INVASION OF AMERICA: OPERATION URBAN WARROR - Maybe more to Marine 'training' than meets the eye?

Research & think hard, before leaping to conclusions about Marine training in this country. Under the training exercises such as "urban-patrol", "bomb disposal", "toxic waste disposal", several counties across the country have been infiltrated by military, often times working hand in hand w/police. To see their urban-patrol exercises done in Swansboro, North Carolina watch this six minute video, also included at the end is a list of the 77 counties in Texas that have been policed by the military while they train for bomb disposal:
video: http://youtube.com/watch?v=71Jux68F_AQ

Maybe there's more to marines training in towns like Toledo than meets the eye. I counted at least 6 or more threads on this site that are more or less, identical - people angry at Carty for sending the marines away. Watch the video & decide for yourself. I won't go so far as to suggest that Carty knows something we do not (he doesn't). But I do think there's enough information about this type of training all over the country to make us think, rather than go into an automatic knee-jerk 'bash Carty' reaction. Before you call it a conspiracy theory - take the time, watch the (very short) video above. Better yet, take the time & watch the videos listed below (some are much longer, but worth the watch). I'm not leaping to paranoid conclusions - yet. But do your OWN research & thinking & make up your OWN minds, and not just use this marine 'training' as an excuse to bash Carty. (I am not defending Carty - I don't presume to know. Don't even bother responding unless you've at least watched that 5 minute video above.

More links -
INVASION OF AMERICA: OPERATION URBAN WARROR
Oakland, CA 1999
http://www.infowars.com/ouwmar9901.html

For a full length video illustrating rhyme and reason watch Police State III: Total Enslavement:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-448659287463550973&q=police+sta...

GEORGE BUSH'S POWER GRAB... IS MARTIAL LAW COMING? (C-Span Washington Journal)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jatpX6kuxHQ&NR=1

Brutal Truth: Tryanny in America (20 minutes)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6607820174911824356

The Posse Comitatus Act: Posse comitatus means that military can not act as police in our country. Police are the enforcement inside our country, military is the enforcement outside of our country. We are not terrorists and posse comitatus stands to protect us from being treated as such. Posse comitatus is a United States FEDERAL law and can only be surpassed by the Insurrection Act.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act

The Insurrection Act: This is a set of laws that instruct the President when it is time to declare martial law. Note that on October 17, 2006 the Insurrection Act was changed as part of the 2007 Defense Authorization Bill and now allows more leniency to employ the Insurrection act by adding conditions that could be considered a "catastophic event". You can view these alterations here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrection_Act

On May 9, 2007, only seven months following the changes of the Insurrection Act, the President bypassed congress and authorized martial law provisions, giving himself complete power to declare martial law if the case arises that could be considered a "catastrophic event" as posed by the updated Insurrection Act.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7249403126470103604&q=bush+auth...

It doesn't matter if it is just training. There is a reason our forefathers enacted Posse Comitatus. There is a reason the Bush administration enacted "The John Warner Defense Authorization Act" which disables this law. They also needed to pass "The Military Commissions Act" (to deny Habeas Corpus). "The PATRIOT Act" labels all US citizens as possible domestic terrorists. See the new thought crime bill "H.R. 1955". Regardless of the leaders intentions THIS ACTIVITY SHOULD NEVER BE ALLOWED!!!

No votes yet

Starling

The first video you show is highly edited, has no interviews, and is set forth to act as if it is a tv newscast. As you watch it you can tell it is not. We've seen with Michael Moore that things can be edited to show whatever you want them to. They did no background with local officals. They did not speak to a representative of the military.

Instead they reference an Army document while showing a Marine training exercise. The two are completely unrelated yet the video goes to portray them as one in the same.

But to more directly confront the most of your post. Yes I, in my capacity of a marine, have been involved in training where I helped law enforcement train. But it was not in a capacity where we where doing it jointly as if we expected to actually work together.

As for most of the other parts of your post I find it funny how some on here now don't want the military operating in civilian environments when during Hurricane Katrina they were mad that Bush didn't have the military there to help them. I'm sure if the Marines had skipped over Toledo and gone to Findlay to put up flood barriers there would be no controversy. Except helping stop floods is not the primary mission of a Marine Rifle Company and when they do take on missions as such they do so under civilian authority.

