PDA

View Full Version : Newsmax envisions coming coup in U.S.


Hatter
09-30-2009, 01:49 AM
In the batshit crazy category, I felt I needed to share this one: (http://www.newsmax.com/john_perry/obama_military_coup/2009/09/29/266012.html)

Obama Risks a Domestic Military ‘Intervention’

Tuesday, September 29, 2009 10:35 AM

By: John L. Perry

There is a remote, although gaining, possibility America’s military will intervene as a last resort to resolve the “Obama problem.” Don’t dismiss it as unrealistic.

America isn’t the Third World. If a military coup does occur here it will be civilized. That it has never happened doesn’t mean it wont. Describing what may be afoot is not to advocate it. So, view the following through military eyes:

# Officers swear to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” Unlike enlisted personnel, they do not swear to “obey the orders of the president of the United States.”

# Top military officers can see the Constitution they are sworn to defend being trampled as American institutions and enterprises are nationalized.

# They can see that Americans are increasingly alarmed that this nation, under President Barack Obama, may not even be recognizable as America by the 2012 election, in which he will surely seek continuation in office.

# They can see that the economy — ravaged by deficits, taxes, unemployment, and impending inflation — is financially reliant on foreign lender governments.

# They can see this president waging undeclared war on the intelligence community, without whose rigorous and independent functions the armed services are rendered blind in an ever-more hostile world overseas and at home.

# They can see the dismantling of defenses against missiles targeted at this nation by avowed enemies, even as America’s troop strength is allowed to sag.

# They can see the horror of major warfare erupting simultaneously in two, and possibly three, far-flung theaters before America can react in time.

# They can see the nation’s safety and their own military establishments and honor placed in jeopardy as never before.

So, if you are one of those observant military professionals, what do you do?

Wait until this president bungles into losing the war in Afghanistan, and Pakistan’s arsenal of nuclear bombs falls into the hands of militant Islam?

Wait until Israel is forced to launch air strikes on Iran’s nuclear-bomb plants, and the Middle East explodes, destabilizing or subjugating the Free World?

What happens if the generals Obama sent to win the Afghan war are told by this president (who now says, “I’m not interested in victory”) that they will be denied troops they must have to win? Do they follow orders they cannot carry out, consistent with their oath of duty? Do they resign en masse?

Or do they soldier on, hoping the 2010 congressional elections will reverse the situation? Do they dare gamble the national survival on such political whims?

Anyone who imagines that those thoughts are not weighing heavily on the intellect and conscience of America’s military leadership is lost in a fool’s fog.

Will the day come when patriotic general and flag officers sit down with the president, or with those who control him, and work out the national equivalent of a “family intervention,” with some form of limited, shared responsibility?

Imagine a bloodless coup to restore and defend the Constitution through an interim administration that would do the serious business of governing and defending the nation. Skilled, military-trained, nation-builders would replace accountability-challenged, radical-left commissars. Having bonded with his twin teleprompters, the president would be detailed for ceremonial speech-making.

Military intervention is what Obama’s exponentially accelerating agenda for “fundamental change” toward a Marxist state is inviting upon America. A coup is not an ideal option, but Obama’s radical ideal is not acceptable or reversible.

Unthinkable? Then think up an alternative, non-violent solution to the Obama problem. Just don’t shrug and say, “We can always worry about that later.”

In the 2008 election, that was the wistful, self-indulgent, indifferent reliance on abnegation of personal responsibility that has sunk the nation into this morass.

John L. Perry, a prize-winning newspaper editor and writer who served on White House staffs of two presidents, is a regular columnist for Newsmax.com. Read John Perry's columns here.

Wow. So regardless of Republican or Democrat stuff, I would like to point out that predicting a coup within the first 9 months of a presidency is fairly staggering. What scares me is that people will read this and think that a coup is a good idea in the U.S. under circumstances where someone you disagree with is elected to office.

Brynja
09-30-2009, 05:06 AM
It makese sense Hatter when you consider the last 20 years or so....getting worse in the last 10...of what really amounts to hateful talk radio on both sides.

obryn
09-30-2009, 08:15 AM
Newsmax and WorldNetDaily are about as crazy as you get in the interwebs. This doesn't really surprise me. :) Link to it on RedState, and you'd have a thousand mouth-breathers cheering about what a great idea it is.

