Loyalty of the Armed Forces

Sounds like a bloody, prolonged civil war waiting to happen.

There's a very clear distinction here. One is that the constitution is not in effect. The other is that it's a worthless piece of paper.

Because you lack the ability to reason, you have gone a step too far in your rhetoric and outed yourself as an enemy of the state.

We're already at that point. They're releasing viruses and drive people crazy with rage. Then another agency spies on their Facebook and uses mind control to neutralize the threat instead of just giving them access to medicine.

They're specifically doing it to dismantle the economy and the government is protecting them ruining the landscape.

Fucking McKill yourself. The Constitution isn't in effect BECAUSE it's a worthless piece of paper, you incredible idiot. If those in power, i.e., the ones with the REAL firepower cared about it, it would be WORTH something.

The American armed forces is composed almost entirely of useful idiots. They're there for a paycheck and they don't care about any moral implications or who's giving the orders. Anyone who enters capable of independent thought or empathy has it beaten out of them in boot camp, reconditioned into a robotic killing machine who won't realize how wrong his actions are or how Jewish the leadership was until he gets nightmares about kids' heads exploding and his brothers in arms screaming for their mother as they bleed out years later. The truly gifted who enter the military and retain their problem solving skills are sociopathic and become the heartless officers who see everything in numbers instead of human lives. The very few who retain their humanity are the medics.

Your impotent rage does not change the equation, and it never will. Jow Forums has already been inoculated against your communist street agitation.

>look, mom! I ignored them again. That makes me right!^^

It's really a very shallow effort when you bring in the backup stooges running exactly the same canned lines at every attempt.

I'm looking forward to the fun times ahead.

Stop replying to me, you kike. You want to fill this board with worthless hope in things that are untrue, whereas I'm about realism. And hate to break it t you, but the "backup" are other real Jow Forumsfags. Get lost in a car crushing plant, please.

I was going to mention that you are doing an even worse job than moarfeces, but then you resorted to calling me a kike. You're really slipping.

Depends on how cucked said soldiers are. I'm sure some will blindly follow orders while others will break off and fight.

It's worst than that. Most of them will become traitors to their own nation and collaborators for the regime like in any other occupation of tyrannical force or government throughout the history. While the nation suffer under the boot, government worker will enjoy countless privileges.

Every soldier I have ever met regards "civilians" (said in that manner) as beneath them, which is funny since the military is the last stop before prison for most of them. They treat their fellow Americans with disdain now, so yeah, they'll be blasting away American skulls right next to the white helmets given the chance.

1.3 million active duty military, that's 26,000 per state, there are 300 million Americans and 360 million guns in their hands. It doesn't matter if they sided with the government or not.

Attached: I get why their coats are red but why arent their pants yellow.png (583x438, 43K)

Why are you so dreadful with opposition research? Blue helmets are the meme, not white ones.

Most Americans don't give a flying fuck about anything but their paychecks and refrigerators. Close all McDonald's, then you might have some truly angry people.

Nothing is ever going to happen.

Of course they'd stay loyal. No question.

Service members and vets love to talk shit about how they're even more distrusting than civilians, of the armed forces and the federal government in general.

They only feel that way when there's something in it for them.

Fucking crayon eating shit bags.

Just like in almost all civil war scenarios, there will be generals/leadership who faction off from the state and command armies of rebels.

army is mostly nigs beaners and women and none of them have enough national identity to follow their oath.

So when the slogan was an army of one, they meant there was literally one competent white guy in the whole army to worry about. Phew. I think we can handle that, even if he'll probably take out a dozen cities before we get him.

what they mean by "an army of one" is "everyone for themselves come get those bennies yo!"

Speaking from experience most people in the military wouldn’t even stay in if there life was in danger and only collect paychecks doing menial low skill jobs. Can’t speak for marines or army infantry

Oh man, so if those bennies are cut off then it's not looking so good for the command structure.

CIA cope

Samefagging, user? I mean Dale from King of the Hill.

They will absolutely stay loyal to the government.
The military itself is like a form of MK Ultra where soldiers are taught there is honor in always following orders of their government.
Soldiers look at civilians as lesser beings that lack discipline.
As long as a government keeps the armed forces comfortable enough, they will always side with the government.

>look ma, I'm posting the same thing from a different IP!

>Nothing is ever going to happen.
if we get a kim jong un like leader the mcburgerkings will probably be closed. but ultimately we the people wouldn't have to do anything anyway, wealthy corporate interests wouldn't allow any such leader be elected or let them interfere with their equity stream.

yeah so a week or so of killing and raping and blowing up their own cities and towns and then once everyone is good and angry at them they splinter off into raider bands

happens every time

LOL god you're a fucking faggot.

Aren't officers also asked if they're willing to open fire on US citizens?

>wealthy corporate interests wouldn't allow any such leader be elected or let them interfere with their equity stream.

