Obama Calls for ‘Civilian Force’ as Large as the Military

[Moon]

I think some here not all compare Obama to Hitler in his early days before the formation of the Nazi party or the Third Reich, in which case there can be comparisons made.

It's an incredibly lazy tactic. It's designed to evoke an emotional response, rather than foster any kind of adult conversation.

 

[deltabtry]

No, there can't.

One comparsion would be the Black Panther group intimadating the voters and then the AG refusing to press charges, the AG was hand picked by Obama therefor represents the Obama admisntration. This example is a easy one but, take a look at nationalizing healthcare, auto industry, banks etc., all these Hitler also advocated. A civilian security force, perhaps not on the same level but Hitler also started such a organization, although Hitler did so because the opposing parties to Hitler where also projecting their views and beliefs through violence.

 

[Jetboogieman]

um ya actually i did if you recall i was the first to respond to it.

Yet you still are propogating this rediculous comparison?

 

[Moon]

haha ok you do that, either way i see it Hitlers brownshirts were basicly his personal army and when i see Oboma wanting to establish a personal civilain army that is under his control i start to worry that history will repeat itself.

Prove your assertion. Make the comparison point by point and show why it should be a concern. Screeching "HITLER!!!111 OMFGZ!!!!!!!!!!!" isn't going to cut it.

 

[deltabtry]

It's an incredibly lazy tactic. It's designed to evoke an emotional response, rather than foster any kind of adult conversation.

B/S, Hitler's early history is extensive and went from one extreme to the next, the end result was the third Reich. If you read on his early days there are similar comparisons to what Obama advocates. I am not suggesting Obama is Hitler, just his politics and the current path that it is taking can be compared to some of Hitler's tactics.

 

[Moon]

B/S, Hitler's early history is extensive and went from one extreme to the next, the end result was the third Reich. If you read on his early days there are similar comparisons to what Obama advocates. I am not suggesting Obama is Hitler, just his politics and the current path that it is taking can be compared to some of Hitler's tactics.

B/S back atcha. Hitler also bathed and drove automobiles, and I hear Obama does too. Coincidence? I think not!!

If that's the best the folks on the right here can come up with for reasons to oppose Obama and his policies, then we're doomed. Honestly, I hate seeing the same lame crap from the right against Obama that I saw from the left towards Bush for 8 years. We're better than that, or we should be.

 

[deltabtry]

B/S back atcha. Hitler also bathed and drove automobiles, and I hear Obama does too. Coincidence? I think not!!

If that's the best the folks on the right here can come up with for reasons to oppose Obama and his policies, then we're doomed. Honestly, I hate seeing the same lame crap from the right against Obama that I saw from the left towards Bush for 8 years. We're better than that, or we should be.

To be honest, I think Obama isn't smart enough to actually come with these policies, he IMO is just the orator for some other entity that is pulling the strings. Anyway Obama nationalizing the auto industry or trying to, is eerily similar to the VW project. The civilian security force although it may not be the brown shirts, but to the American people this would be very foreign to us and it can lead a path to such extremes. The limitations or loss of liberty such as not being able to choose our healthcare can be compared to Hitler's limiting the German people liberty back in the mid thirties.

 

[samsmart]

One comparsion would be the Black Panther group intimadating the voters and then the AG refusing to press charges, the AG was hand picked by Obama therefor represents the Obama admisntration. This example is a easy one but, take a look at nationalizing healthcare, auto industry, banks etc., all these Hitler also advocated. A civilian security force, perhaps not on the same level but Hitler also started such a organization, although Hitler did so because the opposing parties to Hitler where also projecting their views and beliefs through violence.

So where's the political upheaval? Where's the mass rioting? Where's the call for a new government?

Things in the U.S.A. right now are nowhere near as bad as what was going on in Germany that allowed Hitler and the Nazi Party to rise to power. They lost the Great War, was subjected to a punishing treaty, lost important territories, facing the Great Depression, were under an oppressive monarchical and militarist government, and seized power for themselves.

We are continuing to fight the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, we are under no kind of sanctions, we haven't lost any territories, we are in a global recession but are using social safety nets that are working, and Obama was elected democratically without any seizure of power.

So there are more contrasts between Hitler and Obama than there are comparisons.

 

[samsmart]

To be honest, I think Obama isn't smart enough to actually come with these policies, he IMO is just the orator for some other entity that is pulling the strings. Anyway Obama nationalizing the auto industry or trying to, is eerily similar to the VW project. The civilian security force although it may not be the brown shirts, but to the American people this would be very foreign to us and it can lead a path to such extremes. The limitations or loss of liberty such as not being able to choose our healthcare can be compared to Hitler's limiting the German people liberty back in the mid thirties.

Ummm, Obama didn't nationalize the auto industry - he basically had the government them loans. The auto industry is still very much privatized.

 

[deltabtry]

So where's the political upheaval? Where's the mass rioting? Where's the call for a new government?

Things in the U.S.A. right now are nowhere near as bad as what was going on in Germany that allowed Hitler and the Nazi Party to rise to power. They lost the Great War, was subjected to a punishing treaty, lost important territories, facing the Great Depression, were under an oppressive monarchical and militarist government, and seized power for themselves.

