Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Drew Dowdell

Does this concern anyone else?

60 posts in this topic

On October 1, the Pentagon, for the first time ever, dedicated an Army force specifically to NorthCom, which is in charge of securing not some foreign region but the United States of America.

The Pentagon’s decision to dedicate the First Brigade Combat Team to NorthCom has raised alarms, especially in the context of the current economic crisis. In Bush’s National Security Presidential Directive 51, he lays out his authority in the event of a catastrophic emergency. In such an emergency, “the President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government” and will coordinate with state, local, and tribal governments, along with private sector owners of infrastructure.

NSPD 51 defines a catastrophic emergency as “any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government function.”

Notice the use of the word “or” above. In our current circumstances, it might be more relevant to read the definition this way: “any incident . . . that results in extraordinary levels of . . . disruption severely affecting the U.S. . . . economy.”

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On October 1, the Pentagon, for the first time ever, dedicated an Army force specifically to NorthCom, which is in charge of securing not some foreign region but the United States of America.

The Pentagon’s decision to dedicate the First Brigade Combat Team to NorthCom has raised alarms, especially in the context of the current economic crisis. In Bush’s National Security Presidential Directive 51, he lays out his authority in the event of a catastrophic emergency. In such an emergency, “the President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government” and will coordinate with state, local, and tribal governments, along with private sector owners of infrastructure.

NSPD 51 defines a catastrophic emergency as “any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government function.”

Notice the use of the word “or” above. In our current circumstances, it might be more relevant to read the definition this way: “any incident . . . that results in extraordinary levels of . . . disruption severely affecting the U.S. . . . economy.”

Blackwater'll have franchises in major urban areas. Track us via our cell phones. Maybe send a Predator drone out to search for rabble-rousers. It'll keep the riff-raff in check, minus the drug trade which they'll want regulate. And whores. To keep morale up a bit.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On October 1, the Pentagon, for the first time ever, dedicated an Army force specifically to NorthCom, which is in charge of securing not some foreign region but the United States of America.

The Pentagon’s decision to dedicate the First Brigade Combat Team to NorthCom has raised alarms, especially in the context of the current economic crisis. In Bush’s National Security Presidential Directive 51, he lays out his authority in the event of a catastrophic emergency. In such an emergency, “the President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government” and will coordinate with state, local, and tribal governments, along with private sector owners of infrastructure.

NSPD 51 defines a catastrophic emergency as “any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government function.”

Notice the use of the word “or” above. In our current circumstances, it might be more relevant to read the definition this way: “any incident . . . that results in extraordinary levels of . . . disruption severely affecting the U.S. . . . economy.”

Sounds like somebody's scared :D

Sounds like somebody's taking precautionary measures against an uprising not seen since the Civil War.

Meh, no worries though. This country has fallen too far to ever present a truly united front again anyway.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
anyone else half expect some "crisis" to emerge around November 3rd?

Reminds me of the buildup for ECOMCON. I suspect Cheney will declare martial law around the 3rd and proclaim himself dictator for life.. :)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On October 1, the Pentagon, for the first time ever, dedicated an Army force specifically to NorthCom, which is in charge of securing not some foreign region but the United States of America.

The Pentagon’s decision to dedicate the First Brigade Combat Team to NorthCom has raised alarms, especially in the context of the current economic crisis. In Bush’s National Security Presidential Directive 51, he lays out his authority in the event of a catastrophic emergency. In such an emergency, “the President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government” and will coordinate with state, local, and tribal governments, along with private sector owners of infrastructure.

NSPD 51 defines a catastrophic emergency as “any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government function.”

Notice the use of the word “or” above. In our current circumstances, it might be more relevant to read the definition this way: “any incident . . . that results in extraordinary levels of . . . disruption severely affecting the U.S. . . . economy.”

Meh we oughta send them into to gang-infested cities and have a good old fashion fight on crime. Maybe civilians could join the anti-gang NorthCom National Guard.

I'm not particularly worried about this, what are they doing to do? Declare martial law? Do you really think citizens would stand for that? Hell the general populace of the US probably has more weaponry than the entire US army does (granted their weapons are more effective :lol:) But the point is that Americans would not stand for a despot and would fight, violently if need be, to prevent such an occurrence.

Now if democrats were in control and re-instated the Assault weapons ban + various other gun measures and THEN did this, then yes i would be worried, but in its current form i find it nothing more than an oddity.

Edited by Teh Ricer Civic!
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't been around much because of this reason...