MikeyA

MikeyA

"As for most of the other parts of your post I find it funny how some on here now don't want the military operating in civilian environments when during Hurricane Katrina they were mad that Bush didn't have the military there to help them."

Thats' what the National Guard was set up to do, to assist in national disaster's within their states. That doesn't allow them or invite them to operate in civilian environments outside of a disaster, unless specifically asked to.

Then why were elements of the 4th Marine Division brought in?

MikeyA

MikeyA

Because all the National Guardsmen were in Iraq.

wow

wow. You couldn't have been further from the truth.

The National Guard was there as well. They just weren't activated by their governor in an acceptable time. Please don't spout a talking point when the facts clearly don't support it.

Mississippi on the other hand activated their National Guard early and asked for the help of the Army training detachments in areas like Biloxi. Mississippi has recovered quite quickly from the affects of Katerina. This was because of a proactive Governor.

MikeyA

MikeyA

Unfortunately, they are going to come to the same conclusion no matter what is said because the mentality is the same as the 'Do it for the kids' mentality in a school board tax levy. Unconditional support and unrestricted access to whatever, whenever, where ever, no questions asked.

There is a time and place for everything, and there needs to be limits set. There should never be an unconditional, the "'sky's the limit" support for anything.

1. ensured the integration of Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas in 1957

2. accept black men fully into it's ranks before the Civil Rights Act

3. allowed women to serve prior to them gaining access to vote

4. helped other immigrant groups gain social acceptance (our only non WASP president, President Kennedy would not have won the Presidency had he not initially been accepted for being a war hero)

5. protected the rights of former slaves during Reconstruction

6. Declared martial law in the city of District of Columbia to prevent utter disorder and chaos when a three pronged assassination attempt tried to take down the two highest members of the country and three highest members of the miltiary: Abraham Lincoln, Andrew Johnson, and William Seward

7. ordered the 4th Marine Division (temporarily relocated to Texas) back to New Orleans so the Marines income could serve as Federal non-income that would return to the city.

8. lost 125 people at the Pentagon during the attacks of 9-11

this is just a small grouping of contributions the military has had on us domestically. Most times the military is one step ahead of our society in accepting of other peoples and protecting their rights.

MikeyA

MikeyA

Well if the military has brought us those successes, shit, why have a civilian government because God know's they're corrupt. Why not just move into a military based government with a military ruler?

Touting their successes doesn't make right to elevate their role anymore than what our forefather's had set for them. And before kateb calls me a coward for my opinion, my wanting to keep the military's role limited does NOT show any disrespect for those who serve.

Why a local police force? Why National Guardsmen? What purpose do they serve?

I still can't believe this is still all stemming from a Mayor who rejected military training, and with the authority to do so, within the CBD.

I realize many of those videos are edited - I tried to include those that WERE brief, due to space contraints & people's willingness to read long posts here (and this one is long). On those sites, are many, many links to read more & view further about this - if you choose to do so. Draw your own conclusions. I know some people lump Alex Jones in with Michael Moore - and while both do edit to make their points, I believe Jones is less likely to be inaccurate - or to deliberately create inaccuracies (and they are not all Alex Jones videos). But again - you decide. That said - in the first link about Texas, the Marines & the Army were working together. The former Texas Chief of Police in that Texas town was outraged - when he was chief of police, the crime went down, but up again with the new police chief. The marines & army (martial law) were in that Texas town because of it's high crime rate. He stated something to the effect, "you can't do that, confine thousands of people in their homes". And yet, that was the plan. AND, if you take the time to actually watch the other videos that link provides, you'll see a chart listing over 70 counties in Texas where the marines have 'trained' in urban warfare (why over 70 counties in Texas alone?).

