Ariz. Police Say They Are Prepared As War College Warns Military Must Prepare For Domestic Unrest

[Orwellian_Ghost]

A new report by the U.S. Army War College talks about the possibility of Pentagon resources and troops being used should the economic crisis lead to civil unrest, such as protests against businesses and government or runs on beleaguered banks.

“Widespread civil violence inside the United States would force the defense establishment to reorient priorities in extremis to defend basic domestic order and human security,” said the War College report.

The study says economic collapse, terrorism and loss of legal order are among possible domestic shocks that might require military action within the U.S.

<snip>

http://phoenix.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2008/12/15/daily34.html

Known Unknowns: Unconventional "Strategic Shocks" in Defense Strategy Development

"Deliberate employment of weapons of mass destruction or other catastrophic capabilities, unforeseen economic collapse, loss of functioning political and legal order, purposeful domestic resistance or insurgency, pervasive public health emergencies, and catastrophic natural and human disasters are all paths to disruptive domestic shock." it continues.

"An American government and defense establishment lulled into complacency by a long-secure domestic order would be forced to rapidly divest some or most external security commitments in order to address rapidly expanding human insecurity at home..."

"Already predisposed to defer to the primacy of civilian authorities in instances of domestic security and divest all but the most extreme demands in areas like civil support and consequence management, DoD might be forced by circumstances to put its broad resources at the disposal of civil authorities to contain and reverse violent threats to domestic tranquility. Under the most extreme circumstances, this might include use of military force against hostile groups inside the United States." Lt. Col. Freir concludes.

Pages 31-32

http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/PUB890.pdf

[Tangerine LaBamba]

1. Here we go............

They're planning for our very own domestic Dr. Strangelove.

Jesus.

Is this my America in the twenty-first century?

[dixiegrrrrl]

4. They are planning for the military to take over. REad that sentence again.

"Already predisposed to defer to the primacy of civilian authorities in instances of domestic security "
refers to the fact that civilians have and are supposed to be in charge of the military.


,"DoD might be forced by circumstances to put its broad resources at the disposal of civil authorities"
means takingover the civilian policing functions.


to contain and reverse violent threats to domestic tranquility. Under the most extreme circumstances, this might include use of military force against hostile groups inside the United States." Lt. Col. Freir concludes.

Pages 31-32

I don't have pdf reader ( by choice) so can't see the primary document.
However, this trial balloon is being floated ore frequently of late.

Is anyone 100 positive Cheney is really leaving?

[Tangerine LaBamba]

7. I read it, but

you might want to watch "Dr. Strangelove" again.

If you can't see the primary document, you really can't comment adequately on it, not with any degree of comprehension.

Sounds to me like maybe you took off without knowing what's going on.

And what is that about Cheney leaving?

[bluesmail]

19. nope. I just don't see egomaniac sociopaths walking away from something

that was decades (centuries) in the making. This scares me and now I understand my recent 'erratic' behavior.

[Greyhound]

21. Open Office developed by Sun. You can read them and not give up your info. n/t

[NeedleCast]

25. Is This like the Military Takeover During the Election?

Hand-wringers never get tired of this...they're never right about it either.

[TahitiNut]

15. I hope everyone is happy about our "all volunteer Army."

:eyes:

Such a prospect would be far, far more unthinkable in the days of a draft. To the degree it's more conceivable today is, in no small part, attributable to the view of the military as "other" and "them" and not as something in which EVERYONE serves and shares a burden.

[ixion]

2. The MIC needs to be taken down a notch

this talk of tossing Posse Comitatus out the window is a bunch of crap.

[BrklynLiberal]

10. They have already set up troops here in the US

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/09/24/army/
Why is a U.S. Army brigade being assigned to the "Homeland"?

http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin472.htm
U.S. ARMY TROOPS TO SERVE AS U.S. POLICEMEN?

http://stevescomments.wordpress.com/2008/11/04/us-military-units-assigned-within-us-borders/?referer=sphere_related_content/
U.S. Military Units Assigned Within U.S. Borders

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/dec2008/mili-d02.shtml
Pentagon to deploy 20,000 troops on domestic “anti-terror” mission

http://www.semp.us/publications/biot_reader.php?BiotID=165
How the 1868 Posse Comitatus Act Influences U.S. Department of Defense Missions

The assistant secretary provides overall supervision for domestic military missions and military support to U.S. civil authorities. Activation of the U.S. Northern Command (created in April 2002 and fully operational October 2003) provides unity of command for military activities within the continental U.S. Prior to the U.S. Northern Command’s activation, U.S. Joint Forces Command provided military forces to defend U.S. territory from land- and sea-based threats while NORAD defended the U.S. from airborne threats (and still does). The Commander of U.S. Northern Command is also the Commander of NORAD, thereby providing unit of command for air, land, and sea missions (p. 13).

