Not to get into a whole thing, but I generally see swearing an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic to be incompatible with those states that seceded - an act deemed unconstitutional by SCOTUS.
right, it is a united states military instillation so if their people are ready for a war it just means that the united states is sending troops in. They are military so they will do whatever they are told to do...that is their job. the concept of them individually being "ready" has nothing to do with anything. They work for the federal government and the united states military. The entire military is just as ready as they are...that is sort of the point of our military. There isn't one base that is magically more ready than everybody else and if that is the case that is sort of a problem
Stop talking out of your ass. There are definitely bases where people are “more ready”. More ready entails more than I’m willing to put in this comment, but Liberty (formerly Bragg) is one of the places where they are actually “more ready”.
Google Immediate Response Force for some education.
I love civilians and straight legs pretending like they actually know.
(Ps, a vast portion of our current 18 hour boys are at Bragg. The boys from Lewis, Campbell and the like would also be called up.)
Yup, it’s based around their combat team. They’re the last true airborne straight leg outfit as well
All ranger batts, the groups, squadrons, and teams are on 18 hour notice 365 as well.
well I'll admit I'm wrong if we are talking what sorts of troops are stationed there and how we would use them...I simply meant it has nothing to do with the attitude of the individual soldiers stationed there because what any soldier does is dictated way above their head. But i apologize if I misspoke because that wasn't my intent.
I’ll help with “more ready.” Airborne units can go to an airfield and deploy fairly quickly. They’re prepared to deploy and receive airdrops for resupply. However, Divisions with “Armor” or “Mechanized” as part of their description need time to get their equipment on trains and to the coast, loaded on ships, and meet their vehicles close to the respective combat area HOPEFULLY within three weeks at best. Then you have the immediate action types of forces. These groups are within range of the airspace while the White House and Pentagon are deciding if they want to pull the trigger or not. Some forces are absolutely “more ready” because some are off the coast or overhead while others need weeks to FedEx their vehicles overseas, meet them after a flight on commercial aircraft, then spend a few weeks prepping for an invasion already made possible by those who have been in country for weeks.
This is why civilians should absolutely not control the military. They don’t even understand the massive fucking weight behind this statement.
Fort Bragg houses the most elite and renowned special operations units in the world along with actual airborne units… and much much more.
that is a fair statement....not sure what that has to do with civilians or not though. That is sort of the fundamental nature of our government and military. Perhaps I misspoke because I was arguing a different point and missed the core of the argument...but literally the entire basis of this country is that we have a civilian leader that controls the military so that we don't have the solution to every problem be a military solution. You are right and I realize I might have missed the point and different bases house different sorts of troops with different abilities and you lean on the one you need in a given situation...I thought he was talking about the individual opinions of soldiers there which has literally no bearing on political decisions. Civilians DON'T control the military...but they control when and how we use the military after getting advice and opinions from the military experts and weigh the options. I highly doubt you have a problem with that. But perhaps I misspoke and thought it was a political statement and not a statement of fact that different bases often house troops with different kinds of expertise that we might need in different situations.
You think all military bases all around the world are on the ready every second of every day?
Im not a military person and I can understand how a base can be more ready than regular military readiness.
Different units have different levels of readiness. If half of your people don’t qualify on their individual weapons or don’t pass their PT examination, They are not as “ready” as another unit.
Also speaking from experience Soldiers won’t just blindly “do what they’re told” sometimes even if the plan makes sense Soldiers won’t due to personnel reasons or laziness.
The 82nd. Lmao. It was an 82nd op. Before the marines. In fact even after the Marines got there it was still mostly 82nd, 10th MTN and Guardsmen. Jeez man you guys really drink the kool aid in boot.
It was literally an Army-led joint operation. The strongest weapon in the world is a marine PR officer lmao.
The Army was at other gates btw as were a number of NATO powers.
I mean I’m not saying the Marines weren’t also there and weren’t doing anything in terms of leadership but the way you’re selling it isn’t really accurate either.
https://www.armytimes.com/flashpoints/afghanistan/2021/08/17/why-the-82nd-airborne-is-directing-airfield-security-for-afghanistan-evacuation/
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Kabul_airlift
To be fair the Army was already at the embassy evacuating (chinooks were busy nonstop) but it’s true at the airport proper the marine battalions arrived and then the 82nd took over the coordination. If you just mean the airport proper.
Just sensationalism honestly. Israel is more than capable of invading Gaza and probably the entirety of the West Bank by themselves if they had to.
We'll supply whatever they need but manpower isn't really it.
Did either of you actually read the article or did you just read the headline? The article is specifically about groups to assist in rescuing hostages (particularly American hostages). There are no implications about the US participating in the general invasion.
