Do the Armed Forces have contingency plans for confronting the Government

[burythehatchet]

After last night night apocalytical performance by his highness, I suspect all stops will be pulled, including stealing the election. My question: Does the military have a plan for dealing with this when the evidence is apparent?

There is no doubt in my mind that at least a few generals have been podering that scenario and debating what they would do. Should we be talking to them more directly? Is it too crazy to try and have that conversation?

[demnan]

1. Yeah, I wonder

n/t

[hewitt]

2. yeah, it's called a military coup

I'm not ready to go there.

[burythehatchet]

4. arguably, you have already been there.

some might argue that the coup d'etat occurred in 2000. That one was bloodless.

[Englander]

3. I think this film deals with that ,from different pov...

btw,how much of this film is based on reality?

[burythehatchet]

6. thank you

I've been thirsting for more political movies and this one I have not seen.

[Silverhair]

11. It is based on an early 1960's book.

The military has no contingency plans to take over the gov't.

The military culture is such that is just can't happen. I spent too many years as an officer to even imagine that such a takeover is possible. Any general, or group of generals that tried to give the orders that would take the gov't over would find that the orders just wouldn't be obeyed. That often happens in militaries. Remember in 1991 when the gov't called out tanks to disperse the civilian crowd in Moscow, and the tanks joined the crowd? There was a great scene where someone in the crowd was asking a junior officer how they could suppress their fellow Russians. The officer took out his pistol and showed that it was empty. None of them had ammo. Thereby he let the crowd know that it was a bluff.

You can relax the paranoia on that fear.

[burythehatchet]

12. appreciate the thoughtful comments

but I havce to question some of the stated assumptions.

"The military culture is such that is just can't happen"

Why is it so different? We are not so unique.

Remember this is not about a coup. Its about PREVENTING another coup. Significant difference. Dont you think?

[Silverhair]

15. Exactly. We aren't that different from civilians.

When you have a military that is so professional that everybody in it enlists for a career, then the military becomes greatly divorced from the life of civilians. Then it can be used to supress the populace. A citizen army just won't obey orders to move against a crowd that could have their own family in it. You can use them to disperse crowds, put down riots, and things like that, but they just won't cooperate in a coup. Generals can order all they want to, but majors, captains, and various enlisted men have to do it or it doesn't get done.

[Florida_Geek]

5. Why

did you not hear that Kerry want to expand the ARMY and Special Forces, that what the Army military officers want.

[mrgorth]

7. You mean "Operation Valkyrie"?

?

[burythehatchet]

8. I'm not familiar with it but I will google it

[mrgorth]

9. WWII reference

from when Claus Von Stauffenberg and some others in the regular army tried to take Germany back from the nazis.

[burythehatchet]

10. thanks, I read up on it.

I don't see that situation in eactly the same light, although there are similarities. The civilian commanders have clearly damned the troops and the executive branch is planning another theft. In these circumstances, the military commanders are confronted with a very real decision.

[expatriot]

13. In all seriousness.... this is what their contigency plan should be.

Rule 1:

The armed forces shall never act to prevent the U.S. Congress from convening and carrying out its powers as described by the U.S. Constitution.

The armed forces shall guard the Constitutional order of the United States, including the protection of the various branches of government's right to exercise its powers.

The armed forces shall not act under the authority of the executive branch in the capacity to infringe upon the powers of other branches.

Obviously, if Bush tried to usurp the Constitutional order, all we would need is to get Congress in session. There would be only a handful of GOP congressmen that dared to support the coup.

[burythehatchet]

14. wise words

the supreme court's influence would certainly be tainted.

As far as getting congress in session, I agree this is necessary.