To those calling for a civil war, this Marine says military will destroy you

[LiberalNation]

told ya. They follow orders for their paycheck and wont be losing it for some radicals.

http://christopher-calbat.newsvine.com/_news/2010/03/26/4073188-an-article-i-wish-i-would-never-have-to-write-to-those-calling-for-a-civil-war-this-marine-wants-you-to-stop-and-think?pc=25&sp=0#discussion

It's been said that the military is always preparing for war. That is true. We prepare for combat every day. We ran 5 miles today to the rifle range and shot nearly 200 rounds a piece at targets and then ran back. However, we also pray for peace. I would love one day to be completely unnecessary. But alas, I am a realist, and I know that day will never come.

The headlines of the last week have reminded me more of glimpsing at the S2 Daily Briefing Sheets while in theater or the Al-Jazeera than the NY Times or the Washington Post. Think about that for a moment, let it sink in.

Before I get into the main premise of this article - I need to make two statements here.

First and foremost , when it comes to the back and forth of who did what to whom and why - I don't give a @!$%#. It doesn't change the action. In life we're judged by our actions, nothing more, nothing less. One of the greatest things of the military is when it comes to an enemy, the politics behind the situation - don't matter in accomplishing that mission. For the military , life is simple in that regard.

Secondly, Regardless of your political ideology, you've earned the right as US Citizens to say your piece - no matter how wrong it may be. That is your right, and I will give my life to protect it.

But this government of ours is a democracy. We vote for our representatives, and they vote in our interests. Sometimes, the votes don't go our way. That's life, better luck next time. Exhaust your legislative options, and then focus on gaining the required votes and/or seats to achieve your desired legislative vote next election time. That's the way things work.

But the SECOND you start committing acts of violence and vandalism, then you've usurped that Constitution. You in a way have assaulted it. And then you and I (I being every servicemember who has sworn to defend said Constitution) will have a MAJOR PROBLEM.

For those of you calling for a civil war, I implore you to stop and think about what you're saying. Look around your neighborhood and your city. Now imagine using that terrain to survive. Imagine dodging semi-automatic rifle fire as you scramble from cover to cover, dragging your wounded child behind you. Imagine the deafening report of a mortar as it strikes the ground a 150 feet in front of you, the overpressure enough to shatter your teeth and perforate an ear drum. Try and envision a Stryker rolling through neighbor's front lawn or a F/A-18 making lazy loops over your head in Close Air Support for the troops in the distance.

Now with that vision in mind, stop by your local Marine Corps base, being they will be the first military units you'd face in an all out 'civil war' . Look at them for a moment, examine their 'work environment' . They're running the track, they're climbing ropes, they're grappelling with each other in mock hand-to-hand combat, and shooting targets while moving in raid lines on a daily basis. Nearly everyone on that base, down to our 'secretaries' has a combat award of one type or another, they've faced some of the most stressful situations on Earth where succumbing to the stress can get you killed, and they flourished.

Now ask yourselves and be honest - when is the last time you've run anything other than late to work, climbed anything other than a flight of stairs, grappelled with anything other than a paper jam, and shot off anything other than your mouth? When's the last time you were in any situation more stressful than a traffic jam?

Now I'm not blaming you for your career choice, not in the least. I can't think of a single job that's not useful in some way or another. I just want you to simply compare and contrast your work environment with ours and ask yourselves "Who is better suited to win this battle ?" We both know the answer here, and if you doubt that answer, look at the results from Fallujah in 2004. Over 1200 of them 'lost' and we 'lost only 28. That's a 'win-ratio' of almost 60-1, and they've been fighting their whole lives.

Put this in another scenario. You and your officemates think your local pro football team sucks , so you put together your own team of the best your company has and challenge them to a game. Even if your team might be good, they're professionals. This is their job. Your job is to answer phones and type on a keyboard. In short, they've forgotten more than you will ever know about football. The result, will be a slaughter for you, and a practice for them. But at least you'll get a chance to sit at home, ice your wounds and say 'whew I never should've done that!'