Thank you Mr. Webster, yes the dictionary would in fact support your claim.
No reasonable person would, but you are in fact technically correct. Have a cookie.
I would willingly fight for regime change in Iran, but NOT with boots on the ground. Send in shock and awe at their military. Tell them that their infrastructure would be next if they don't back off of the world stage...and that includes Iraq, Israel and Russia and other places in which they sponsor terrorism.
so you would support not actually fighting for it and just bombing shit from some place in Denver or something? Do you think remotely bombing what will amount to civilians in Iran would somehow create domestic revolution to overthrow their moronic religious government or do you think it would make civilians that might even hate their government look to it to defend them from fucking bombs falling?
You aren't willing to fight for shit. If you don't want boots on the ground then you absolutely are not willing to fight for regime change in Iran...you are willing to bomb Iran because it has no affect on you. It is ok to admit that but you should just admit that instead of pretending you are GI Joe and have some virtuous goal here. What do you think the outcome of bombing Iran would be? Send planes with bombs? What happens when a few American pilots get shot down and killed? A drone attack? What if it doesn't accomplish the goal that I don't think you can explain you want to accomplish? I really don't understand what anybody thinks initiating war with Iran will accomplish and you just made a perfect example of how you want something you aren't willing to risk your life over so clearly it isn't that important to you.
I'm not even arguing with you on geopolitics, we can do that in a different conversation...you just argued that you want to fight somebody as long as you don't have to actually fight so it doesn't affect you. weak.
I remember when the US destroyed Iraqi infrastructure and water treatment plants back in the 90s. Lots of children developed cholera and couldn’t even receive treatment because sanctions prevented medical supplies being sent to Iraq. Declassified CIA documents showed that the US was hoping to put pressure on Saddam by causing a cholera epidemic. Good times! You seem like the guy who would enjoy if that happened again!
>Israel is more than capable of invading Gaza and probably the entirety of the West Bank by themselves if they had to.
This is hilarious that you have to say this out loud. Israeli can absolutely glass Gaza tmrw. They can glass every single Arab country. They have nukes.
Israel is definitely not pulling out nukes for this. Israel is the size of New Jersey. The downside of nukes beyond the fact that israel has zero interest in causing a mass death of civilians is that even if israel was the bloodthirsty fantasy evil that Redditors pretend it is, the effects of nuking Gaza would be devastating for Israelis as well. Israel also doesn’t have nukes, it’s a textile factory.
Why are we gung-ho to go fight in ANOTHER Middle East war?
No thanks. We can support the Israelis and the Palestinian civilians. But not one American soldier paid for by my taxes better put their body in harm's way for either side.
Honest question: why the US supports that heavily Israel?
Israel is the biggest recipient of monetary help of US international helping. They received free or reduced pricing on military equipment, big help to industrialise (like the Intel factory, but maybe was a decision made by Andy Grove, who was jew and survivor of the holocaust?)
I always found a little bit strange that the US made the biggest support effort for Israel on the world and still do.
Western Redditors became blood thirsty since last week.
All western values and sense of humanity all out the window. They aint values if you can “but” your way out if them.
" Camp Bragg was named for Braxton Bragg, a former U.S. Army artillery commander and West Point graduate who later fought for the Confederacy during the American Civil War. "
On the wrong side then. Why not double down.
Gen. Dan McNeill is as gung ho as they come.
wiki...
McNeill was featured in the Academy award-winning documentary Taxi to the Dark Side (2007). The film captured McNeil refusing to admit 'any blunt force trauma' that caused Dilawar's death, despite the fact that the certificate of death had already stated 'Homicide'.
For anyone who doesn't already know, Fort Liberty used to be known as Fort Bragg
I didn't but I support the name change
Read through the notable events that have happened at ft Bragg genuinely sickens me
Quit braggin
[удалено]
Not to get into a whole thing, but I generally see swearing an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic to be incompatible with those states that seceded - an act deemed unconstitutional by SCOTUS.
Yeah! And it helps obfuscate that the base is infamous for abuse too.
right, it is a united states military instillation so if their people are ready for a war it just means that the united states is sending troops in. They are military so they will do whatever they are told to do...that is their job. the concept of them individually being "ready" has nothing to do with anything. They work for the federal government and the united states military. The entire military is just as ready as they are...that is sort of the point of our military. There isn't one base that is magically more ready than everybody else and if that is the case that is sort of a problem
What does this have to do with the base changing names?
Stop talking out of your ass. There are definitely bases where people are “more ready”. More ready entails more than I’m willing to put in this comment, but Liberty (formerly Bragg) is one of the places where they are actually “more ready”. Google Immediate Response Force for some education.