Mikey - I have the utmost respect for our military. My dad is a vet. But that does not mean I am not allowed to question some of what they are ordered to do. It is not the enlisted men & women who make the decisions like this - they are simply following orders. And the military & military orders of today, may not be the same as when you were in the military. Our govt. & military have been known to do questionable acts before - the Nevada Nuclear testing for one.
***************************************************************************************
In a report by the National Cancer Institute, released in 1997, it was determined that ninety atmospheric tests at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) deposited high levels of radioactive iodine-131 (5.5 exabecquerels) across a large portion of the contiguous United States, especially in the years 1952, 1953, 1955, and 1957—doses large enough, they determined, to produce 10,000 to 75,000 cases of thyroid cancer. The Radiation Exposure Compensation Act of 1990 allowed for people living downwind of NTS for at least two years in particular Nevada, Arizona or Utah counties, between January 21, 1951 – October 31, 1958 or June 30, 1962 – July 31, 1962, and suffering from certain cancers or other serious illnesses deemed to have been caused by fallout exposure to receive compensation of $50,000. By January 2006, over 10,500 claims had been approved, and around 3,000 denied, for a total amount of over $525 million in compensation dispensed to "downwinders".[5] Uranium miners, mill workers and ore transporters are also eligible for $100,000 compassionate payment under the Radiation Exposure Compensation Program, while $75,000 is the fixed payment amount for workers who were participants in the above-ground nuclear weapons tests.

Nuclear test series carried out at Nevada Test Site
Operation Ranger — 1951
Operation Buster-Jangle — 1951
Operation Tumbler-Snapper — 1952
Operation Upshot-Knothole — 1953
Operation Teapot — 1955
Project 56 — 1955
Operation Plumbbob — 1957
Project 57, 58, 58A — 1957–1958
Operation Hardtack II — 1958
Operation Nougat — 1961–1962
Operation Plowshare — 1961–1973 (sporatic, at least one test a year)
Operation Sunbeam — 1962
Operation Dominic II — 1962–1963
Operation Storax — 1963
Operation Niblick — 1963–1964
Operation Whetstone — 1964–1965
Operation Flintlock — 1965–1966
Operation Latchkey — 1966–1967
Operation Crosstie — 1967–1968
Operation Bowline — 1968–1969
Operation Mandrel — 1969–1970
Operation Emery — 1970
Operation Grommet — 1971–1972
Operation Toggle — 1972–1973
Operation Arbor — 1973–1974
Operation Bedrock — 1974–1975
Operation Anvil — 1975–1976
Operation Fulcrum — 1976–1977
Operation Crescent — 1977–1978
Operation Quicksilver — 1978–1979
Operation Tinderbox — 1979–1980
Operation Guardian — 1980–1981
Operation Praetorian — 1981–1982
Operation Phalanx — 1982–1983
Operation Fusileer — 1983–1984
Operation Grenadier — 1984–1985
Operation Charioteer — 1985–1986
Operation Musketeer — 1986–1987
Operation Touchstone — 1987–1988
Operation Cornerstone — 1988–1989
Operation Aqueduct — 1989–1990
Operation Sculpin — 1990–1991
Operation Julin — 1991–1992
http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Tests/index.html

Published: Thursday, May 20, 2004 6:31 a.m. MDT
New projects planned for the Nevada Test Site are raising concern that nuclear bomb testing may resume there. http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,595064453,00.html
*****************************************************************************
And I've read a lot & watched enough video to question when they say it's all for 'our own good'. Yes, I do understand there have been, and may be times, when martial law may be needed when the military may need to be called in to keep order.(although, this can be disputed - From wikipedia (for what it's worth) -
In United States law, martial law is limited by several court decisions that were handed down between the American Civil War and World War II. In 1878, Congress passed the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids military involvement in domestic law enforcement without congressional approval. The Military Commissions Act of 2006 rescinds these limits by suspending habeas corpus. Since, USNORTHCOM [5] has increased its direct involvement with civilian administration.