Not so with combat. The results of combat are far...FAR..more permanent. There are no second chances, no time for regrets, and no do-overs. This is not Call of Duty.

Now I 'd like to disperse a myth here - many of you think that US military would not fight civilians. I can't speak for all, but in my case - the moment you declare civil war, you're no longer civilians. The moment you attack the constitution, you're now enemies of that constitution. And I swore to defend and support and if necessary give my life for that Constitution and utilize every tool, technique, and weapon at my disposal to do so. And trust me, I'm not alone. ~snip

[darin]

Problem is - with our government usurping the constitution to the applause of congress, the oath 'that marine' took requires him to take action...Our enemy right now is domestic. The greatest enemy to the constitution is President Obama.

[LiberalNation]

they fired on civilians during vietnam, they fired on them again when the ww1 vetrans went to washington to get their promised bonus, don't think it wouldn't happen again. No, the domestic enemy are these militias talking civil war. Obama was duely elected in a fair democratic process. Don't like it, try an vote him out next time.

[revelarts]

That's pretty chilling and sad. I don't think it needs to go to civil war i think it's counter productive. The people that caused the problems will be FAR from the fields of battle waiting for the dust to clear and just swoop back down onto the levers of control with "solutions" to keep us safe and "never let it happen again" if we give up xyz. And they'll be more dead U.S. soldiers citizens who THOUGHT they where doing the right thing and U.S. citizens soldiers who knew better. A loose loose for the people.

I'd encourage that soldier to check out the Oathkeepers.org website. many soldiers and police have pledged that they will Uphold the oath to the constitution which means ultimately to the people not the gov't in washington. Here's the short version of the pledge they make that they feel dove tails to the oath to the constitution

1. We will NOT obey orders to disarm the American people.

2. We will NOT obey orders to conduct warrantless searches of the American people

3. We will NOT obey orders to detain American citizens as “unlawful enemy combatants” or to subject them to military tribunal.

4. We will NOT obey orders to impose martial law or a “state of emergency” on a state.

5. We will NOT obey orders to invade and subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty.

6. We will NOT obey any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps.

7. We will NOT obey any order to force American citizens into any form of detention camps under any pretext.

8. We will NOT obey orders to assist or support the use of any foreign troops on U.S. soil against the American people to “keep the peace” or to “maintain control."

9. We will NOT obey any orders to confiscate the property of the American people, including food and other essential supplies.

10.We will NOT obey any orders which infringe on the right of the people to free speech, to peaceably assemble, and to petition their government for a redress of grievances.

I hope thousand will continue to join and keep the pledge. (you might want to give it some thought) Both Bush and Obama and many other presidents before pissed o the constitution against the clear rights of the people in the name of either "safety" or "well being". As much as each of those are great commodities. liberty is what the constitution was rooted in.
And that letter confirms another of the founders fears, that a "standing army" is a detriment to any peoples liberties.

.
As far as the military being able to trash the people. -as I Said I think CIVIL WAR IS A BAD IDEA, A LOOSE LOOSE for the PEOPLE-- but If the military is so effective why haven't we clearly won in Iraq or Afghanistan in the past 8 years. Are the Iraqis and Afghans that big and bad? I know that the U.S. is full of couch potatoes but there are a bunch of pissed sobs that have been packing guns and crap for years. I used to think that the U.S.'s advanced fire power and tech gave us the killing advantage over any opponent but after all these years against an underfunded, underarmed foe I've begun to wonder how much of an advantage all this advanced tech and training really give you against a enemy? (Unless we're not over there to win.. hmmm something to consider?)

peace
:salute:

[darin]

Obama was duely elected in a fair democratic process. Don't like it, try an vote him out next time.



arguably fair process....but that's beside the point. Since taking office he's shat upon the constitution in a crazy-ego-maniacal power-grab/invention. He and the congress are dooming our nation and folk like you sit back and cheer him on. He and large portions of congress are a domestic threat to the constitution.

[LiberalNation]

that's why we have courts, not militias. Bush packed the SC with conservatives, I wouldn't be suprised if you won a few.