>implying they wouldn't be all for him and make good friends with him.

They turned their guns on peaceful whites in little rock. They join up with FBI and kills us in Ruby Ridge and Waco. They will obey orders for global homo no matter the cost.

There was an internal survey some years ago, and people were quietly encouraged to give the "correct" answer. It is not my information that this is standard practice.

Soldiers have a duty to protect and defend the constitution, and the people (citizens) of the United States. Any order to do otherwise would be unlawful. The president can not order you to do these things. If he did, the generals would say no, the lawyers would say no. Hard to believe for some people, but the soldiers are still US citizens. They still hold a stake in the future of the country. They're not going to be willing participants in their own destruction to take out the 2 things they swore to protect.

>Soldiers look at civilians as lesser beings that lack discipline.

Regardless of where one stands on the issue of troop loyalty in dark times, you must agree that is a true fact.

Depends on how much government is willing to increase their pay and benefits. If its AOC and the squad, who basically despise US armed forces and LE, you can bet they'd turn in a second against the US government.

>The president can not order you to do these things. If he did, the generals would say no, the lawyers would say no. H

That's a legal fact, but remember how Obama fired all the generals who would say "no"? I do.

Soldier? Or disgruntled former soldier who couldn't hack it.

this. look at other countries in south america and how the armed forces stay loyal to the government as long as they get their benefits.

What? Where do you get this idea?
>honor in following government
Nobody in the military likes the government. We dont give a flying flip. Some people are here for a paycheck, it's just a job. Some are here for college. Guess what? They're gone by 4 years. The rest who want to serve stay in. We all swore the same oath. Protect my people, protect the constitution, with a DUTY to disobey unlawful orders. If your commander gives an unlawful order like killing US citizens, and you follow it, its your ass on the line. Were not here for the government, we're here for civilians. If some dude is seeing civilians as less than, then fuck that guy.

Both. They are inherently different people, that much is agreeable.

Half would, but the other half are already infiltrated by foreign operatives, under "joint" allied programs, contracted through various military programs.

So, in retrospect. Half would kill whoever under orders. Because they are from different nations.

Difficult question (I am an army officer by the way). If it was phrased as 'just go be evil bad guy and oppress etc' then, no, the military would not support it. Certainly if it happened tomorrow. The officers in very large part (that are mostly conservative with libertarian leanings) would not go along with it - and we would likely refer to our oath. Soldiers in general would not go along with it. There is zero chance this would work.

But that is not likely how it will be phrased. Rather, there will be 'bad people' that have to be opposed. It will be a process, and not a sudden change. So military might be used to police, maybe against those in opposition to the government. But so long as there is not a sudden attempted shift then I see no reason for the military to not grumble, but obey.

That was at some Marine training base as well. It was not a general survey of actual soldiers, just some trainees.

Where in the FUCK do you find awkward pictures like this

Funny, I don't remember being taught to blindly worship the government, but just to follow the chain of command and even then most of us grunts at company level know that our civilian political leaders are retarded. Any more words of wisdom from the never-served faggot?

> some dude

ALL soldiers see themselves as some kind of action hero above civilians.

>would the armed forces stay loyal to the government
the surest sign that they would not is that gov has not ordered them to do so.

>So military might be used to police, maybe against those in opposition to the government. But so long as there is not a sudden attempted shift then I see no reason for the military to not grumble, but obey.
You just contradicted yourself. If they are willing to break posse comitatus, then they're actively harming or killing their precious fellow Americans already.

>ALL soldiers see
There is no such creature.

Doubt. Shit ton never even see combat.

>break posse comitatus

Would you mind pointing out where in the constitution Posse Comitatus is located? After you do that you might understand why it would not be an issue if the government did not want it to be one.

It's almost like if you pay someone off, give them goods, services, medicine and access to doctors, and housing, that they'll stay loyal no matter what.

Attached: commandant anon.jpg (336x250, 18K)

Only the young ones that are fresh out of boot see themselves as this. After a year or two the military bureaucracy and politics wears down most of them where they're fine with mediocrity until their contract is up.

>Would you mind pointing out where in the constitution Posse Comitatus is located?
Thanks for explaining for me how the gov't would get soldiers to turn on the citizenry.

which is exactly my point. If you are getting paid by the army you WILL follow orders.

It has happened and it is happening across the world in many different countries.

>this just in: soldiers refuse to shoot their own families
Imagine my shock

So, answer my question, Mr. or Ms. Or Attack-helicopter Army Officer to reply - Do you or do you not have various programs under joint customs to allow allied NATO operatives to act and work along with the government military?

Which is why it's so important that no one ever gives those orders. Our elections are supposed to weed those kooks out. It's ok to laugh.

Understanding that it would not be 'turn on', but rather 'enforce lawful orders against a domestic enemy' is what you need to understand. And to understand the process of shifting perception to make that happen. Only then can you truly understand what is going on and understand the reason people in political parties may be doing things.