-O

Hatter
09-30-2009, 04:16 PM
Well the article was actually removed from the site this morning maybe too crazy even for Newsmax.

Name Lips
09-30-2009, 04:48 PM
Sometimes I get worried... that one of the main differences between liberal nutjobs and conservative nutjobs is that the conservative nutjobs are more likely to have an arsenal...

...which is why articles like this, subtly encouraging a violent uprising against the government, scare me. When liberals say these things, you can smirk and look the other way because all we have are big mouths.

Hatter
09-30-2009, 06:25 PM
In my experience, the military is conservative in the classic definition of the word: opposed to change. There's no way the military will step in and depose a duly-elected government, they take their constitutional mandate very seriously.

Aloysius
09-30-2009, 06:32 PM
In my experience, the military is conservative in the classic definition of the word: opposed to change. There's no way the military will step in and depose a duly-elected government, they take their constitutional mandate very seriously.

The military, probably. Far right militias on the other hand can absolutely go Oklahoma and blew/assassinate a few things.

Freedom Canadian
09-30-2009, 06:49 PM
In my experience, the military is conservative in the classic definition of the word: opposed to change. There's no way the military will step in and depose a duly-elected government, they take their constitutional mandate very seriously.

Exactly.

Trainz
09-30-2009, 06:59 PM
subtly encouraging a violent uprising

:grey:

Name Lips
09-30-2009, 07:04 PM
I say subtly in that if you actually write an article that says outright "You should all take up arms and march on Washington, exectute the President and all Democratic elected officials, and take control of the country" -- that is OVERT and will get your ass investigated by the Secret Service and FBI.

Comparitively, this is subtle. By saying that "some people are considering it" it puts the idea in the minds of people who might otherwise have never thought of it, and makes those who have thought of it more justified in their beliefs. But the author can always stand back and say, "woah now, I never said that!"

DarwinOfMind
09-30-2009, 09:12 PM
The military, probably. Far right militias on the other hand can absolutely go Oklahoma and blew/assassinate a few things.
careful now, I'm in oklahoma, I don't want a repeat

Utrecht
10-01-2009, 09:08 AM
While the coup element is definately a new element - there have been fringes like this for Bush and Clinton (remember the movie Death of a President during Bush's term or similar remove Clinton from his presidency by any means during the impeachement timeframe).

Harry
10-01-2009, 09:21 AM
A fictional movie by a British filmmaker hardly counts the same as conservative columnists calling for a President's head or encouraging a coup. Unless you are like my father and claim that such people are simply entertainers sputtering bad fiction no one listens to.

The Theocrat of Poon-Tang
10-01-2009, 11:29 AM
A fictional movie by a British filmmaker hardly counts the same as conservative columnists calling for a President's head or encouraging a coup...

You really want to go down this rabbit-hole? Some of the shit the far left was alleging and encouraging against Bush was just as insane.

Oh, and by the way, if any of you think this is a real possibility you're just as crazy as the guy who wrote it.

Old Fart
10-01-2009, 12:42 PM
simply entertainers sputtering bad fiction no one listens to.Who do you mean? British film-makers? Conservative columnists? "Hate talk radio" hosts? "Hate talk radio" hosts whom Minnesotans stupidly elect to the Senate? Michael Moore? Other?

Space Cadet B^3
10-01-2009, 01:13 PM
Not scared of a coup, not worried about a revolution. Just tired of the hype on both sides preventing progress.

The Theocrat of Poon-Tang
10-01-2009, 02:52 PM
Sometimes I get worried... that one of the main differences between liberal nutjobs and conservative nutjobs is that the conservative nutjobs are more likely to have an arsenal...

...which is why articles like this, subtly encouraging a violent uprising against the government, scare me. When liberals say these things, you can smirk and look the other way because all we have are big mouths.


That sort of lets liberals off the hook. Take this guy, for example, who called the lack of Obamacare a "holocaust". Is that not just as damaging a scare tactic?

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0909/Grayson_calls_health_care_crisis_holocaust.html

The Winslow
10-01-2009, 03:36 PM
Political debate in the 21st century USA:
"You're Hitler!"
"Nuh-huh, you're Hitler!"
"Oh yeah? Well, you're Hitler and Stalin!"
"And you're Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot!"