[namvet]

sure would like to see a Marine rip the OP's head of and shit down his neck. i'd pay to see that

[BoogyMan]

they fired on civilians during vietnam, they fired on them again when the ww1 vetrans went to washington to get their promised bonus, don't think it wouldn't happen again. No, the domestic enemy are these militias talking civil war. Obama was duely elected in a fair democratic process. Don't like it, try an vote him out next time.

The problem with your comment is that I have heard no-one calling for civil war, but I have heard people say they are afraid that the actions of the socialist/Marxist in the white house will ultimately cause a civil war.

Oh, and by the way, your article was deleted by the author.

Do you really have so little respect for the constitution that you search for things to try and scare those fearing for our future away from dissent? Sounds like the tactics of Marx to me.

[LiberalNation]

you musta never met pale rider, plenty of people have been calling for civil war.

[namvet]

deleted by the author. :laugh2: this kid knows how to pick em. just like his nose:lol:

[Mr. P]

Ln...ahhhh your link...


This article was deleted by the author.

Why do you suppose that is? Cuz someone was tallkin out their ass maybe?

[LiberalNation]

cuz someones in the military and talking bout the military killing US citizens.

[namvet]

cuz someones in the military and talking bout the military killing US citizens.

your ships sinkin' fast kid best get a lifeboat while you can !!!!:lol:

[chloe]

they fired on civilians during vietnam, they fired on them again when the ww1 vetrans went to washington to get their promised bonus, don't think it wouldn't happen again. No, the domestic enemy are these militias talking civil war. Obama was duely elected in a fair democratic process. Don't like it, try an vote him out next time.


I hope nobody fires on me or my kids !!!

[SassyLady]

cuz someones in the military and talking bout the military killing US citizens.

Here's his latest:


A rewrite of a Marine's call for peace and pause that had been reduced into sheer irrelevance....and an apology.
News Type: Opinion — Sat Mar 27, 2010 9:04 PM EDT.us-news, military, peace, us-government
By Sgt C USMC
advertisement

(I want to apologize to all of you who posted your thoughts and feelings regarding the prior article - I de-published the article to rewrite it to this, and it will not re-publish. I understand many people put a lot of effort into those comments, as I put a lot of effort into my replies. If any of the Newsvine community can tell me how I can get the comments back , I will gladly do so. My biggest apology is for my failure as a moderator. I should have done a better part to keep the conversation to the topic at hand and avoid responding to derailing comments.)

This is intended to be a rewrite of the article that was written - because some people obviously DON'T get it.

The article I wrote yesterday was intended to be a call for peace, and a moment for pause. In all honesty, it was merely my venting after reading dozens of headlines regarding the type of violence in the US that I was more accustomed to seeing on the daily intel briefing sheets while in theater. I never expected the response I got, and I must admit while some of the comments that I received were some of the greatest thoughts and words I've ever seen - some were words I'd hope no human being would never utter to another. My family and myself were threatened, if for no other reason than because my opinions differed from someone else's. Obviously, the intent of my message was convoluted and lost. This is an attempt to correct it.

Every service member has sworn an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. There's no grey area to that. It's as black and white as it gets.

I nor any service member wants to combat civilians in this or any other country. I don't know how many times I can reiterate that - we do not want it to happen. Even as we prepare for war, we pray for peace.

We lace up our boots every morning in an attempt to preserve the freedoms that democracy has awarded us. We all love our country, and we would give our lives to protect it and its way of life.

Military members must have faith in the system of Government, or the whole chain of command and system of military discipline falls apart. We are rarely given all of the details of our entire mission, and instead are expected to complete seemingly ambiguous tasks in support of that mission with the belief that we are doing the right thing . When we find an order illegal , we're obligated not to follow it, and report it.

So call me naive, but yes. I do have faith in the Constitution and the mechanisms inside of it to correct itself and removing people unworthy of holding office. If I didn't , I never would've taken an oath to defend it. You just can't defend part of the Constitution, or the parts you agree with. It's all or nothing. I choose to defend all of it ,even the parts I may disagree with.

