USA "Martial Law" what happens?

[Brickjectivity]

Ok, so lets say hypothetically that a US president decided to make up an excuse and declare martial law over the USA and its territories. Say they had already been in power for several years, been popular and had been planning their takeover for a long time.

How would that go? Would the military cooperate? Would the police fall into line? Would the NSA and FBI go along with it?

Would US citizens cow down and hope for it to pass over, or would we overthrow the dictator?

 

[Lyndon]

You're doing research for Trump, aren't you???

 

[Brickjectivity]

You're doing research for Trump, aren't you???

I'm sorry but the money is just too good.

Actually I already think I know the answers to these questions but am stimulating a little talk. I do feel like it might happen, so I think a little discussion might be worthwhile.

 

[suncowiam]

He is Trump posing as an RF member. Or, it's Hillary posing as Trump posing as an RF member.

Pretty sure one of the two.

 

[columbus]

I'm sorry but the money is just too good.

You're getting the cash up front right?
Tom

 

[Sunstone]

I think Americans these days would be easier push-overs than most of us suspect. Maybe about half of them -- if not more -- would welcome it as a necessary or even desirable measure, especially if it were sold to them as something that must be done to make them safe from a terrorist attack. Americans have lost their love of liberty and replaced it with a fear for their security.

If you don't think that's so, just pay attention to how popular Trump has become through fear-mongering. Or to how popular Fox News has been for years now doing the same thing as Trump --- fear-mongering. A scared nation is an obedient nation.

 

[Brickjectivity]

He is Trump posing as an RF member. Or, it's Hillary posing as Trump posing as an RF member.

Pretty sure one of the two.

...or I could be a right wing gun nut excited about Hillary. She could get elected and declare martial law, and then all of us gun nuts would finally be recognized as the sensible people that we are.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

I think Americans these days would be easier push-overs than most of us suspect. Maybe about half of them -- if not more -- would welcome it as a necessary or even desirable measure, especially if it were sold to them as something that must be done to make them safe from a terrorist attack. Americans have lost their love of liberty and replaced it with a fear for their security.

If you don't think that's so, just pay attention to how popular Trump has become through fear-mongering. Or to how popular Fox News has been for years now doing the same thing as Trump --- fear-mongering. A scared nation is an obedient nation.

I'd say that roughly a quarter to a third at either end would be happy to see their party take over as a dictatorship and eliminate/persecute the other end of the spectrum. Therefore at least one-quarter at the other end would be vehemently opposed--willing to take to the streets, even take up arms--to oppose a dictatorship of the other end of the spectrum. The middle third would probably be pretty evenly divided between willing to kowtow and willing to resist simply because it would be "UnAmerican" to allow someone to subvert the Constitution so blatantly.

 

[Valjean]

Too many unknown factors to make an assessment.
How popular is this president -- and who's he popular with?
What precipitated this enactment?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I think the police would probably be more behind it than the military.

 

[Sunstone]

I think the police would probably be more behind it than the military.

I suspect the military would get behind a right wing plot much more readily than a left wing plot.

 

[Sees]

There is actually an internal discussion about this passed to each new generation of folks in the military and law enforcement. People should put a lot more faith in them than they do.

 

[Sunstone]

There is actually an internal discussion about this passed to each new generation of folks in the military and law enforcement. People should put a lot more faith in them than they do.

That's reassuring. Thanks.

 

[psychoslice]

It must be something in the water, America is acting pretty stupid lately, so who knows.

 

[BSM1]

Ok, so lets say hypothetically that a US president decided to make up an excuse and declare martial law over the USA and its territories. Say they had already been in power for several years, been popular and had been planning their takeover for a long time.

How would that go? Would the military cooperate? Would the police fall into line? Would the NSA and FBI go along with it?

Would US citizens cow down and hope for it to pass over, or would we overthrow the dictator?

Just as a thought to add to your thread, Obama has been weeding out officers and enlisted from the military that would not necessarily support him for the last seven years. A prime example is his very public statement that he would not use nukes on a non-nuke country. Officers that feel the government would not use all the tools in the box to defeat an enemy would be hesitant to lead soldiers in combat, thus they would leave the service. The same holds true of Joe Enlistedman. If he felt that the President would not protect him in the worse situation then he/she may not join. This leaves an army of de facto Obama supporters. Also, check the record and see how many high ranking officers have been drummed out of the service over extremely minor incidents in the last couple of years. Martial law is not a s far-fetched as it sounds.

 

[Laika]

Ok, so lets say hypothetically that a US president decided to make up an excuse and declare martial law over the USA and its territories. Say they had already been in power for several years, been popular and had been planning their takeover for a long time.

How would that go? Would the military cooperate? Would the police fall into line? Would the NSA and FBI go along with it?

Would US citizens cow down and hope for it to pass over, or would we overthrow the dictator?

Ask Abraham Lincoln:

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=69993

Article 1, Section 9 of the US constitution ties the suspension of the right of habeas corpus to martial law.

The Insurrection Act of 1807 limits the power of the President to deploy troops in the event of lawlessness, insurrection and Rebellion;

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrection_Act

In the reconstruction period Congress limited the powers of the Federal government to use the armed forces to enforce domestic policies after ending the US army's occupation of the Confederate states.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act

Power to declare martial law was expanded in 2007, to include the right of the President to take control of the national guard without authorisation by the state governed when public order has been lost and state governments are no longer capable of enforcing public order. (This law was repealed in 2008).

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.R._5122_(2006)

I think that's probably enough to start with.

 

[psychoslice]

I think the way the USA is going, that they need a martial law, they are full of crime, their prisons are full of criminals, they are going down the toilet, so yes they certainty need something to wake them up, and if that's marital law, then so be it.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Just as a thought to add to your thread, Obama has been weeding out officers and enlisted from the military that would not necessarily support him for the last seven years. A prime example is his very public statement that he would not use nukes on a non-nuke country. Officers that feel the government would not use all the tools in the box to defeat an enemy would be hesitant to lead soldiers in combat, thus they would leave the service. The same holds true of Joe Enlistedman. If he felt that the President would not protect him in the worse situation then he/she may not join. This leaves an army of de facto Obama supporters. Also, check the record and see how many high ranking officers have been drummed out of the service over extremely minor incidents in the last couple of years. Martial law is not a s far-fetched as it sounds.

Question: By 'check the record' do you refer to news media reports covering well known events like the firing of Gen. Petraeus or is there a record of who is drummed out on whitehouse.gov or something like that?

 

[Underhill]

Just as a thought to add to your thread, Obama has been weeding out officers and enlisted from the military that would not necessarily support him for the last seven years. A prime example is his very public statement that he would not use nukes on a non-nuke country. Officers that feel the government would not use all the tools in the box to defeat an enemy would be hesitant to lead soldiers in combat, thus they would leave the service. The same holds true of Joe Enlistedman. If he felt that the President would not protect him in the worse situation then he/she may not join. This leaves an army of de facto Obama supporters. Also, check the record and see how many high ranking officers have been drummed out of the service over extremely minor incidents in the last couple of years. Martial law is not a s far-fetched as it sounds.

Yeah, it really is.

 

[Underhill]

I think the way the USA is going, that they need a martial law, they are full of crime, their prisons are full of criminals, they are going down the toilet, so yes they certainty need something to wake them up, and if that's marital law, then so be it.

I think you have been spending too much time reading horror pieces. The country is extremely safe for the most part. There are a few neighborhoods in some cities I would avoid at night alone. But well over 99% of the country is as safe as anywhere on the map.

We have some specific crime problems, and our prisons are absurdly full of pot dealers but the media makes things sound so much worse than they really are.