• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

National Guard training in Iowa -weapons dealers

echo6tango

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
230
Location
, Maryland, USA
imported post

suntzu, I have not found anything stating that the Disaster Recovery Personal Protection Act of 2006 was voted into law, but was added as an amendment to the Homeland Security Appropriations Bill. So at least that portion is Federal law.

I'd like to hope that this would prevent confiscations, but I don't think it has had an opportunity to be tested yet...and let's hope it does not get that opportunity
 

suntzu

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Messages
1,230
Location
The south land
imported post

echo6tango wrote:
suntzu, I have not found anything stating that the Disaster Recovery Personal Protection Act of 2006 was voted into law, but was added as an amendment to the Homeland Security Appropriations Bill. So at least that portion is Federal law.

I'd like to hope that this would prevent confiscations, but I don't think it has had an opportunity to be tested yet...and let's hope it does not get that opportunity
Echo6tango, I certainly hope it never gets the opportunity to be tested either. Unfortunately history has shown that such occurrences have happened in the past and will unfortunately happen in the future--because mankind simply cannot learn from history.
 

FMCDH

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2008
Messages
2,037
Location
St. Louis, MO
imported post

suntzu wrote:
...Unfortunately history has shown that such occurrences have happened in the past and will unfortunately happen in the future--because mankind simply cannot learn from history.
O we learn alright, its just we have the collective attention span and memory of a cracks addicts.

:?
 

echo6tango

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
230
Location
, Maryland, USA
imported post

suntzu wrote:
echo6tango wrote:
suntzu, I have not found anything stating that the Disaster Recovery Personal Protection Act of 2006 was voted into law, but was added as an amendment to the Homeland Security Appropriations Bill. So at least that portion is Federal law.

I'd like to hope that this would prevent confiscations, but I don't think it has had an opportunity to be tested yet...and let's hope it does not get that opportunity
Echo6tango, I certainly hope it never gets the opportunity to be tested either. Unfortunately history has shown that such occurrences have happened in the past and will unfortunately happen in the future--because mankind simply cannot learn from history.

That's why I said that I hope that it would prevent confiscations and not that I know that it would prevent confiscations :D. Yeah, I do know better. Our society is more likely to repeat mistakes rather than learn from them. Sometimes I like to pretend that the clouds are marshmellows and rainbows really lead to a pot of gold, but then all I have to do is turn on the news to get slapped back to reality ;)

I'm as cynical as they come...hoping for the best while preparing for the worst and knowing that the later will be more beneficial in the long run.

Have a great weekend!
 

suntzu

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Messages
1,230
Location
The south land
imported post

FMCDH wrote:
suntzu wrote:
...Unfortunately history has shown that such occurrences have happened in the past and will unfortunately happen in the future--because mankind simply cannot learn from history.
O we learn alright, its just we have the collective attention span and memory of a cracks addicts.

:?
and because we have the collective attention span of a crack addict we are doomed to repeat history infinitum:banghead: an amoeba would probably have a longer collective attention span...
 

Francis Marion

Regular Member
Joined
May 22, 2008
Messages
194
Location
Taylorsville, Utah, USA
imported post

This is a classic example of the media not telling the story right because they don’t understand the military and a bunch of chicken littles screaming martial law.

This is exactly what the National Guard units are doing in Afghanistan and Iraq. The training is obviously geared toward their combat mission and they are using local assets for more realistic training.

The National Guard has been federalized many times before. They cannot be activated for combat overseas without being federalized so WWI, WWII, and Korea were no different than Desert Storm, Haiti, Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Iraq today. The precedent that wylde007 seems to be referring to was one established during Vietnam; the roll of the National Guard was changed to ensure that any long term combat commitment would require the use of the Guard and therefore would need greater public support. The National Guard has ALWAYS been subject to federalization and it is written into their charter which is why they receive federal funds and training.