Oh well, at least it's kinda entertaining. Around here it's just as lame, but it's also boring.

obryn
10-01-2009, 03:44 PM
You really want to go down this rabbit-hole? Some of the shit the far left was alleging and encouraging against Bush was just as insane.
So am I to take it that anything anyone does in politics is okay as long as you can point to someone else - connected to government or not - who did a slightly similar thing one time?

I mean, it's a clever defense, but I'm pretty sure I won't use it for raising my kid.

-O

AZRogue
10-01-2009, 05:09 PM
In my experience, the military is conservative in the classic definition of the word: opposed to change. There's no way the military will step in and depose a duly-elected government, they take their constitutional mandate very seriously.

I know some special forces guys--they like skydiving just west of Buckeye, not far from where I live--and I've heard them talk about what they would do if they ever needed to overthrow the government for straying too far from the Constitution. They make it sound easy.

Of course, this was over beers. More than a few beers. Bravado tends to get thick around a campfire under those circumstances. Just saying, I think it's something that many in the armed forces think about in the back of their minds, even if only as a mental exercise.

Ancalagon
10-01-2009, 05:23 PM
That guy used to be on the whitehouse staff?

That's concerning.

DarwinOfMind
10-01-2009, 05:24 PM
These people that are all we need to take violent action to protect the constitution, where were they when the bill of rights was being used to line the bottom of bird cages?

They act like the 2nd admentmend is the only one they've read.

The Winslow
10-01-2009, 05:31 PM
They act like the 2nd admentmend is the only one they've read.

The Right to Bear Arms:

Brynja
10-01-2009, 09:06 PM
That guy used to be on the whitehouse staff?

That's concerning.

Do you mean disconcerting?

Snatch
10-01-2009, 11:17 PM
Do you mean disconcerting?

Nah - Anc's an optimist!

Northcott
10-02-2009, 01:27 AM
Yeah, that's the part that stuck out for me -- this wingnut used to be White House staff. I wonder which administrations had him on payroll?

Merganser
10-02-2009, 06:05 PM
Yeah, that's the part that stuck out for me -- this wingnut used to be White House staff. I wonder which administrations had him on payroll?

Supposedly it was Lyndon Johnson and Jimmy Carter. If that's true, I assume that this man must be one of those former liberals who became neoconservatives or otherwise became very hawkish after Sept. 11th.

Hatter
10-02-2009, 07:48 PM
Or... and I'm just going to throw this out there... Maybe he's a lunatic.

Ancalagon
10-02-2009, 08:45 PM
I guess that over the decades, his brain had time to rot?

I was concerned because I was appalled that someone like that would be working for the Whitehouse, but I guess there is enough temporal distance.

The Theocrat of Poon-Tang
10-05-2009, 08:13 AM
Or... and I'm just going to throw this out there... Maybe he's a lunatic.

:lol:

Well done, Hatter.

Snatch
10-05-2009, 09:48 AM
Or... and I'm just going to throw this out there... Maybe he's a lunatic.

Is that a fourth party now? ;)

tleilaxu
10-05-2009, 11:40 AM
Wow. So regardless of Republican or Democrat stuff, I would like to point out that predicting a coup within the first 9 months of a presidency is fairly staggering. What scares me is that people will read this and think that a coup is a good idea in the U.S. under circumstances where someone you disagree with is elected to office.

if such a thing occurred the only way to save the country would be a general strike and non-violent non-cooperation with the state.

In my experience, the military is conservative in the classic definition of the word: opposed to change. There's no way the military will step in and depose a duly-elected government, they take their constitutional mandate very seriously.

and this we should all be thankful for. the very idea of a military coup in the united states is almost unthinkable.

Dacke
10-05-2009, 12:15 PM
Is that a fourth party now? ;)
Well, it is in the UK (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_Monster_Raving_Loony_Party).

Scutisorex Shrewlord
10-14-2009, 01:00 AM
It's a ridiculous idea. Obama's policies, at least so far, are no more Socialist than Bush's policies. The militias won't do anything to screw up their growth right now anyway... they're recruiting more and more loonies and are adverse to real confrontation anyway. Unless Obama gives them a rallying cry like Ruby Ridge or Waco, I suspect nothing will happen. To those idiots, killing Obama would be killing the goose who laid the golden eggs.