As long as you think 'but Posse Comitatu will protect us', you are doomed. Because, as I assume you have just discovered, it is not a part of the constitution. In fact the founders saw a role for the military to play in domestic enforcement of law. PC is simply a law, and nothing more. A law that can be changed at any time, and has been changed already many times. Even following the law as it is, presents almost no barrier to the government (the President need only say 'yeah, this is an emergency' and no more').

the military is conservative, and therefore most would defect if the government sent the military after conservatives. However those numbers would be replaced by democrat illegals as fodder. It would take time for many to defect however because their orders would be based on lies, just like they always are. It would start off as "the communists are causing chaos in the cities / attempting a coup, so here's a list of people to take out, and enforce military law, etc." But it would happen because the military would eventually find that conservatives were being targeted. That's why the EU wants a european military, so they can send german troops to france, etc. The US would use those tactics. The minority / left leaning troops would be sent to the rural areas.

>As long as you think 'but Posse Comitatu will protect us', you are doomed. Because, as I assume you have just discovered, it is not a part of the constitution.

You assumed wrong, but you're a righteous path.
>In fact the founders saw a role for the military to play in domestic enforcement of law.
Or are you?

Back to your point on shifting perceptions, yes that is an area that needs more study.

imagine her looking like this at your cock omgggg

The military attracts bootlickers, of course they will side with the government

Toothy-BJ. Not good times.

There are a number of 'Joint' programs out there. We have foreign military here in the states all the time. Usually attending schools, a few getting 'Joint' time. Joint time (or points) is the concept that in order to be well balanced you need to serve outside of your own area - so a well rounded Navy officer needs to spend some time working with the Army as an example The best 'Joint' time is with a NATO ally, working with foreign military. It is a requirement for War College (need this to get full bird). The focus on working with other Military is that the US sees itself as a world leader. To support this we have guys in our military working with 'their guys' all the time.

What you are really asking (I think) is if there is a plan to bring in UN helmets to enforce evil Obama laws. No, there is not. In part because there is no need for such a thing. Treaties could be enforced, for example, to allow allied partners to operate in US soil in defense of the US (against an outside invading force). But that is about it.

Rather you should ask 'is there a law that prevents'. That is where you need to start your question.

>leaf
Lol

Attached: communism-working-class-comic.png (1500x500, 76K)

No the military attracts mostly poor people whose allegiances are fickle at best.

>Back to your point on shifting perceptions, yes that is an area that needs more study.

Oh they certainly did expect the military to take part in domestic operations. And for a very long time the military did as the occasion demanded.

By the way, the Military (officer side) has no interest in taking part in domestic operations beyond disaster relief programs (and not even really then in general). We would much rather focus on 'war fighting'. Domestic stuff would be seen as something we want nothing to do with. And that includes 'border operations'.

Some argument could be made for Special Ops conducting Domops in a sort of SWAT capacity.

>What you are really asking (I think) is if there is a plan to bring in UN helmets to enforce evil Obama laws. No, there is not.

You are either lying or ill-informed.

>By the way, the Military (officer side) has no interest in taking part in domestic operations beyond disaster relief programs

I don't think you've kept up.

>mostly poor people
You need a bachelors degree to be an officer.

Im more interested in the loyalty of foreign nations armed forces. Can I expect a shipment of Chinese or Russian AKs?

>Thinks the backbone of the military is made of entirely officers.
Any more dumb things you want to say?

There is a limit to how many enlisted personnel you can have. Officers are not limited.

I'm serving right now. I have no doubt that if asked by a reporter, any officer would say 'of course I support'. I would if asked. Even if after when we are talking we would say 'fuck that shit' to each other.

You should also educate yourself to the differences between the Federal military and the National Guard. They are not the same in this area.

Not from my experience, we mostly see ourselves as janitors with guns, crippling depressing and alcoholic tendencies.

t. 5 year undeployed infantryman

There are practical limits to both

Yeah, I wondered what infantrymen do when they're not training or deployed. Cleaning, and drinking sounds right. Us desk jockeys have jobs and such to keep us busy, so that's nice I guess. Keep up the good fight brother.

t. Legal

why do you think isreali troops train in alaska?
The plan is to have israel take over the most valuable state. Pax judaica

Garrison is hell my friend. It often depends on what unit you are in.

Soldiers throughout history have always been loyal to their commanders. American soldiers aren't special. They're going to kill whoever they are told. Very few will rebel.

1 post by id

>Actually believing this

When he said if you had anymore dumb things to say, user I believe that was rhetorical question. Are you the type that thinks having too many chiefs and not enough Indians is a good idea?

Attached: 3547hw.png (720x303, 96K)

>why do you think isreali troops train in alaska?
To test missiles.

They train elsewhere to develop better operational skills. Texas, etc.

PACOM problems. At least I got to go to Japan.

Damnit this was meant for this