Comments on: When Soldiers Are Quartered, War is Imminent

By: David Z

David Z — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 02:15:45 +0000

duly noted, csun.

Thanks for the comment!

By: csun

csun — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 13:53:26 +0000

Alarming News?
Not when you take into account the fact that there are well over 100 military bases on US soil now.
And we the people have been quartering these several hundred thousand (conservative guess) via confiscation of American wealth for decades.
These soldiers can and have been used to suppress uprisings/riots (see WWI veterans pay riots and 1960′s war protests)and alternative lifestyles.
The assault on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco Texas by ATF/FBI using Abrams tanks , Bradley Assault vehicles and helicopters compliments of Fort Hood is just one more example.
The question is not “when will America become a police state?”
We have arrived.

By: Zach S

Zach S — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 02:05:22 +0000

Dave-

Yeah I get ya about the contradictory thing.

Thanks for the tie from the article to your post. Sometimes I take things to literally!

John-
That’s a sweet quote. Thanks for sharing.

By: John

John — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 23:57:30 +0000

FSK, David, et al.:

Gun-rights activist and science-fiction author L. Neil Smith said this about the police:

“The police are the standing army that the Founding Fathers worried about, and, as such, they’re the very people the Second Amendment was ratified to protect us from.”

By: FSK

FSK — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 22:52:30 +0000

Police are also a type of quartered troops, especially when they conduct para-militarized no-knock raids.

If you don’t pay taxes, you don’t have the US military using violence to force you to pay. It’s the police that are more likely to terrorize the average American.

By: David Z

David Z — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 21:53:21 +0000

The article didn’t mention quartering, but a few people found this website by searching for information about peacetime quarter.

The primary issue is the standing army on U.S. soil, in violation of the Posse Comitatus act.

First, they tell us: “The war on terror is OK, because there have been no attacks on U.S. soil”

Then, they turn around, and say “We need to put a standing army on our soil.”

Kind of contradictory…

By: Zach S

Zach S — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 21:22:41 +0000

I’m confused about the article. I did not see anything about quartering.

If anything, I read they are assigning an active duty brigade to respond to problems that may happen within our borders and in control of different command for that use.

If I have read this correctly, my frist impression was just call on the Guard and Reserves…that is what they are there for; however, from my own personal experience, neither is equiped, trained, or even have enough people to respond to such issues (more so the Reserves than the Guard since Infantry Units-the Guard-receieve much more funding for equipment and training).

If I am not reading the article right, please direct me on the right path!

-Zach

By: Eric Ogunbase

Eric Ogunbase — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 19:11:06 +0000

You didn’t get the memo? We have to have active duty troops in America to fight terrorism! You’re either with us, or with the terrorists!

/idiotic thought masquerading as patriotism

By: John

John — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 17:31:12 +0000

It’s pretty bizarre to think that the Third Amendment, the most irrelevant amendment since the ratification of the Constitution, could become relevant again, at least as a topic of discussion, in the near future.