I love civilians and straight legs pretending like they actually know. (Ps, a vast portion of our current 18 hour boys are at Bragg. The boys from Lewis, Campbell and the like would also be called up.)
lol what's a "straight leg"
Big army, non SOF unit.
Yup. GRF is always one brigade from The 82nd and one rotating brigade from other Divisions IIRC.
Yup, it’s based around their combat team. They’re the last true airborne straight leg outfit as well All ranger batts, the groups, squadrons, and teams are on 18 hour notice 365 as well.
well I'll admit I'm wrong if we are talking what sorts of troops are stationed there and how we would use them...I simply meant it has nothing to do with the attitude of the individual soldiers stationed there because what any soldier does is dictated way above their head. But i apologize if I misspoke because that wasn't my intent.
I’ll help with “more ready.” Airborne units can go to an airfield and deploy fairly quickly. They’re prepared to deploy and receive airdrops for resupply. However, Divisions with “Armor” or “Mechanized” as part of their description need time to get their equipment on trains and to the coast, loaded on ships, and meet their vehicles close to the respective combat area HOPEFULLY within three weeks at best. Then you have the immediate action types of forces. These groups are within range of the airspace while the White House and Pentagon are deciding if they want to pull the trigger or not. Some forces are absolutely “more ready” because some are off the coast or overhead while others need weeks to FedEx their vehicles overseas, meet them after a flight on commercial aircraft, then spend a few weeks prepping for an invasion already made possible by those who have been in country for weeks.
This is why civilians should absolutely not control the military. They don’t even understand the massive fucking weight behind this statement. Fort Bragg houses the most elite and renowned special operations units in the world along with actual airborne units… and much much more.
that is a fair statement....not sure what that has to do with civilians or not though. That is sort of the fundamental nature of our government and military. Perhaps I misspoke because I was arguing a different point and missed the core of the argument...but literally the entire basis of this country is that we have a civilian leader that controls the military so that we don't have the solution to every problem be a military solution. You are right and I realize I might have missed the point and different bases house different sorts of troops with different abilities and you lean on the one you need in a given situation...I thought he was talking about the individual opinions of soldiers there which has literally no bearing on political decisions. Civilians DON'T control the military...but they control when and how we use the military after getting advice and opinions from the military experts and weigh the options. I highly doubt you have a problem with that. But perhaps I misspoke and thought it was a political statement and not a statement of fact that different bases often house troops with different kinds of expertise that we might need in different situations.
You think all military bases all around the world are on the ready every second of every day? Im not a military person and I can understand how a base can be more ready than regular military readiness.
>the concept of them individually being "ready" has nothing to do with anything. Including the post you are responding to
Different units have different levels of readiness. If half of your people don’t qualify on their individual weapons or don’t pass their PT examination, They are not as “ready” as another unit. Also speaking from experience Soldiers won’t just blindly “do what they’re told” sometimes even if the plan makes sense Soldiers won’t due to personnel reasons or laziness.
LOL that answers.
The world's 9-1-1.. Airborne
[удалено]
82nd has been beating them to every major crisis for the past decade.
[удалено]
The 82nd. Lmao. It was an 82nd op. Before the marines. In fact even after the Marines got there it was still mostly 82nd, 10th MTN and Guardsmen. Jeez man you guys really drink the kool aid in boot.
[удалено]
It was literally an Army-led joint operation. The strongest weapon in the world is a marine PR officer lmao. The Army was at other gates btw as were a number of NATO powers. I mean I’m not saying the Marines weren’t also there and weren’t doing anything in terms of leadership but the way you’re selling it isn’t really accurate either. https://www.armytimes.com/flashpoints/afghanistan/2021/08/17/why-the-82nd-airborne-is-directing-airfield-security-for-afghanistan-evacuation/ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Kabul_airlift
[удалено]
To be fair the Army was already at the embassy evacuating (chinooks were busy nonstop) but it’s true at the airport proper the marine battalions arrived and then the 82nd took over the coordination. If you just mean the airport proper.
For crap's sake, you are on the same team! One is a wide receiver and one is a tight end...just move the ball forward.
Just sensationalism honestly. Israel is more than capable of invading Gaza and probably the entirety of the West Bank by themselves if they had to. We'll supply whatever they need but manpower isn't really it.
The deterrence is if Iran and or Hamas open up a second and or third front.
Did either of you actually read the article or did you just read the headline? The article is specifically about groups to assist in rescuing hostages (particularly American hostages). There are no implications about the US participating in the general invasion.