Please give those of us in the National Guard the benefit of doubt and not assume that we are mindless minions of a tyrannical government. We are also freedom loving American Patriots who individually know our legal limitations and responsibilities. I have on many occasions sworn an oath to “protect and defend the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic.” I do not take this oath lightly and neither do my fellow Guardsmen. The 2A is an important part of that document so any attempt to infringe upon the right to keep and bear arms will meet staunch opposition from me and my associates.
 

wylde007

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
3,035
Location
Va Beach, Occupied VA
imported post

It's not the guardsmen we are concerned about - it's your handlers and the illegal alien the sheeple elected to the highest office in this doomed republican experiment.

If you say... YOU PERSONALLY... say that you are only willing to follow an order that obliges the Constitution, then start by demanding that "your" Chimp-in-Chief is eligible to serve... like this man did:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=89837

Your oath means nothing if you serve under false pretenses. It's time to end this nightmare sleigh ride once and for all.

You and your fellows, who volunteer one weekend a month and two weeks every summer are called again and again... the federalization is Bush, Sr.'s sidestepping of the state governors to call troops for active duty (illegal, executive order)... to "defend" freedom by invading foreign sovereign nations and occupying in the name of the empire.

If all you were called to do was your jobs - DEFEND AMERICAN LIBERTY - here, on American soil, then I would have no qualm. As it stands, you are constantly called by a corrupt federal entity to invade and conquer foreign powers sofar as it meets the interests of the high-command.

Every action of our government has very serious and sinister overtones to it and they are using our honorable Southern men and women for very dishonorable and meddlesome imperial operations and occupations.

God bless our fighting men and women. God damn the government that dishonors their service.
 

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,180
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,
imported post

Iowa Guard ends urban war exercise amid outcry
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20090224/NEWS10/902240390

The Iowa Army National Guard has dropped plans for urban warfare training in the western Iowa town of Arcadia after being deluged by nearly 100 e-mails and phone calls from gun-rights advocates nationwide.

The four-day event in April would have involved between 90 and 100 combat troops arriving in the Carroll County community in a convoy with a Blackhawk military helicopter flying overhead.
adlabel_horz.gif

OAS_AD('300x250_1'); Troops would have gone door to door, asking the town's 443 residents about a suspected arms dealer and conducting searches of homes if property owners volunteered in advance to cooperate.

There was no opposition to the Guard's plans from city leaders. But gun-rights advocates were outraged, and news about the exercise became a hot topic nationally on radio talk shows and the Internet.

Arcadia Mayor Oran Kohorst said Monday he was disappointed the exercise had been canceled. He said he had not heard of a single objection from residents, and he said the City Council supported it. At least two guardsmen live in Arcadia, and many residents either have served in the military or have family members who have served in the armed forces, he said.
"This was completely blown out of proportion," Kohorst said. "They were going to come through and meet with the townspeople and just practice going in and out of their homes. They were never, ever going to confiscate guns or anything like that."

Talk show host Alex Jones of Austin, Texas, whose syndicated radio program is carried on about 60 stations, said he had received phone calls on and off the air from people in Arcadia and nearby towns who objected to the plans.
He said he believes oil companies, in concert with central banks, are creating a worldwide economic crisis to set up a world government.

"This is part of an acclimation for martial law," Jones said of the National Guard's plans.

Lt. Col. Gregory Hapgood Jr., the Iowa Guard's public affairs officer, said Monday that some urban warfare training will still be conducted, but it will be held at the armory in Carroll instead of in Arcadia.

Rather than holding a large company-sized exercise, the training will be in small groups at the platoon and squad level.
He said Guard officials changed their plans not because of the protests, but because the unit — Company A, 1st Battalion, 168th Infantry — has recently installed new leadership at the company and battalion level. Smaller unit training would be more beneficial, he said.

Company A is an infantry unit that served in Afghanistan for 13 months in 2004 and 2005, and it is expected to receive orders to return overseas within the next 24 months, Hapgood said.
One tactic used by infantry units is known as cordon and search. It involves creating layers of security in an area and then searching for weapons caches, explosive devices and bomb-making materials, and people of interest.

Hapgood said he considered the surge of e-mails and phone calls as a protest from outside of Iowa.