The National Guard is an exception, since unless federalized, they are under the control of state governors. [6]. This has now changed. Public Law 109-364, or the "John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007" (H.R.5122), was signed by President Bush on October 17, 2006, and allows the President to declare a "public emergency" and station troops anywhere in America and take control of state-based National Guard units without the consent of the governor or local authorities. Title V, Subtitle B, Part II, Section 525(a) of the JWDAA of 2007 reads "The [military] Secretary [of the Army, Navy or Air Force] concerned may order a member of a reserve component under the Secretary's jurisdiction to active duty...The training or duty ordered to be performed...may include...support of operations or missions undertaken by the member's unit at the request of the President or Secretary of Defense." [6] The President vetoed the Defense Authorization Act of 2008 on December 27, 2007.A provision in the 2008 defense authorization bill would have repealed this section of PL 109-364. [7]
*********************************************
The National Guard (not the marines or army) may be called in for hurricane & flood disasters, riots (although Kent State does come to mind & it is one instance where the military were not shining examples of 'goodness'), or a terrorist attack. That said - I do not believe the marines were in Toledo to train for hurricane or terrorist attack training (what are the odds of it occurring?). I asked before & nobody's coughed up an answer yet - WHAT were they training FOR? I do not want a vague 'well if we got hit with a terrrorist attack' answer. I want a specific answer - and so far, nobody seems to think it worth asking the question. And nobody seems to be willing to offer an answer. I've been told by some, that 'nothing bad has happened with this training so far, here, so who cares?". Scary thinking. The marines were clearly planning to do urban warfare training (why else would they need a mostly empty small town to train in?) - training that they clearly have had a LOT of in other states & towns already. Their presence certainly had nothing at all to do with training to be used overseas, in Iraq, etc. We are simply expected to believe it is 'for our own good', and to question these maneuvers, must automatically mean we are against our fine men in the military (who risk their lives for us, etc.). IF you take the time to actually watch some of those videos, you will see video & photos of civilians being man-handled by the rifle toting marines, illegal car searches, an entire greyhound bus searched, people being roughed up, etc. Those videos & photos clearly show illegal serch & seizure & a military presence in dometic law.

You can make whatever claim you want to discredit the material shown in the video, but it has no arrest for the bare-bone facts. The President authorized martial law provisions, he did so without the knowledge of the people and without the consent of congress, and he did this only months after rewriting the Insurrection act so as to make it more suited to his trigger-happy agenda. If you can't see the correspondence between him seeing martial law as a future option and the recent training of our troops in a manner so strikingly similiar to what I've suggested, then it may be possible I am wrong, but it is just as possible that you've failed to do your necessary homework.

To quote Ayn Rand -
"The only proper purpose of a government is to protect man's rights, which means: to protect him from physical violence... The only proper functions of a government are: the police, to protect you from criminals; the army, to protect you from foreign invaders; and the courts, to protect your property and contracts from breach or fraud by others, and to settle disputes by rational rules, according to objective law. "

I don't claim to know if this type of marine training is good or bad. I am simply asking what it is they are training FOR. Research yourself but don't blindly buy into the mindset that if it 'our military who puts their lives at risk for us' mentality - it must therefore, be a good thing. Simple google searches bring up a lot so it's not that hard to find information about this. And then, make up your own minds.

I won't disagree that our government was quite cavalier in their nuclear testing but again that came from the authority of civilian control.

Our military is apolitical. That's why I'm so against those who are anti-military. They take it from a political standpoint. Carty being one of those. As much as he tries to say it's because "I don't want people afraid" his comments on WJR about Jack Smith showed an anti-military bias.

As for the training. I will tell you it WAS NOT training in response to a terror attack. That is entirely different training. This was urban warfare training. Also it's important to note that from what I've read it sounds like the training was mainly to be taken place inside the Madison building with only patroling taking place outside. This meant most Toledoans would not have seen the bulk of the training. But inside the building they'd be practicing "room clearing" which is a particularly dangerous operation.

Room clearing can ONLY be done in small groups. It requires quick thinking and quick reactions. The reason the Marines practice it so much is because the only way to save lives is to make the decision making process instinct because hesitation kills in that environment.

You may ask "Why Toledo" which is reasonable. There are two reasons 1. They had done them here with a good response from the safety officials so you just use the same plan and you know what works, what doesn't and most importantly how much will it cost. and 2. With these being Michigan Marines most would be unfamiliar with Toledo. This makes the training more realistic because they're away from home and in a strange environment.

I hope I answered your question.