Its all sort of coming together right now and I understand a lot of what i have been subjected to the past couple years.

That's about all i can say. :wink: cough* maybe later i will go into some details but don't be alarmed.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Reminds me of the buildup for ECOMCON. I suspect Cheney will declare martial law around the 3rd and proclaim himself dictator for life.. :)

Who do you like in the Preakness?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who do you like in the Preakness?

"I only bet on sure things."

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe we are getting ready for our third attempt to take over Canada?

Maybe Canada will invade us! That way we would could finally get the metric system, universal health care, and lacrosse. And widespead availability of Tim Hortons, Earls, The Keg and Western Pizza :)

Edited by moltar
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe Canada will invade us! That way we would could finally get the metric system! :)

Which brings me to another question. If 2 NATO countries simultaneously invade the other at the exact same time (literally same millisecond), does that mean that NATO is obliged to fight on the side of both countries?

And considering that Tim Hortons has only had marginal success in coming to America, i doubt it, at least not any sooner than they would have come on their own.

Edited by Teh Ricer Civic!
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Which brings me to another question. If 2 NATO countries simultaneously invade the other at the exact same time (literally same millisecond), does that mean that NATO is obliged to fight on the side of both countries?

And considering that Tim Hortons has only had marginal success in coming to America, i doubt it, at least not any sooner than they would have come on their own.

No idea... interestingly, I know of a couple tiny towns in Ohio that have Tim Hortons, none here in the Phoenix area AFAIK. Speaking of Canadian chains I like, here in the Phoenix area, we have Earl's, The Keg, Boston's, and Western Pizza... the Denver area has the first 3 also.

Edited by moltar
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No idea... interestingly, I know of a couple tiny towns in Ohio that have Tim Hortons, none here in the Phoenix area AFAIK. Speaking of Canadian chains I like, here in the Phoenix area, we have Earl's, The Keg, Boston's, and Western Pizza... the Denver area has the first 3 also.

Tim Hortons is slowly expanding in the northern states. They had 2 places down in Florida back in the day but those were eventually shut down.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe we are getting ready for our third attempt to take over Canada?

That was the first thing that came to my mind when I read this. That'd be totally unfair, seeing as we Canadians are still on strike. :(

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it does seem distressing in spite of the usual. sadly more aren't coming home and reentering our workforce and starting new companies and reindustrializing this nation.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe we are getting ready for our third attempt to take over Canada?

"they're not even a real country anyway..." -S.P.B.L.U. :lol:

-----

All joking aside: Reason No.357 why the 2nd Amendment is essential

to all that makes our Nation the best in the world. STILL.

Edited by Sixty8panther
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the point is that Americans would not stand for a despot and would fight, violently if need be, to prevent such an occurrence.

This much, I think we can count on.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This much, I think we can count on.

:unitedstates::metal:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
it does seem distressing in spite of the usual. sadly more aren't coming home and reentering our workforce and starting new companies and reindustrializing this nation.

Well if they weren't re-enlisting and if our dollar falls precipitously in value then your wish may come true. The weakness of the dollar has been good for USA manufacturing, however as the dollar slowly begins to strengthen we will once again loose what little edge we have in production (other than productivity) on the global market.

Besides, during a time of economic downturn i do believe their job security is infinitely better in the military at this given time.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And you wonder why people keep leaving C&G. You people are paranoid. Enough negativity already. This is primarily because of Katrina and Ike etc. Bush's term is up, Cheney didn't even run for president. There is no difference between the candidates on almost any policy except a timetable for withdrawal. Have we heard anything on funding for Amtrak, or commuter transit? No. They both have the same policies, and all they've been doing is saying the other side is lying about it. Energy, healthcare, etc., it's all the same, and very little is different from what you've got already. All they really have to say right now is "You won't cut taxes, I will"

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And you wonder why people keep leaving C&G. You people are paranoid. Enough negativity already. This is primarily because of Katrina and Ike etc. Bush's term is up, Cheney didn't even run for president. There is no difference between the candidates on almost any policy except a timetable for withdrawal. Have we heard anything on funding for Amtrak, or commuter transit? No. They both have the same policies, and all they've been doing is saying the other side is lying about it. Energy, healthcare, etc., it's all the same, and very little is different from what you've got already. All they really have to say right now is "You won't cut taxes, I will"

Job's too big for one Man or Woman. Too many separate and special interests. I don't know how we've made this far.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0