"We have been doing training in our communities for decades, so this is very routine business for us," Hapgood said. "We were quite surprised when we received e-mails from out of state criticizing the event. We have a responsibility to have our men and women ready to go into combat, and we are not going to change that."
Many of the e-mails were hostile, even threatening, Hapgood said.

One e-mail from a Texas resident said, "I am appalled the Iowa National Guard does not know what the Constitution of the United States says. ... How dare you?"

A man who described himself as a "Nevada citizen" wrote that it was good the exercise was called off: "It is possible that there would have been some dead Iowa Guardsmen."

Arcadia City Clerk Nancy Schmitz said she had 14 messages when she arrived at work Monday. All were apparently from listeners of Jones' show, she said.
"They all basically left the same message; they talked about it being like the Nazis and having the troops coming into our homes and confiscating weapons. It was very different from what was actually going to take place," Schmitz said.

She added she supported the training, calling it "a good opportunity to help out the troops."
 

KansasMustang

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2008
Messages
1,005
Location
Herington, Kansas, USA
imported post

Jblack44 wrote:
This is some scary stuff right here!!!

Why is the military training for police work??????



http://www.carrollspaper.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=7451
National Guard unless "Federalized" in other words activated by Federal Command are not considered "Military". They are under the command of the State AG and Governor. They ARE authorized within the state to provide law enforcement assistance as well as disaster relief. I suggest you do some research.
It is apparant to me that most of you have no earthly clue as to how the military is made up. The National Guard and Reserve make up over 55% of the Armed Forces of this country. They are controlled by the States in which they reside,,until and UNLESS the Federal Government activates them to active duty. There are units in the guard and reserve that the Active forces do not even have within itself.
 

wylde007

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
3,035
Location
Va Beach, Occupied VA
imported post

KansasMustang wrote:
They are under the command of the State AG and Governor. They ARE authorized within the state to provide law enforcement assistance as well as disaster relief. I suggest you do some research.
Attorney General? Since when? The Governor used to be the only man who could grant the president use of his state guard troops. That was bypassed by illegal executive order, see below. Perhaps you mean Adjutant General (TAG)?

It is apparant to me that most of you have no earthly clue as to how the military is made up. The National Guard and Reserve make up over 55% of the Armed Forces of this country. They are controlled by the States in which they reside, until and UNLESS the Federal Government activates them to active duty. There are units in the guard and reserve that the Active forces do not even have within itself.
That was true until Bush, Sr. federalized the Guard. I "suggest you do some research" chief.

The problem doesn't come from the people not trusting the Guard, it's that they don't trust the federal government who has, among other things, used the Guard to confiscate weapons from law-abiding citizens and are sent all over the world on what many consider exercises of conquest and occupation which are NOT in the interest of this nation... or shouldn't be.
 

KBCraig

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
4,886
Location
Granite State of Mind
imported post

LTC Hapgood, PAO for the IANG, was quoted in an earlier article as saying they had to train in Arcadia because there is nowhere else to conduct urban training in Iowa.

Tsk-tsk, colonel! The Carroll unit could have used a proper MOUT training center just 80 miles away in Johnston, at a facility owned by --wait for it-- the Iowa National Guard!

http://www.iowanationalguard.com/CampDodge/Documents/MOUT_SOP.pdf
 

KansasMustang

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2008
Messages
1,005
Location
Herington, Kansas, USA
imported post

wylde007 wrote:
KansasMustang wrote:
They are under the command of the State AG and Governor. They ARE authorized within the state to provide law enforcement assistance as well as disaster relief. I suggest you do some research.
Attorney General? Since when? The Governor used to be the only man who could grant the president use of his state guard troops. That was bypassed by illegal executive order, see below. Perhaps you mean Adjutant General (TAG)?

It is apparant to me that most of you have no earthly clue as to how the military is made up. The National Guard and Reserve make up over 55% of the Armed Forces of this country. They are controlled by the States in which they reside, until and UNLESS the Federal Government activates them to active duty. There are units in the guard and reserve that the Active forces do not even have within itself.
That was true until Bush, Sr. federalized the Guard. I "suggest you do some research" chief.