MikeyA

MikeyA

Martial Law: Coming to a Neighborhood Near You?
http://www.rense.com/general28/whenthewarhitshome.htm

"Martial lawdestroys every guarantee of the Constitution and effectually renders the military independent of an superior to the civil power--the attempt to do which by the King of Great Britain was deemed by our fathers such an offense that they assigned it to the world as one of the causes which impelled them to declare their independence. Civil liberty and this kind of martial law cannot endure together; the antagonism is irreconcilable, and, in the conflict, one or the other must perish."

An invasion of Iraq or any of the "Axis of Evil" or "Beyond Axis of Evil" nations is likely to result in a response that means American citizens will die here in the U.S. One incident, one aircraft hijacked, a "dirty nuke" set off in a small town, may well prompt the Bush regime, let's say during the election campaign of 2003-2004, to suspend national elections for a year while his government ensures stability. The precedent for such thinking is now enshrined in GOP politics. Another egotistical politician, Rudolph Giuliani, suggested that he should stay on as Mayor of New York a while longer past his term to make sure "New Yorkers would get through this thing". Would it be any surprise to hear Bush II say the same thing late in 2003 after insurgents would have destroyed part of a city or a chemical weapons cloud spreads over half of a small state?

Many closed-door meetings have been held on these subjects and the notices for these meetings have been closely monitored by the definitive www.cryptome.org. In the event of martial law, the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which has already been largely gutted by the USA Patriot Act and other Bush II actions, would cease to exist. Posse Comitatus has, for over 100 years, served as an important criminal law safeguard proscribing the use of the Army (later, the Air Force and Navy) to "execute the laws," except where expressly authorized by the Constitution or by Congress. With the abrogation of Posse Comitatus and the imposition of martial law, the military would, as it did during post-Civil War Reconstruction in the South, be able to arrest and detain civilians for any flimsy reason. Civilian detainees consigned to federal prisons would be under the control of the Bureau of Prisons while those detained by the military would be subject to the regulations imposed by military commanders. The writ of habeas corpus would be suspended and the family members and legal representatives for detainees would not have a right to see them. This situation has already occurred with those detained in the wake of September 11 without a formal imposition of martial law.

Military tribunals could, as they did in Hawaii during the war, try and convict U.S. civilians. If prisons could not hold all the detainees, the government already has plans to create or reactivate large prison camps in the South and West. Some of these were already used to detain Cuban, Vietnamese, and Haitian "boat people."

In the event of martial law, Draconian censorship laws would be implemented. Even now, the Patriot Act grants authority to obtain an order from the FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) Court requiring any person or business to produce any books, records, documents, or items." That law would undoubtedly be extended to encompass the Internet as well. It should be of little wonder why the Pentagon has brought Iran-contra felon Admiral John Poindexter back from retirement to head the Office of Information Awareness. Coupled with the Office of Information Exploitation, Poindexter's office is seeking ways to identify, block, and determine the sources of seditious material posted on the Internet. Blocked web sites, confiscated computers and servers, and the arrest of non-conforming web site managers would become the rule of the day.

Not that it would need much in the way of pressure, but the broadcast media would similarly be required to air only that which has been approved by government censors. For example, U.S. Air Force scientists are soon to meet with CNN to figure out how to gather and disseminate information. During the war against Yugoslavia, CNN and National Public Radio hosted as interns U.S. Army psychological warfare operatives who worked on news stories concerning the war.

Similar closed-door meetings for "Continuity of Government" have taken place since September 11, 2001. Odd, it seems, that no "regular U.S. citizen" and few first responders have had any input into this process. Chalk that up to the fact that the entire process is classified and a matter of "national security" - the rubric that is used to justify the constant whittling away of the Constitution and its Bill of Rights. If the general public knew that "Continuity" actually means that the abilities of the Internal Revenue Service to continue to collect taxes, the Customs Service to continue to collect duties, and the Environmental Protection Agency to continue to collect fines actually outweigh the health and safety of American citizens, they would be outraged. Hence the secrecy surrounding the continuity plans.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=157×4778
BALTIMORE, PHILADELPHIA MOVE TOWARDS MARTIAL LAW
Saturday, May 19, 2007
JOHN FRITZE, BALTIMORE SUN

Large swaths of Baltimore could be declared emergency areas subject to heightened police enforcement - including a lockdown of streets - under a city councilman's proposal that aims to slow the city's climbing homicide count. The legislation - which met with a lukewarm response from Mayor Sheila Dixon's administration yesterday, and which others likened to martial law - would allow police to close liquor stores and bars, limit the number of people on city sidewalks and halt traffic in areas declared "public safety act zones." It comes as the number of homicides in Baltimore reached 108, up from 98 at the same time last year. . .