We are continuing to fight the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, we are under no kind of sanctions, we haven't lost any territories, we are in a global recession but are using social safety nets that are working, and Obama was elected democratically without any seizure of power.

So there are more contrasts between Hitler and Obama than there are comparisons.

I agree to all your points, but like I said some comparsions can be made and I am not saying Obama is Hitlarian(my own term). The auto industry such as VW, Hitler attempted to nationalize but it failed, non the less the attempt was made. The U.S. on the other hand is not in as bad shape as Germany in the early part of the 20th century..yet anyway. Although I wonder about those who advocate policy behind the scenes for Obama push, now these are dangerous people....just my own gut feeling.

 

[Resist the gov.]

I see someone still hasn't read my first post...

well have you even read the bill that proposes this? cause it clearly states that although this civilian army will be used for humanitarian releif it also states that it is to assist the military in any way Obama sees fit. It also goes on to imply that this civilian army will be fighting alongside the regular army in Iraq and Afhganistan. Now again they way i see it the brownshirts were Hitlers personal army just like this new civilian army will answer to Obama, now ill admit there are huge differneces as you have proved but you can see were the worry comes from when our president wants a new military group that will answer only to him and how people could see it as being comparable to the brownshirts.

heres the link to the bill if you havent read it yet. http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/140410p.pdf

 

[Goshin]

Oh Joy! More government because its been working so well already. :roll:

Obama Calls for ‘Civilian Force’ as Large as the Military -- News from Antiwar.com

Where the hell is the money for something so huge supposed to come from???

A third of our budget is debt right now!

 

[deltabtry]

Where the hell is the money for something so huge supposed to come from???

A third of our budget is debt right now!

The money will come from we the people, like everything else the government likes to delve into, I just hope we the people don't lay down and take it.

 

[Moon]

well have you even read the bill that proposes this? cause it clearly states that although this civilian army will be used for humanitarian releif it also states that it is to assist the military in any way Obama sees fit. It also goes on to imply that this civilian army will be fighting alongside the regular army in Iraq and Afhganistan. Now again they way i see it the brownshirts were Hitlers personal army just like this new civilian army will answer to Obama, now ill admit there are huge differneces as you have proved but you can see were the worry comes from when our president wants a new military group that will answer only to him and how people could see it as being comparable to the brownshirts.

heres the link to the bill if you havent read it yet. http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/140410p.pdf

That's not a bill, and it doesn't say what you want it to say. That was a directive issued a long time ago (here's a link to the 1992 version) that established worldwide deployment guidlines for DoD civilian employees. Note that it was issued on January 23rd, 2008, three days after Obama took office. Not nearly enough time to establish a "civilian army". Note also:

1. PURPOSE. This Directive:
a. Reissues DoD Directive (DoDD) 1404.10 (Reference (a)) under a new title to establish the
policy through which an appropriately sized subset of the DoD civilian workforce is preidentified
to be organized, trained, and equipped in a manner that facilitates the use of their
capabilities for operational requirements. These requirements are typically away from the
normal work locations of DoD civilians, or in situations where other civilians may be evacuated
to assist military forces where the use of DoD civilians is appropriate. These employees shall be
collectively known as the DoD Civilian Expeditionary Workforce. Members of the DoD
Civilian Expeditionary Workforce shall be organized, trained, cleared, equipped, and ready to
deploy in support of combat operations by the military; contingencies; emergency operations;
humanitarian missions; disaster relief; restoration of order; drug interdiction; and stability
operations of the Department of Defense in accordance with DoDD 3000.05 (Reference (b)).

If you're going to play Chicken Little, at least get your facts straight first.

 

[Resist the gov.]

That's not a bill, and it doesn't say what you want it to say. That was a directive issued a long time ago (here's a link to the 1992 version) that established worldwide deployment guidlines for DoD civilian employees. Note that it was issued on January 23rd, 2008, three days after Obama took office. Not nearly enough time to establish a "civilian army". Note also:

What are you trying to note in the citation above ? Because thats exactly what i was talking about were it says, "and ready to
deploy in support of combat operations by the military." that means a.k.a fighting in the wars so again he wants it to be like the military so how does it not say want i "want " it to say?

 

[Moon]

That's not a bill, and it doesn't say what you want it to say. That was a directive issued a long time ago (here's a link to the 1992 version) that established worldwide deployment guidlines for DoD civilian employees. Note that it was issued on January 23rd, 2008, three days after Obama took office. Not nearly enough time to establish a "civilian army". Note also:

What are you trying to note in the citation above ? Because thats exactly what i was talking about were it says, "and ready to
deploy in support of combat operations by the military." that means a.k.a fighting in the wars so again he wants it to be like the military so how does it not say want i "want " it to say?

No, that's not what it means. I found this same directive at least as early as 1987. Do you think Obama had it written back then so he could form a "civilian army" in 2010?

Again, it doesn't say what you want it to say.

 

[Resist the gov.]

No, that's not what it means. I found this same directive at least as early as 1987. Do you think Obama had it written back then so he could form a "civilian army" in 2010?

