JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Messages
680
Reactions
1,266
So that title is as egregious as it gets, and is alarming. But I'm reading this article which basically reprints the executive order, and I'm not arriving at the same conclusion. The context is unclear (to me) as it repeatedly says 'U.S. operations' which does that mean operations by the U.S. abroad, or operations in the U.S.?
Maybe someone can read this thing and determine if this really is an authorization of use of force against citizens or is it something more to do with citizens as casualties of the 'war on terror' as the actual executive order is titled, "Executive Order — United States Policy on Pre- and Post-Strike Measures to Address Civilian Casualties in U.S. Operations Involving the Use of Force"
Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't put it past the Socialist in Chief to pass yet another draconian and unlawful/unconstitutional executive order, but I'm not sure this is it.

Read the order for yourself here: <broken link removed>

What say you?
 
One thing Obuttnugget needs to remember: modern warfare is VERY supply intensive, and those supplies all have to come from somewhere... Yamamoto famously advised Tojo not to get into a peeing contest on our mainland because there'd be a rifle waiting behind every blade of grass.
 
I have to leave for work so I have not read the whole EO and I just glanced at it - skimmed over it - however...

The military has always had the ability and right to operate on US soil against all enemies.

What it has not had since the enactment of the Posse Commitatus act, and still doesn't - at least not lawfully - was the right to be used as a law enforcement force against US civilians on US soil.

That said, I don't think that is what this EO is about - I don't see anywhere in the EO where is specifically says anything about using the military against US citizens. If anything, it seems to be outlining a policy of minimizing "collateral damage" - especially US civilian casualties - in US soil military operations where "force" is necessary.
 
Wouldn't that mean measure or aid given to peoples affected by U.S. Operations?

Like say us using drone strikes in foreign counties and accidentally killing innocent non-combatants?

He probably justs wants more funds to pay off killing the wrong people in foreign countries.
 
One thing Obuttnugget needs to remember: modern warfare is VERY supply intensive, and those supplies all have to come from somewhere... Yamamoto famously advised Tojo not to get into a peeing contest on our mainland because there'd be a rifle waiting behind every blade of grass.

Except Yamamoto never said that.

I read the EO. I'll never get that time back. In any case the US Military has always had the authority to go after all enemies foreign and domestic . The EO doesnt change that.
 

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top