In addition to closing businesses in the zones, the bill would permit police to limit the number of people who could gather on sidewalks, in streets or in other outdoor areas. It would prohibit the sale and possession of weapons, though Curran acknowledged that weapons used by criminals are almost always already obtained illegally. Zones could be established solely by the mayor, initially for a two weeks, with the option to renew indefinitely.

Provisions of the bill are identical to a law in Philadelphia that recently gained attention when a mayoral candidate and former city councilman proposed relying more aggressively on the code. That candidate, Michael Nutter, won the Democratic nomination for mayor Tuesday. . .

Philadelphia's law allows the city to impose a curfew in the emergency zones, but Curran said he removed that provision from his bill because it seemed too strict.

The blog:
http://prorev.com/2007/05/baltimore-philadelphia-move-t...

'Desperate' plan to slow crime
Council bill would put areas of city under enforcement some liken to martial law
By John Fritze
Sun reporter
Originally published May 17, 2007

Large swaths of Baltimore could be declared emergency areas subject to heightened police enforcement - including a lockdown of streets - under a city councilman's proposal that aims to slow the city's climbing homicide count.

The legislation - which met with a lukewarm response from Mayor Sheila Dixon's administration yesterday, and which others likened to martial law - would allow police to close liquor stores and bars, limit the number of people on city sidewalks and halt traffic in areas declared "public safety act zones." It comes as the number of homicides in Baltimore reached 108, up from 98 at the same time last year.

"Desperate measures are needed when we're in desperate situations," said City Council Vice President Robert W. Curran, the bill's author. "What I'm trying to do is give the mayor additional tools."

By introducing the legislation, Curran - who is an ally of Dixon - is promoting increased enforcement at a time when City Hall is moving in the opposite direction, shifting away from zero tolerance and toward an approach that focuses more attention on individual criminals. Dixon has sought to ease tension between police and residents who feel the city's past arrest policies were overzealous.

The entire article cont'd:
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/baltimore_city/b...

T++

I said that I disagree with you. That's a long way from calling you, personally, a coward.

Maybe you feel convicted b/c of the conversation that is at hand. I'm not sure why - I know why I personally feel convicted and conflicted. Not sure it it's the same for you.

I'm pissed off that we passed the year 2000 and never figured out to stop shooting at each other. I'm pissed off because I am 44 years old, a mother and a grandmother and I am leaving a world much less better off for them than I was handed. Much less better. And it's easier to be pissed off than to face my own impotence.

I'm pissed off every time I see the picture of a mother and a child in Iraq with terror in their eyes. I'm pissed off when I read about the great successes because they can go to the market again or to school. Then another bomb goes off. I am pissed of by an 'army' who is too cowardly to don a uniform or show their face and who uses civilians - their own countrymen - to terrorize others into doing what they want.

I'm hugely pissed off that we even need a military and even more pissed off by people who don't realize we need a military and insult the people that are doing the heavy lifting in our place.

I hate the idea that mothers from my town, my grandmother, my OWN mother saw their kids go off to serve. To serve what? Mans inhumanity to man? When will mankind become civilized? Do you suppose that's the topic of the millennium in heaven?

Under the current circumstance, if we didn't have the military that we do, we'd fall as a society. That's the long and short of it. And I hate it. It makes me sick to think that other mothers are watching their sons learn how to jump around on prosthetic limbs or worse, burying their kids.

But those kids and their mothers deserve to be honored. And those soldiers deserve to be as well trained as humanly possible before WE ask THEM to go off and do the unthinkable, for US - again.

If you're here to tell me it's my fault - you're right. I meant to do it. It was alot of fun. That's why I have this happy smile on my face.