Probably the most foolish choice of words I chose to use in that article were the words 'civil war' . I just shouldn't have written them. But I could think of no other way to articulate what I felt it would require for the military to become involved. A civilian uprising wouldn't be sufficient, it would require an all out civil war.

Much of the comments reflected on this poor choice of words - and successfully derailed the conversation from a call for peace and to use the democratic system to resolve our differences, to people arguing over who's side would destroy who. I'll admit, I too was guilty in that regard - and my attempt to compare military and civilian life easily came across as boisterous and hostile, even though its' intent was to be succinct and concise. For that, I apologize.

BUT DON'T YOU @!$%#ING GET IT?!? In a war, no one wins. Even if you're not wounded, it doesn't mean you leave whole. The images, the feelings, the thoughts never leave you, they're forever etched into your mind, and they become a part of who you are. It's been said that "the people who die in war are the lucky ones - they don't have to live with the memories of what transpired." As morbid as it sounds, in many cases its true.

And to what end ? What would be left AFTER this 'war' was concluded ? Would anything really change ? Or would we slowly sink back into the quagmire of the status quo, resort back to what's comfortable, and then future generations will be arguing over the very reasoning behind this conflict , just as we now debate the real reason behind the civil war ? What would our children, and their children say when they look back at this point in our history ? Seriously, what does anyone expect to gain from fighting their friends, family, neighbors over a difference of opinion ? That's what this really boils down to - people are screaming for blood because they feel differently than someone else.

If that's not the definition of madness, I don't know what is. It needs to stop. Now.

The senatorial elections are coming in November 2010. Everyone who feels passionately about this country , one way or the other, should get out and vote for who THEY think will best represent them . The same in November of 2012. This is your Constitutional right - this is your step in democracy. You get to choose who represents you and your views in the Government.

If you choose to vote using force instead, not only will you fail in your attempt, but your cause will suffer on account of your actions. You will hurt not only yourself, but also every individual who ever aligns with that cause in the future. Consider that when you're making your decision - our causes are not typically portrayed by our most noble or thoughtful members, but rather the most crude and thoughtless. They forever taint what might otherwise be a worthwhile message.

So once again, I , an NCO of Marines, call on all people both military and civilian to exercise your Constitutional rights and participate in the democratic process. I urge you to stop reacting, and start instead thinking and considering. I urge you not to immediately dismiss opinions other than your own.

I urge you to open your minds and consider that maybe, just maybe, there's not a single one of us who has all of the answers, and that includes myself.

In short, I urge all of you - to treat everyone else as you would want to be treated, whether you agree with them or not.

http://christopher-calbat.newsvine.com/_news/2010/03/27/4080107-a-rewrite-of-a-marines-call-for-peace-and-pause-that-had-been-reduced-into-sheer-irrelevanceand-an-apology

[LiberalNation]

same thing, we will fire on civilians if they rebel.

[DragonStryk72]

same thing, we will fire on civilians if they rebel.

Actually, no. That is your personal interpretation, but that's not the point of his writing.

[namvet]

same thing, we will fire on civilians if they rebel.

yes we will

[BoogyMan]

same thing, we will fire on civilians if they rebel.

Ah, so now that you align yourself with the socilist/Marxist set, you want to silence rebellion by violence? I was right, your side of the aisle is determined to CAUSE a civil war.

[Trigg]

Would our government go to war against it's own citizens today if states voted to leave the union????

IMHO if a state holds a vote and the majority of the citizens want to form their own country I would be against forcing them to stay.

Thoughts???

[Gaffer]

Would our government go to war against it's own citizens today if states voted to leave the union????

IMHO if a state holds a vote and the majority of the citizens want to form their own country I would be against forcing them to stay.

Thoughts???

I'm all for that. If my state doesn't do that I would be looking to move to the new country.

At some point in the not too distant future that is what's going to happen if things aren't changed quickly in washington. The dark lord will be like Lincoln and divide the country. Except in the end he will lose. He doesn't have the good of the nation at heart.

[SassyLady]

same thing, we will fire on civilians if they rebel.