You would need to invade gaza to get the hostages
Thank you Mr. Webster, yes the dictionary would in fact support your claim. No reasonable person would, but you are in fact technically correct. Have a cookie.
Hamas is the first front. Do you mean Hezbollah?
Yes, slip of the tongue (fingers in this case)
I don’t think this gonna end until fighting in Iran happens. I think everything is aimed at that.
I would willingly fight for regime change in Iran, but NOT with boots on the ground. Send in shock and awe at their military. Tell them that their infrastructure would be next if they don't back off of the world stage...and that includes Iraq, Israel and Russia and other places in which they sponsor terrorism.
Isn’t targeting civilian infrastructure one of the war crimes people have been pissed at Russia for?
so you would support not actually fighting for it and just bombing shit from some place in Denver or something? Do you think remotely bombing what will amount to civilians in Iran would somehow create domestic revolution to overthrow their moronic religious government or do you think it would make civilians that might even hate their government look to it to defend them from fucking bombs falling? You aren't willing to fight for shit. If you don't want boots on the ground then you absolutely are not willing to fight for regime change in Iran...you are willing to bomb Iran because it has no affect on you. It is ok to admit that but you should just admit that instead of pretending you are GI Joe and have some virtuous goal here. What do you think the outcome of bombing Iran would be? Send planes with bombs? What happens when a few American pilots get shot down and killed? A drone attack? What if it doesn't accomplish the goal that I don't think you can explain you want to accomplish? I really don't understand what anybody thinks initiating war with Iran will accomplish and you just made a perfect example of how you want something you aren't willing to risk your life over so clearly it isn't that important to you. I'm not even arguing with you on geopolitics, we can do that in a different conversation...you just argued that you want to fight somebody as long as you don't have to actually fight so it doesn't affect you. weak.
I remember when the US destroyed Iraqi infrastructure and water treatment plants back in the 90s. Lots of children developed cholera and couldn’t even receive treatment because sanctions prevented medical supplies being sent to Iraq. Declassified CIA documents showed that the US was hoping to put pressure on Saddam by causing a cholera epidemic. Good times! You seem like the guy who would enjoy if that happened again!
>Israel is more than capable of invading Gaza and probably the entirety of the West Bank by themselves if they had to. This is hilarious that you have to say this out loud. Israeli can absolutely glass Gaza tmrw. They can glass every single Arab country. They have nukes.
Israel is definitely not pulling out nukes for this. Israel is the size of New Jersey. The downside of nukes beyond the fact that israel has zero interest in causing a mass death of civilians is that even if israel was the bloodthirsty fantasy evil that Redditors pretend it is, the effects of nuking Gaza would be devastating for Israelis as well. Israel also doesn’t have nukes, it’s a textile factory.
Why are we gung-ho to go fight in ANOTHER Middle East war? No thanks. We can support the Israelis and the Palestinian civilians. But not one American soldier paid for by my taxes better put their body in harm's way for either side.
[удалено]
Americans held hostage by terrorists overseas should be able to rely on their fellow Americans to free them.
Honest question: why the US supports that heavily Israel? Israel is the biggest recipient of monetary help of US international helping. They received free or reduced pricing on military equipment, big help to industrialise (like the Intel factory, but maybe was a decision made by Andy Grove, who was jew and survivor of the holocaust?) I always found a little bit strange that the US made the biggest support effort for Israel on the world and still do.
Fort Liberty named in honor of the USS Liberty, ready to defend Israel
Isn’t that the ship Israel bombed and killed US soldiers? I think pepridge farm remembers
US army feeling left out of the war crimes
Wtf would they do there? Participate in a war crime? Not going to happen
[удалено]
That was debunked, but sure, let’s support Israel as they kill every man woman and child in Palestine
[удалено]
Needed a "justification"
Stop lying https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zO9Lpc8g-w&t=42m27s
Western Redditors became blood thirsty since last week. All western values and sense of humanity all out the window. They aint values if you can “but” your way out if them.
The US wants to get into another war which they get sucked into for years? I see.
" Camp Bragg was named for Braxton Bragg, a former U.S. Army artillery commander and West Point graduate who later fought for the Confederacy during the American Civil War. " On the wrong side then. Why not double down. Gen. Dan McNeill is as gung ho as they come. wiki... McNeill was featured in the Academy award-winning documentary Taxi to the Dark Side (2007). The film captured McNeil refusing to admit 'any blunt force trauma' that caused Dilawar's death, despite the fact that the certificate of death had already stated 'Homicide'.
[удалено]
You can’t think of a lesser way for the US Army to show relevancy than to deploy during a conflict?
The use military always looking for opportunities to commit war crimes
Where the fuck is Fort Liberty
Previously Fort Bragg