That's a very admirable post, and for about 99% of it I agree with it. And those kids do deserve to be honored. I just don't see how you can't place a limit on the military, because if there isn't, the military is wide open to be used as a political tool as is in every other military ruled state. We're far from that, but being overly nationalistic and overly supportive of the military giving them unlimited rule is a step in that direction. The men who serve in the military, police forces across the nation, firefighters, and all defensive and rescue forces certainly do deserve to be honored, but given limitless possibilities as to what they can and can't do.

The argument could be used for the 3/4% tax levy. Be supportive of your local police force, and vote for that 3/4% tax levy so our police force have the appropriate training, body armor, and weapons needed to keep crime out of Toledo. If they Mayor were to shove that down your throat, and sensationalize it by saying do it in memory of Keith Dressel, would you agree with it?

As you pointed out T++ the military is both apolitical and ALWAYS civilian run which is unlike most other countries militaries.

"We're far from that, but being overly nationalistic and overly supportive of the military giving them unlimited rule is a step in that direction."

Overly nationalistic and overly supportive still does not mean the military gains any strength over the government. The military has civilian leadership at the top and civilian oversight throughout. Being supportive of the military doesn't create the formula for a military run gov't or military coup. Singular control by one group or one person is the only formula that would account for that.

MikeyA

MikeyA

"Overly nationalistic and overly supportive still does not mean the military gains any strength over the government."

Isn't that what has happened here? People are pissed off because a civilian government exercised its' power over the military in disallowing them to actively exercise in their CBD. What is going to be spawned from this, a law that mandates the military is allowed to perform exercises in local cities without the permission of that local city's government, as backlash to Carty's decision? I don't see that being to far off. That, to me, is giving the military more strength over the government.

Someone lays it on the table like that and you twist it around to stump for a tax levy? I'm pretty much through talking to you.

If you're here to tell me it's my fault - you're right. I meant to do it. It was alot of fun. That's why I have this happy smile on my face.

I'm duplicating the current scenario with another comparative. You say, we need to give unconditional support to do what they need to do at whatever costs. Your support is comparative to Sandy's support of the School Board tax levy, with the 'do it for the kids' mentality. Unconditional support, at whatever the costs. So my question was not irrelevant or distasteful in anyway, and it goes along with my comparative to whether or not you think the Air Force should be allowed to fake an airplane hijacking and fly it around NYC skyscraper's at the expense of causing fear in residents. Its' curiosity. I'm curious as to the limit and oversight you place on the military, if any at all, as to how they operate.

Edit: Don't mistake my tax levy question as support for it. I'm curious of the mentality your expressing. It just seems to me its' the "do it for the kids" mentality of the support for a school board levy.

I'm sure many of you assume I am a conspiracy theorist - a paranoid whacko, and I'm also sure I don't have all the facts about any of what I posted. I honestly don't know what to think. Like Katie - I am furious our country has come to this. On the other hand - perhaps it's always been this way, just not exposed. I realize that I have probably spent most of my life blissfully ignorant of the ugliness that goes on in our govt. & maybe this is why it's hitting me hard, between the eyes now. But I honestly don't know enough to say that I trust, or don't trust these goings on. I heard on the radio the other day that of all the Muslims (in our country), about 5 percent were of the militant mindset who believes Americans deserve to die. That didn't sound like very many to me, until it was pointed out the huge number of Muslims in this country/state/Lucas County - and 5 percent of those numbers can translate into a lot of potential for disaster. Having said that - IF these Marine "urban warfare training" missions are about fighting this type of terrorism on our soil - then I understand it better. Somebody explained to me that while they probably have urban training settings on base, they also need to train in unfamiliar settings. That did make sense to me. But from what I read about Texas & Baltimore, I can also see where this 'urban warfare training' can be used to contain entire towns - for their own good. City council in Baltimore explained that it could mean the marines confiscating citizens' guns, curfews, limited numbers of people allowed on the streets, the shutting down of businesses in the evenings, etc. to prevent crime. THAT reeks of martial law to me, and it is not the job of our military to do that. As far as I know, Baltimore did not approve martial law - yet. But will the day come when towns will resort to this? THAT is my fear. I fear the day when we see soldiers with rifles walking our streets, searching cars & homes - confining people. IF we were hit by a group of militant shooters or bombers - then yes, I can see why it'd be necessary. I guess I wonder what would most likely happen first though - the marines enforcing martial law because of terrorists in Toledo or Lucas County? Or, the marines enforcing martial law here or anywhere in this country to control the citizens or cut down on crime or whatever reason they may need. I honestly don't know, which is why I put all this out here in the first place - I'm asking questions. But don't presume that because I have doubts & questions that I am against our troops or the good they've done, or the prices they've paid. My heart aches for the enlisted a lot, because they have to follow orders - even if they die doing it. Even if they don't agree with the orders. I heard somebody on the radio say that if we require our enlisted men & women to be in Iraq, then have the decency to give them the equipment they need to do the job right - or do he decent thing & bring them home. THAT, I agree with. I watch them on the news & it breaks my heart - they look like children in uniform. But it's always been that way - kids joining the army only to discover the ugliness that is war. As for the "urban warfare training' - I guess I will just assume it's to ensure our safety if we get hit by a terrorist, and hope that our military & govt. doesn't use it for other reasons.