The problem doesn't come from the people not trusting the Guard, it's that they don't trust the federal government who has, among other things, used the Guard to confiscate weapons from law-abiding citizens and are sent all over the world on what many consider exercises of conquest and occupation which are NOT in the interest of this nation... or shouldn't be.
I suggest you do some more research, CHIEF.And yes, I meant Adjutant General of the state, don't quibbel about small s**t. We soldiers just call it AG. And ALL of my time was active duty. The Guard is NOT permanently federalized. They are called up and activated as needed. And IF you look at my avatar,,I didn't get all those stripes by not knowing WTF I'm talking about. And,,it's Sergeant Major not Chief. I'm not a squid TYVM. The Feds would have to pay full time pay to the guard if they stayed activated and would have to provide full time benefits, which for a fact I know isn't happenning. How long did you serve??
 

wylde007

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
3,035
Location
Va Beach, Occupied VA
imported post

KansasMustang wrote:
I suggest you do some more research, CHIEF. And yes, I meant Adjutant General of the state, don't quibble about small s**t. We soldiers just call it AG. And ALL of my time was active duty. The Guard is NOT permanently federalized. They are called up and activated as needed. And IF you look at my avatar, I didn't get all those stripes by not knowing WTF I'm talking about. And, it's Sergeant Major not Chief. I'm not a squid TYVM. The Feds would have to pay full time pay to the guard if they stayed activated and would have to provide full time benefits, which for a fact I know isn't happening. How long did you serve?
I do quibble about details, because that's where the devil is. If you can't be bothered to consider the difference between the Attorney General and Adjutant General, I can't be bothered to expect you to know your a** from a hole in the ground.

The Guard may not be permanently federalized, but you missed the point, which was that the President no longer has to ask permission from the state governors to call them up. He used to have to do that. Now he just waves his magic sceptre and wham, bam, thank you, ma'am... they're activated.

I have never served the empire. Never will. "You" soldiers, thankfully, are not all smart-alec know-it-alls, talking down to us "citizens" like you know-all and see-all.
 

Francis Marion

Regular Member
Joined
May 22, 2008
Messages
194
Location
Taylorsville, Utah, USA
imported post

Wylde,

You're talkin' out the wrong hole. President Johnson obviously didn't have to ask Gov. Wallace and I think that happen just a couple years before this new precedent you claim that GHWB set.
 

wylde007

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
3,035
Location
Va Beach, Occupied VA
imported post

Francis Marion wrote:
You're talkin' out the wrong hole. President Johnson obviously didn't have to ask Gov. Wallace and I think that happen just a couple years before this new precedent you claim that GHWB set.
So if what I'm hearing from you is true, the Guard was federalized a long time ago, yes?

How convenient for the empire.

Sorry for talking out of my pooper.:D
 

Francis Marion

Regular Member
Joined
May 22, 2008
Messages
194
Location
Taylorsville, Utah, USA
imported post

What I am saying is that various units in the National Guard, including mine, have been federalized and then released back to state control on many occasions dating back to WWI and GHWB did not set any new precedent.
 

wylde007

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
3,035
Location
Va Beach, Occupied VA
imported post

Francis Marion wrote:
What I am saying is that various units in the National Guard, including mine, have been federalized and then released back to state control on many occasions dating back to WWI and GHWB did not set any new precedent.
To me that sounds grossly irresponsible and thoroughly despotic.

National Guard.

Not "Imperial Expeditionary Guard".
 

heritage01

New member
Joined
Nov 4, 2008
Messages
6
Location
Abilene, Kansas, USA
imported post

wylde007 wrote:
Francis Marion wrote:
What I am saying is that various units in the National Guard, including mine, have been federalized and then released back to state control on many occasions dating back to WWI and GHWB did not set any new precedent.
To me that sounds grossly irresponsible and thoroughly despotic.

National Guard.

Not "Imperial Expeditionary Guard".

Perhaps a little history of the National Guard from their own website will settle this.

http://www.ngb.army.mil/About/default.aspx
 
Top