Again, it doesn't say what you want it to say.

Then why is this only surfacing now? And why through Obama?

 

[Moon]

Then why is this only surfacing now? And why through Obama?

Beats me. If others are using the same DoD directive that you did as "proof", then they don't know what they're talking about. No surprise, there are rabid Obama haters just like there are/were rabid Bush haters. None of them make a damn bit of sense and should be scorned and ridiculed at every opportunity. There are plenty of policy issues to oppose without having to make up stupid ****.

 

[Cold Highway]

Where the hell is the money for something so huge supposed to come from???

A third of our budget is debt right now!

Money is no object when it comes to these clowns.

 

[PubliusInfinitu]

FactCheck.org: Is Obama planning a Gestapo-like "civilian national security force"?

It's a ****ing disgrace to all the people who died under the Nazi regime, to equate your Right Wing Propoganda to this...

You dishonor the memory of those innocent souls who died under the Nazi Regime when you try to compare the Obama administration to it...

Maybe when you actually attack the Obama administration on something solid I'll take you seriously... til then have fun believing this quite frankly offensive drivel.

The comparison is to the Progressive reasoning of the NAZIs... not the Aryan Regime itself.

The NAZIs did not start off murdering millions of innocent people. That didn't begin until they had managed to secure supreme power and implemented their every whim... and became desperate to project the blame for the failures of those policies onto those murdered millions. It's a constant across all Leftist 'experiments' throughout human history.

 

[bicycleman]

Kristallnacht - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I suggest you go and read a little before making such a comparison.

Unless this SEIU is an invention of Obama and under his direct control like the Brown Shirts were to Hitler... then you are sadly mistaking.

Read from Wikipedia? No way. Not when anyone with a political penchant can join the website and alter anything at will. If you are using Wikipedia for your sources, you need to redo your research. Beside, what is written there parallels exactly what I am saying about what Obama could make his all civilian force become.

Here's some food for thought. I am a union steward, but I am one of the few, who is a conservative. Last October, I attended steward training in northern Pa. All I heard was leftist propaganda, morning, noon, and night about how wonderful Obama, the late Murtha, and others on the left were. It got so bad that at lunch, I would gulp down my food and leave before the propagandists took the podium. I would take a walk, or go back to my room and call my wife. It is amazing what I have had to do to live and work with the leftist idiots.

 

[bicycleman]

Actually the National Guard can be deployed in national emergencies and civil unrest, as it was done in Los Angeles during the riots over Rodney King. What the national Guard can not do is engage in armed conflict against the civilian population.

A coworker of mine is a staff sergeant in the National Guard. He has attending meetings discussing whether he would have a problem firing on American citizens. He said he had no qualms.

 

[bicycleman]

The thing is what I find stupid is that people compare things to Hitler and his regime to often when they have no argument left. Even comparing Obama regime too Nazi Germany is stupid, and people need to learn their history.

oh and Jet thanks for some reading material.

What history would that be, the truth, or the rewritten version?

 

[bicycleman]

Umm, no the National Guard isn't a civilian military. The National Guard fills any number of roles.

On one level, it is an organization for state militias. In this regard, it is a "state military" that can work with state agencies and domestic federal agencies.

It is also a reservist force for the military. The National Guard can be called for overseas service working with the branches of the U.S. military.

The National Guard can also be federalized and used for domestic purposes on behalf of the federal government under very specific circumstances, which mostly covers riots or civil disturbances. Otherwise, the federal government has no military powers on domestic soil - this is the Posse Commitatus Act, and it was passed by Southern Senators after Reconstruction to limit federal power in the South.

This is why Obama, and others, are calling for a "civilian force" as large as the military - because the federal government has very few powers to deal with domestic issues.

One example of this was during Hurricane Katrina. President Bush tried to assert his authority to secure New Orleans during the aftermath, but was prohibited from doing so because of Posse Commitatus. He even went so far as to try to get a U.S. Army officer sworn into the Louisiana National Guard, but that didn't go through.

So, more likely than not, such a civilian force would be most likely geared towards riot control and federal response to manmade and natural disasters. Personally, I wouldn't mind if the National Guard was federalized more but made a purely domestic force and unable by law to be deployed overseas for these reasons. I also think the National Guard along with the Coast Guard be attached to the Department of Homeland Security instead of the Department of Defense as it is now.

So while there are fears of some kind of personal army, such a force would mostly be used for federal disaster response. I don't know how the specifics of it should work, because it will all be quite political, but I do think that the federal government should have a better ability to respond to domestic crises and disasters, and I think that's how it should be geared towards.

Why do you think Obama would need to deploy such a force? Would it be because he figures there would be a revolt against the government because of his unpopular strong armed progressive policies of martial law? Why would Obama want to declare martial law, except he has a plan to enslave the American people and by doing so, destroy the Constitution?

 

[bicycleman]

Oh yeah, we wouldn't want history to disagree with us now would we :roll:

So we can find rediculous comparisons between Obama and Nazi Germany so we can win an election in November

eace

Why do you think Obama is so wonderful?