Here's what one of theposters had to say about Libbs posting this same article on the National Guard forum.


Note to moderators: This thread should be deleted.

1) The news article is not "News." Is is the opinion of an over-confident Marine.

2) It fosters discord

3) It in not in unison with the mission of the forum.

4) The responses are not going to be civil

Note to RandyB: Please don't post things like this, post real news pertaining to the National Guard, or Army.

In fact, just after I read this the thread was deleted.

[LiberalNation]

locked last time I checked. Military dudes don't like discord in the ranks, that board is better than most tho. If you notice a mod was a main contributer to that debate.

[HogTrash]

told ya. They follow orders for their paycheck and wont be losing it for some radicals.

http://christopher-calbat.newsvine.com/_news/2010/03/26/4073188-an-article-i-wish-i-would-never-have-to-write-to-those-calling-for-a-civil-war-this-marine-wants-you-to-stop-and-think?pc=25&sp=0#discussion
I'm afraid you and the misguided young Marine are both mistaken...It is not "Civil War" that is the issue, but "Revolution" that people are discussing.

The Marine is likely an Obama supporter, of liberal leanings and/or possibly a minority who believes his primary duty is to protect Obama and the US government...He could not be more wrong!

The military requires it's personel to swear an oath to defend and uphold the constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic and to obey any and all lawful orders by all superiors.

Many of the lessor intelligent military personel will be confused about which directive takes priority...Protecting the Constitution takes priority over following the orders of people whose policies violate it.

In the first place, the military is forbidden to be used as a police force against US citizens by the Posse Comitatus Act and any law designed to circumvent this is null and void.

And second place, revolution would only become necessary if and when US citizens decided the government was guilty of not upholding the Constitution and subversion.

Determining what is "unconstitutional" might sometimes be a grey area that's best decided in the courts but on many issues it is as simple as black and white.

For example, if your right to speak freely or own a gun has been violated or suspended, you don't have to be a Harvard Law scholar to hand down a guilty verdict against the government.

Any serviceman or police officer who is ordered to fire on US civilians that are simply defending their constitutional rights and way of life, should arrest or kill if necessary, whoever gave them the order.

In fact it is the sworn duty of all military and police personel to join with those civilians in their struggle to protect their Constitution, regardless of who their advisary may be.

The military does not serve the government, but are protectors of US citizens and defenders of their constitutional rights and if ordered to kill their fellow Americans, I imagine there will be much conflict within their ranks.

[Mr. P]

I'm afraid you and the misguided young Marine are both mistaken...It is not "Civil War" that is the issue, but "Revolution" that people are discussing.

The Marine is likely an Obama supporter, of liberal leanings and/or possibly a minority who believes his primary duty is to protect Obama and the US government...He could not be more wrong!

The military requires it's personel to swear an oath to defend and uphold the constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic and to obey any and all lawful orders by all superiors.

Many of the lessor intelligent military personel will be confused about which directive takes priority...Protecting the Constitution takes priority over following the orders of people whose policies violate it.

In the first place, the military is forbidden to be used as a police force against US citizens by the Posse Comitatus Act and any law designed to circumvent this is null and void.

And second place, revolution would only become necessary if and when US citizens decided the government was guilty of not upholding the Constitution and subversion.

Determining what is "unconstitutional" might sometimes be a grey area that's best decided in the courts but on many issues it is as simple as black and white.

For example, if your right to speak freely or own a gun has been violated or suspended, you don't have to be a Harvard Law scholar to hand down a guilty verdict against the government.

Any serviceman or police officer who is ordered to fire on US civilians that are simply defending their constitutional rights and way of life, should arrest or kill if necessary, whoever gave them the order.

In fact it is the sworn duty of all military and police personel to join with those civilians in their struggle to protect their Constitution, regardless of who their advisary may be.

The military does not serve the government, but are protectors of US citizens and defenders of their constitutional rights and if ordered to kill their fellow Americans, I imagine there will be much conflict within their ranks.

Bambam knows all that which is why (IMO) he wants this...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHmecy94z-M