...territory would be less of a reason for conducting urban warfare scenarios than practicing for the uncertainty of being in those environments surrounded by civilians, who may or may not turn out to be military combatants.

Those types of scenarios just can't be simulated ~ I would imagine that there is a critical importance to training troops to navigate not just the physical requirements of conflict in an urban environment, but also the human environment. And if I think about it this way, it really is about not just critically training our troops to protect themselves, but also to better protect the innocent civilians who are embedded in those situations as well.

We do that too.

I got "killed" in a training scenario once when our platoon leader didn't try to keep a group of civilians together as we interrogated their leader. Two "insurgents" blended in with a farmer and his neighbors to get close to us and opened fire.

And last year the Michigan State Police arrested me 50 times. They asked us to help them train. I was a protester who opposed a tree being cut down so we chained ourselves around it (it was actually a steel pole). For my efforts I got a letter of appreciation and a strained wrist (I resisted one of the times).

MikeyA

MikeyA

mikey said - "As for the training. I will tell you it WAS NOT training in response to a terror attack. That is entirely different training. This was urban warfare training. "
Ok, given that I was thinking if it was to prepare to fight a terrorist attack on our soil I could justify & understand this "urban warfare training". But you say it was NOT for terrorist training, but instead, was "urban warfare training" - which STILL tells me nothing. "Urban" is just what the word implies. Ditto "Warfare". So tell me mikey - explain please, what the marines would USE this "urban warfare training" FOR, and WHERE (here or Iraq?) ? In a real life scenareo. Everybody I ask, blows it off with a glib "it's just urban warfare training, nothing to worry about" - and yet, nobody has YET to explain to me, what it is used FOR or WHERE. "Urban Warfare Training" to me, suggests that it is training to be used in the event of riots, control of the masses, etc. - and THAT is supposed to be the job of the National Guard, not the Marines or the Army. Can you say with certainty that it is training for use in places like Iraq? ( I was presuming it was training to protect US from terrorists on our soil, but you said that's not what it was for.) I"m not trying to be difficult. I just would like to know - with straight answers & no double-talk.

MY only warfare experiences are related to the north end of Toledo.

However, I think that this type of training has to do with flushing insurgents out of each city in Irag as the Marines 'clear' a region. Based on that, the importance of having and using abandoned and empty buildings is obvious. They are trying to replicate that same scenario in training props. Citizens included.

I guess it could be said that our Central Business District in Downtown Toledo closely resembles a war-torn city.

Some Economic Director the Fink turned out to be - rah-rah, sis boom bah.
Bah humbug.

"and yet, nobody has YET to explain to me, what it is used FOR or WHERE. "

Urban warfare is fast becoming the most common warfare. I can't think of a modern conflict where we haven't come in contact with some aspect of urban warfare.

The reason it's so popular is because it inflicts heavy damage because you must get up close and personal to the enemy to fight it. Here is an article that does a really good job explaining why Marines are so focused on urban warfare training and why it's so hard to do so.

http://www.military.com/NewContent/0,13190,NI_1104_Urban-P1,00.html

MikeyA

MikeyA

thanks mikey. While it doesn't convince me this training won't be mis-used at some point - it was helpful. And I hope it won't ever be mis-used.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.