretch most local emergency/law enforcement departments to the breaking point, putting them into the red, and perhaps forcing many local governments into bankruptcy. We simply do not have the resources to enforce such nonsense.

In addition, if you think you're going to see troops marching up Main Street any time soon, think again. With the other U.S. millitary divisions already stretched to their limits around the globe, the "National Guard" has been called to serve in Iraq. What's left in the U.S., at best, could be strategically stationed at various points in the major cities (i.e. NYC, LA, Chicago, DC) but not enough to enforce martial law over the long haul.

[Djinn]

21. it's unneccesary

why would anyone take the political risk of instituting martial law ehen they can just engineer another terrorist act or vaguely talk about the threat of one. As Goebbels knew, big lies are easy to beleive.

[amjsjc]

27. Turning a dumbass into a monster...

Bush is a shitty president, but he's not the anticrist. A few of the people on DU are, shall we say, a bit paranoid. Don't believe everything you read around here.

[scared]

28. Boy.......

A bit condescending aren't we? I can't stand that superior attitude.

[amjsjc]

29. You're correct...

But I stand by the statement anyway

[Beam Me Up]

39. "not the antichrist" -- Perhaps -- but he might as well be.

If you don't know what is going on, perhaps you should educate yourself. The idiot in charge believes he's been chosen by god to lead amerikkka into the promised land of imperial global dominance. Meanwhile the hidden fact of the matter is, these MATERIALIST monsters care nothing for life or liberty -- except their own of course. Care nothing for human rights or human dignity. They are criminals. They are traitors. They are the worst scum of the earth.

Yeah, I'm OUTRAGED. But what you apparently don't understand is, it is all true! These people are a THREAT to our real national security. That isn't some vague 'national interest': I'm talking about YOU and ME and everyone and everything we know and love.

You could start by reading this and its links:

http://www.newtopiamagazine.net/content/issue12/features/bushempire.php

[robertpaulsen]

30. Monday morning kick

Anyone else with info on how martial law is feasible in today's political climate, let me know. I'm sure the government always has some sort of emergency plans for martial law contingent on a WMD attack or something similar. I think I remember reading about it in Against All Enemies, Richard Clark called it COG or something similar.

[donhakman]

34. Code Red is martial law

Read it!

[TahitiNut]

35. In specific areas, not nationwide.

Every 'discussion' of this on DU seems to ignore the obvious. First of all is the sovereignty of the states under the Constitution. Martial (not "marshal") law is a state decision, not a federal decision. I have never seen any provision for a nationwide declaration of martial law. Indeed, it wouldn't even be necessary, even under the "tinfoil hat" scenarios, to make it nationwide. Take a few "swing states" and select an urban area with a high concentration of "commie liberal" voters in each state - and you've got the makings of affecting the outcome of an election. Cleveland, Ohio? Miami, Florida? Philadelphia, Pennsylvania? Name 'em.

[donhakman]

36. FEMA

will have shoot to kill orders in a bio attack.

[robertpaulsen]

41. There is a precedent for nationwide martial law.

In the United States, there is precedence for martial law. Several times in the course of our history, martial law of varying degrees has been declared. The most obvious and often-cited example was when President Lincoln declared martial law during the Civil War. This instance provides us with most of the rules for martial law that we would use today, should the need arise.

On September 15, 1863, Lincoln imposed Congressionally authorized martial law. The authroizing act allowed the President to suspend habeas corpus through out the entire United States. Lincoln imposed the suspension on "prisoners of war, spies, or aiders and abettors of the enemy," as well as on other classes of people, such as draft dodgers. The President's proclamation was challenged in ex parte Milligan (71 US 2 <1866>). The Supreme Court ruled that Lincoln's imposition of martial law (by way of suspension of habeas corpus) was unconstitutional.

Did this mean that martial law could never be implemented? No, the Court said. The President can declare martial law when circumstances warrant it: When the civil authority cannot operate, then martial law is not only constitutional, but would be necessary: "If, in foreign invasion or civil war, the courts are actually closed, and it is impossible to administer criminal justice according to law, then, on the theatre of active military operations, where war really prevails, there is a necessity to furnish a substitute for the civil authority, thus overthrown, to preserve the safety of the army and society; and as no power is left but the military, it is allowed to govern by martial rule until the laws can have their free course. As necessity creates the rule, so it limits its duration; for, if this government is continued after the courts are reinstated, it is a gross usurpation of power. Martial rule can never exist where the courts are open, and in the proper and unobstructed exercise of their jurisdiction. It is also confined to the locality of actual war."

http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_mlaw.html

So, I disagree and I agree with you. Martial law can be declared on a national level, and I'm sure that in the wake of another major terror attack in the US that Bush would have no problem coercing Congress into approving it. But I agree with your scenario as to the implementation of martial law, the most severe effects will probably only be practiced in the key areas that you mentioned. Anything to keep those "commie liberal" voters out of the picture.

[TahitiNut]

46. A "terrorist" attack within the US does not constitute civil war ...

... or a foreign invasion. A criminal act, no matter how atrocious, does not equate to "war." The IRA "troubles" did not result in Britain's invasion of Ireland, even though Britain had a Grenada-low threshold for invading. The US did not bomb the state(s) from which Tim McVeigh obtained support. In my view, it's this kind of scenario that gave rise to posse comitatus (18 USC 1385). (The irony is that it's coming from the right - the end of the political spectrum historically most paranoid about it.)

Retrospectively, I could kick LBJ in the ass for using the term "war" in a euphemistic way, serving not as much to increase a sense of urgency regarding the goals but to decrease our appreciation of what "war" really means. But that desensitizing didn't start with LBJ - virtually every teacher and 'educational' source that presents war in some sterile, academic fashion is guilty of desensitizing us.