NORAD before 9/11 focused its attention on aircraft approaching U.S. airspace and had planned to order Air Force units to prevent a hostile aircraft from entering U.S. airspace. Since 9/11, NORAD has expanded its focus to include monitoring aircraft operating with the U.S. and now orders combat air patrols over U.S. cities to prevent terrorist attacks.
<snip>
In fact, the assistant secretary of defense, in response to a letter from the GAO requesting comments on the report, replied: “Numerous references throughout the report confuse the interpretation and application of the Posse Comitatus Act with regard to the use of the military to enforce the laws of the United States. The President or Congress may authorize the use of the military to enforce the law.” (p. 33). The GAO authors replied, “We disagree.”

[CoffeeCat]

3. Ok, now wait a minute here...

According to this article, "civil unrest" that could cause "troops being used" includes such behaviors as "protests against businesses and government" or runs on beleaguered banks .

Ok, isn't a "run on a bank" simply many people simultaneously trying to get THEIR OWN money out of the bank, in a non-violent fashion?

Why in the hell would people trying to recoup their OWN MONEY from a failed bank---be reason to sick American troops on Americans???

I can understand if people were tearing down the bank, but not trying to peacefully get their own money out of it.

I tell ya...they have this web in place for some specific reason. They can detain anyone, declare them an "enemy combatant", torture them, hold them
indefinitely and they don't have to charge the person with a specific crime. This exists for a reason. They didn't orchestrate this because they
thought they might need to do this stuff. They've got the web spun because they know what's going to go down.

Jan 20 can't come soon enough. It's bad enough to have the economy collapsing all around you...we don't need another 25 days of wondering what
these goons will do before Obama is supposed to take office.

[carlyhippy]

5. I have been predicting this

as the economy gets worse there will be civil unrest, it will be different than in the 30's. Looting widespread, robbing, people basically doing what they have to in order to take care of themselves and their family. I am usually a doom and gloom one, but I can really see this happening.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

8. See, I don't agree, which surprises me,

because, normally, yes, I'd say that the people will rise up.

But look back at the last eight years. Where were the people? Where was the outrage? They didn't care, and they stayed silent and passive and allowed those thugs to steal everything from us, including our Constitutional rights. In part, I think it's because they've been so beaten down for so long, held so powerless, they lack the energy to fight.

So, I doubt we'll see what we should - outrage in the streets like we had during the American invasion of Vietnam. Instead, I think we'll see a lot more petty crime, shoplifting, larceny, more assaults, small stuff.

People are, I think, just worn out. Apathy, hardly, but it looks like it. Ennui, no, I don't think so, but it manifests itself thusly.

Plus, the OP didn't read the document, so I suspect specialized quoting doesn't really give us the whole import of what it's about.

[Mojorabbit]

9. They didn't rise up

because I think none of the stuff directly affected them. What is going down now is different. This is affecting peoples pocketbooks and a lot of people are losing their shelters.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

12. I thought of that,

and I hope that when people are hit in the wallet, maybe that's where their outrage will ignite. I hope, I really hope.

But, honestly, I'm not optimistic.

What would really suck about this - if it happens - is that it'll take place with President Obama in office, instead of during the illegal tenure of that fucking Oval Office thug/squatter. But, if anyone could handle it well, I think it would be Obama.

I just cannot believe this is my America.

[Two Americas]

22. I don't blame the people

I think we should stop blaming the people. The general public does not have access to the information that we do. That has been caused by the compromising and cowardice of Democrats and liberals. We are the ones missing in action.

Why would we want the people to suffer, in order for them to rise up, so that we can see things we like be accomplished?

The working people lack leadership. That is the task we should take up, rather than thinking and speaking as though we were merely aloof and superior observers passing judgment.

You say you wish that you wish that any social movement would have happened while the Republicans were in office rather than the Democrats. This is, in my opinion, backward. You see a potential social movement for justice and equality as subordinate to partisan politics. Only those relatively immune from the unfolding catastrophe could afford to see things that way. For a relatively privileged few, it is sufficient to have Democrats in power. But for most of the people, this is woefully inadequate. This thinking is part and parcel of the weak stance of the activist community, and the very cause of the inability of the people to resist the growing oppression and tyranny.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

23. Well said. nt

[Tangerine LaBamba]

24. Get a grip.......

The notion, first, that internet access is somehow limited to a privileged caste is absurd. The general public has access to all the information you and I have.