[robertpaulsen]

51. You make a very important distinction.

That is the difference between war and a criminal act. The Oklahoma City bombing is a very good example of domestic terrorism in which the authorities managed to keep their cool without resorting to police state tactics. If only people like Tommy Franks could understand the difference, then the possibility of martial law being imposed as the result of a terrorist attack would not even be a consideration. It would be condemned as treason.

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/211103martiallaw.html

[JayS]

42. I have lived under Martial Law once before briefly. This was...

...after a hurricane had trashed the town and our police force (one man) would of course not be able to handle the job. It was a little strange but you knew the troops were there to keep away looters. It would have been a bad idea to do any stealing at that time and you got a verbal warning about this when you entered the town.

[TahitiNut]

47. Yes, and I lived in inner city Detroit during the 1967 riots.

:scared: I was far, far less concerned for my personal safety being in danger from the rioters than from the insane zealots in uniform.

[smirkymonkey]

55. NYC during the Repub Convention??

I don't think we should ever risk underestimating these thugs. Call me paranoid, but I don't think we'll get through the year without a major incident in defense of the Patriot Act.

[TahitiNut]

58. The Patriot Act is like a runaway train ...

... loaded with cheering, drunken neofascists. Eventually it'll crash and take a lot of innocent lives along with it. It's not going to be pretty. I wouldn't be at all surprised if it's before the election, and either in Boston or New York City during a convention. Considering that the police-state-in-the-streets during the 68 Democratic Convention in Chicago probably helped Nixon get elected, I'm inclined to look as easily at Boston as NYC.

[DoNotRefill]

38. It depends.

If Liberals insist that we disarm ourselves, it'll be very, very easy to supress us.

If Liberals are armed and reasonably trained in the use of firearms, the RW's problem had been magnified many-fold.

The RW have guns. We need to have them, too.

[Swamp Rat]

40. Corporate America would say "NO"

Does anyone think they'd close all the 24hr Wal-Marts and gas stations?

[westsidexview]

43. indianapolis

[GarySeven]

44. The American Internal Security Act of 2004

BE IT ENACTED BY CONGRESS ...

A) That the President shall have the authority to suspend the Electoral College....

D) That the President shall have authority to deploy the Armed Forces of the United States ... to federalize the various state militias and the National Guard ... to secure the borders of the several states .. to restrict access to the Federal Highway System ... to cause individual citizens to register via form and report to the Director of Internal Security all such information as the Attorney General and his deputies shall assign ...

F) (i) ... Shall have authority to suspend writs Habeus Corpus

G) ... Shall authorize the Attorney General to ...

Someone is writing this bill right now in some secret hearing room on Capitol Hill. Yet the conservative talk show hosts will tell you that the greatest danger this country faces is liberal Democrats legislating in an open congress to raise taxes.

[robertpaulsen]

45. I don't doubt that at all.

After all, the Patriot Act was written prior to September 11. They're prepared for complete totalitarian clampdown, should the need (or desire) arise.

[Realityhack]

49. It would erily resemble now for quite some time

There is a huge problem with the question what would martial law look like. This being that one can not fesibly declare martial law in the united states or even large protions of it. The protests would be too severe. This is the lesson of vietnam. The only way to get close would be to have a mass cazualty event in which case you could stay close to martial law for a week or so.

So instead you create an atmosphere of self sensorship. Of fear. You get people to think everyone who oposes you is crazy, evil, dangorous. Silence them while encorageing them to speak. Make sure they will get arested for assulting the officers who kicked them first etc.

It isn't hard. Various psych experiments have shown how easy it can be.

RH

[greekspeak]

50. What would it look like?

I would say the current propeganda machine would go into overdrive, there would be 24/7 pro-administration news. There would be limited mobility. There would be interment camps for "terrorists." Suspension of the constitution. Many of those we call sheeple would go along with it until the first time they were inconveinced. Eventually there would be a civil war with even the biggest freepers freaking out. By then, people like us would have been interred, but that would end in a war situation. I can't imagine most Americans living in a strange environment like that of North Korea or a similar regime.

[Independent_Minded]

52. What would it look like?

It would look like a very brief attempt to wrest power from the people followed by millions of armed vigilantes moving on the usurpers.

the worst part would be the loss of life, and for some, admiting that an armed populace was a genious-stroke by the founders.

[stavka]

54. ...it would be very short.

[tjwash]

57. Worst case scenario...

...the economy will collapse, and the US will pull an old "Soviet Union" and split up into a dozen or so separate countries. It's just too big to control under martial law. History tells us there are a dozen stages to an empire, and this is the conclusion of all the large ones.

[donhakman]

59. The fact that the Pat Act was ready before 9-11

Is ammunition for the LIHOP crowd

Regarding the suppresion of protests and demonstrations the Republicans feel quite secure.

There are so many new crowd control weapons available to them now, it would make your head swim.

Think tanks were on this one 20 years ago.

Microwave cannons, low frequency cannons and electromagnetic weapons of various frequencies are here. Some have been field tested in Iraq.

All can be lethal depending on use but can also be used gingerly for lnl lethal effect.

Believe me, tin foil hats will not protect you from the ultra low frequency cannons.

Of course there are the old fashioned lethal weapons.

[LoZoccolo]

64. It would look kind-of silly.

This is because our military's been so depleted from an unnecessary war that they might not be able to really control much at all.

Next time you're talking to your conservative friends, ask them if they think it would be OK if Bush* put the country under martial law for a while if another big terrorist attack happens. If they say yes, ask them how they're gonna do that if Bush* depleted the military.

[Andy_Stephenson]

65. Armed Republicans

Roaming the streets with their newly minted automatic weapons.