Clearly, you have some other kind of agenda that seems mostly to be concerned with disjointed thoughts and rather narrow perspectives. If you continue to believe that people are uninformed, and if you continue to make assumptions that leave you further and further behind, that is your wish.

But, in the meantime, get a grip. Notice the world around you and how smart the people are. And be careful that you don't fall head-first out of that imaginary ivory tower.

[Two Americas]

26. the usual smears

"Get a grip" is not an argument. It implies very strongly that the person who happens to disagree with you is mentally unbalanced or delusional, and as such is an ad hominem attack - a smear, an attack on the messenger rather than a refutation of the message.

I didn't say "internet access is somehow limited to a privileged caste."

Are you really claiming that the general public "has access to all the information you and I have?" We have no problem with media in this country? No problems with the state of the press and journalism? No problem with who owns the media? No problem with suppression of information? No massive orchestrated disinformation campaigns aimed at the public?

Suggesting that a person has "some other kind of agenda" is also not a rational argument, not a legitimate response to what I said, but rather is an attempt to discredit the other person and encourage the readers here to ignore what they have to say.

[Joe the Liberal]

13. Yea I don't see any civil unrest happening anytime soon......

People don't care anymore to actually do anything. I agree, the most we will see is a rise in petty crime and maybe a few small organized protests which in this day and age doesn't accomplish much of anything that has an impact.

[Two Americas]

29. it is already happening

The effects of just one small action recently have been incalculable. The impact of one "small organized protest" has been extraordinary.

The liberal activists are out of the loop. That does not mean nothing is happening.

"This day and age" has nothing to do with anything. It is an excuse.

There is a serious disconnect between the activists - the intellectuals of the Left, by which I mean writers, readers, researchers, thinkers and speakers - and the rest of the people in the working class. This was dramatized a while back in very clear and unambiguous terms. As millions of immigrants took to the streets demanding economic justice and equal rights, I read posts here saying "when oh when will the stupid sheeple ever wake up and organize and resist?"

More recently, we see GLBTQ people here dismissed and attacked for getting "too radical."

We - the activists - are the ones missing in action. We are the strongest bastion of conservatism, we are the main obstacle, we represent the most stubborn resistance and are in the deepest denial. This takes the form of arguing for moderation, for taking baby steps, for working within the system, for "giving our leaders a chance" - there seems to be an endless supply of these arguments. They are all excuses. They block any possibility of solidarity, any direct action, any sense of urgency, any courageous stands, any powerful speech.

The working class - to which we all belong - has no leadership, no voice, because we are trapped in an intellectual and political ghetto of "like minded" people, admiring ourselves and each other as we cower in a comfortable bubble of irrelevancy and futility.

[bemildred]

6. Does this mean we won't be able to have total dominance everywhere?

What is Guam going to do without us? How will Iraq manage? Or Afghanistan?
:sarcasm:

[Marr]

11. And now we see who the establishment types are *really* referring to when they say "us" and "we".

"We" have to protect "our" strategic interests around the globe... "we" have to prepare for "civil unrest"... yeah.

[tomp]

14. does it really matter which aspect of the "police" suppresses us?

did anyone actually believe they would not use any means at their disposal to stop "unrest" (read; rebellion, revolution)?

[Leftest]

16. Kent State

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZctaIeUoX0

[Cetacea]

17. And Kent State had a chilling affect on the anti-war movement

In my opinion, it had the desired effect.

[silverojo]

18. This will probably take place on January 19th

Martial law, and all that.... :scared:

I joke, but I wouldn't put it past Cheney.

[Catshrink]

20. Arizona: Home to Sheriff Joe, you betcha.

This martial law business is made for him.

[L0oniX]

27. Welcome to my world ...the world where I am totally anti military and have been for a long time.

Yes folks ...your military will be used to keep you from using your freedom to dissent, to perform civil disobedience with out the threat of death from our police and military and freedom of speech. It's going to be a national Kent State situation soon. ...do ya still support the troops? ...will you support them when they attack the people of this country? The only excuse for a military is to defend this country in a time of war when we have been attacked by another country ...not some band of Arabs who hate US military bases in their country and have attacked us for it. We provoke people to become terrorists. Policy wars are for suckers and fools!

[SlowDownFast]

28. Don't worry.

Obama will save us!

:sarcasm: