Internet rages as a Baltimore Whole Foods market made effort to feed US Soldiers in the city. - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Antdawg;47629278]Thank you. This is the kind of reply I was hoping I'd get not 'ur dumb lol'.[/QUOTE] My mistake, I thought you might have already understood that there aren't enough police to contain such a large protest WITH looters and riots. It would take probably 4-5 times the amount of manpower the police have to deal with everything. The National Guard just comes in when there is a state of emergency to help give manpower wherever it's needed. They often hand out tarps, ice, water, and MREs here when we have bad hurricanes. They can also act as police during civil unrest. They are just run like the military in that they are required to wear their uniforms and have their weapons. They are like a swiss army knife when shit hits the fan.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;47629275]Our military can't do that, but our national guard does every time.[/QUOTE] Actually they have mobilized the army for disaster relief before, and the 101st airborne division (the famous Screaming Eagles) were also deployed to protect black students in Little Rock schools during the beginning of desegregation prior to the nationalizing of the Arkansas guard. Although I suppose the loophole there is the capacity they were acting in.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;47629318]My mistake, I thought you might have already understood that there aren't enough police to contain such a large protest WITH looters and riots. It would take probably 4-5 times the amount of manpower the police have to deal with everything. The National Guard just comes in when there is a state of emergency to help give manpower wherever it's needed. They often hand out tarps, ice, water, and MREs here when we have bad hurricanes. They can also act as police during civil unrest. They are just run like the military in that they are required to wear their uniforms and have their weapons. They are like a swiss army knife when shit hits the fan.[/QUOTE] We have coverage of the riots on domestic news here but today was the first time I heard the National Guard was involved. Now I see why. Edit: Okay seriously how is this post dumb?

[QUOTE=zin908;47629316]Sometimes I think Facepunch is the only sane area of the internet left. Using the term "sane" loosely, since we are all lunatics in our own right.[/QUOTE] That's a scary thought. [editline]29th April 2015[/editline] National Guard are the good guy's called in when shit's really bad. They wear camo and fight alongside national military in wars, but when the state has a crisis they're the first on call, and they'll always respond. Whether its a natural or man made disaster, riot, terror act, whatever.

[QUOTE=Antdawg;47629336]We have coverage of the riots on domestic news here but today was the first time I heard the National Guard was involved. Now I see why.[/QUOTE] If you want an interesting read on the topic, look up Kathleen Blanco on wikipedia, the part about hurricane Katrina specifically. Bush offered to federalize the National Guard to simplify the command structure, but Blanco declined because they would then become part of the federal military, and lose policing powers needed to stop looters. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathleen_Blanco#Hurricane_Katrina[/url]

[QUOTE=Antdawg;47629234]Not disputing that. They are still soldiers.[/QUOTE] Then you lack understanding into how the US works. The police can not deal with the situation by themselves, therefore the National Guard is called out. They are called out for a variety of things, and are trained to help handle the situation. This is a shitstorm because some people have no life and must bitch about everything. The National Guard is there to help protect them from rioters, and some people have to bitch about a Whole Foods store being generous to the people protecting their livelihoods...

i don't get why people are so shocked that businesses are offering to feed the people keeping their stores safe, unless they think there is no looting happening at all

Why can't they give free food to the NG and kids? Why does it have to only go to one or the other?

[QUOTE=New Cidem;47629465]Why can't they give free food to the NG and kids? Why does it have to only go to one or the other?[/QUOTE] Because they can't guess where the kids live, they're just giving food to NG that happen to go by their stores. Pretty sure there are no kids in the streets due to how dangerous it is.

[QUOTE]One woman tweeted, "As Baltimore's poorest kids are left hungry due to school closure (no school lunch), @WholeFoods feed the oppressor."[/QUOTE] I understand peps can go through hard times, my family helps the church with feeding the homeless and I've worked with the local high school multiple times to get under privileged students refurbished home computers for study, but you can fuck right off blaming the people just trying to help out.

[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;47629459]i don't get why people are so shocked that businesses are offering to feed the people keeping their stores safe, unless they think there is no looting happening at all[/QUOTE] People have been driven so far into the "Us v.s. Them" mentality that they think any form of authority is oppression, and you shouldn't support any of it.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;47629542]People have been driven so far into the "Us v.s. Them" mentality that they think any form of authority is oppression, and you shouldn't support any of it.[/QUOTE] Objectivity is one of the rarest things in today's age and culture.

[QUOTE=Michael haxz;47629536]I understand peps can go through hard times, my family helps the church with feeding the homeless and I've worked with the local high school multiple times to get under privileged students refurbished home computers for study, but you can fuck right off blaming the people just trying to help out.[/QUOTE] funny thing is a bunch of churches were giving out free lunches to kids who were counting on that for lunch

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;47629218]It's the National Guard. The U.S. military can't operate on U.S. soil for civilian law enforcement because the army is ran by the federal government. The state's national guard, however, is operated by the state, and therefore is allowed to operate within it's state to be used as law enforcement to keep the peace, or as a defense for the state against the federal government. It was a way to make sure the government couldn't use the army against the states. Posse Comitatus Act[/QUOTE] Not really. The national guard is broken up on a state by state basis for organizational purposes. The guard is the federal militia outlined in the US constitution in article one. (which outlines the authority of congress) [quote]To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;[/quote] The federal government wasn't supposed to have a standing army. Hence the two year restriction on budgeting for the military. The standing arm of enforcement of the federal government IS the national guard. They are the militia that the constitution refers to. You can tell because the federal government does indeed use them to suppress insurrection (like riots) and because they adhere to the training and funding requirements laid out by the constitution. The guard? They exist to suppress the people, not to defend the states against the federal government. Aside from Texas, I know of no states which maintain a state level military. The second amendment exists explicitly because we'd just finished fighting a war AGAINST the militia (and regulars) and we recognized the danger the militia posed, but also the necessity of their existence in order to maintain order. Guardsmen get used to put down riots because that is what they are there for. They suppress insurrection. Also the federal military can totally be used to do exactly the same thing, it just requires an act of congress. Which is what the Posse Comitatus Act says. [quote] it shall not be lawful to employ any part of the Army of the United States, as a posse comitatus, or otherwise, for the purpose of executing the laws, except in such cases and under such circumstances as such employment of said force may be expressly authorized by the Constitution or by act of Congress[/quote]

Whole Foods sandwiches are amazing, lucky guys.

people are honing in on the fact that whole foods is practically an icon of gentrification that caters to new money, and by making sandwiches for troops people are choosing to see it as a symbolic positioning of private wealth and the establishment against the working poor, who are arguably the force driving the baltimore riots. it's a bit ridiculous, but i can understand the association being made. whole foods is totally a contrivance of post-recession inequality in the US.

[QUOTE=GunFox;47629959]Not really. The national guard is broken up on a state by state basis for organizational purposes. The guard is the federal militia outlined in the US constitution in article one. (which outlines the authority of congress) The federal government wasn't supposed to have a standing army. Hence the two year restriction on budgeting for the military. The standing arm of enforcement of the federal government IS the national guard. They are the militia that the constitution refers to. You can tell because the federal government does indeed use them to suppress insurrection (like riots) and because they adhere to the training and funding requirements laid out by the constitution. The guard? They exist to suppress the people, not to defend the states against the federal government. Aside from Texas, I know of no states which maintain a state level military. The second amendment exists explicitly because we'd just finished fighting a war AGAINST the militia (and regulars) and we recognized the danger the militia posed, but also the necessity of their existence in order to maintain order. Guardsmen get used to put down riots because that is what they are there for. They suppress insurrection. Also the federal military can totally be used to do exactly the same thing, it just requires an act of congress. Which is what the Posse Comitatus Act says.[/QUOTE] The federal government equips and trains the National Guard, but they are in no way under command of the federal government. If they were, they would not be able to directly enforce state law, due to the Posse Comitatus. The fact that governors and states can use the National Guard to enforce state law without an act of congress means they aren't a federal militia, but a state militia, and answer to the state. So while they are indeed trained and funded by the federal government, as required by the constitution, they do not answer to the federal government because if they did so, they wouldn't be able to be used for cases such as this without congressional approval as they are doing now.

[QUOTE=GunFox;47629959]Aside from Texas, I know of no states which maintain a state level military.[/QUOTE] Well shit, the more you know I guess. Does it operate as their form of the National Guard? I saw that the Texas military is split into three branches, I wonder how many people actually serve in it.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;47630030]The federal government equips and trains the National Guard, but they are in no way under command of the federal government. If they were, they would not be able to directly enforce state law, due to the Posse Comitatus. The fact that governors and states can use the National Guard to enforce state law without an act of congress means they aren't a federal militia, but a state militia, and answer to the state. So while they are indeed trained and funded by the federal government, as required by the constitution, they do not answer to the federal government because if they did so, they wouldn't be able to be used for cases such as this without congressional approval as they are doing now.[/QUOTE] The president, by simple use of an executive order, can immediately federalize the ANG under his command at any time. That's why there were ANG units fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. [editline]30th April 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=GunFox;47629959]Aside from Texas, I know of no states which maintain a state level military.[/QUOTE] [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_defense_force]Well...[/url]

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;47630057]The president, by simple use of an executive order, can immediately federalize the ANG under his command at any time. That's why there were ANG units fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.[/QUOTE] I'm not saying he can't, because he can under the Insurrection Act of 1808. Don't get me wrong here. I'm not saying that they can't ever be part of the federal military forces. It's that by default, they are state military forces, not federal ones. That's why they have the flexibility of being able to directly enforce state law without an act of congress. It's why they can operate how they can.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;47630090]I'm not saying he can't, because he can under the Insurrection Act of 1808. Don't get me wrong here. I'm not saying that they can't ever be part of the federal military forces. It's that by default, they are state military forces, not federal ones. That's why they have the flexibility of being able to directly enforce state law without an act of congress. It's why they can operate how they can.[/QUOTE] It's more like, they're the Army reserve that state governors get use when not called upon.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;47630101]It's more like, they're the Army reserve that state governors get use when not called upon.[/QUOTE] Kinda, yeah. But when the governors use them, they are under command of the state, not the federal government. It's like your boss loaning you out to a subsidiary company. You work as a full fledged employee of the subsidiary temporarily, but your boss can call you back at any time if he really needs to.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;47630090]I'm not saying he can't, because he can under the Insurrection Act of 1808. Don't get me wrong here. I'm not saying that they can't ever be part of the federal military forces. It's that by default, they are state military forces, not federal ones. That's why they have the flexibility of being able to directly enforce state law without an act of congress. It's why they can operate how they can.[/QUOTE] Read the Oath of Enlistment.

[QUOTE=wickedplayer494;47629279]No, because the retards that are rioting think a violent protest will get anything done. Spoiler alert: it doesn't.[/QUOTE] Damn their warnings, damn their lies! They will see the people rise!

[QUOTE=Eonart;47629471]Maybe if you people hadn't started to riot and destroy everything, schools wouldn't have been closed in the first place and the NG wouldn't have needed to come. Food for thought.[/QUOTE] Yeah I'm sure the stay at home mom with two five year olds is totally responsible for the riots she had nothing to do with. "You people." What is this, the fucking sixties?

[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;47630277]Yeah I'm sure the stay at home mom with two five year olds is totally responsible for the riots she had nothing to do with. "You people." What is this, the fucking sixties?[/QUOTE] There's more than one way to look at "you people"; it could be Eonart was referring to the people inciting and/or supporting the rioting, which the person who tweeted clearly is considering they called the NG "the oppressors". Also, the use of "you people" makes it clear the poster wasn't singling out the person who tweeted as the sole cause of the riots, so I'm not sure why you even made the first remark.

You'd think with the defense budget being so fuckhuge they wouldn't need meals from a mega corporation

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;47629218]It's the National Guard. The U.S. military can't operate on U.S. soil for civilian law enforcement because the army is ran by the federal government. The state's national guard, however, is operated by the state, and therefore is allowed to operate within it's state to be used as law enforcement to keep the peace, or as a defense for the state against the federal government. It was a way to make sure the government couldn't use the army against the states. Posse Comitatus Act[/QUOTE] Pretty sure I remember reading 82nd Airborne and Marines from some Californian military base were deployed during the Los Angels Riots

[QUOTE=download;47630594]Pretty sure I remember reading 82nd Airborne and Marines from some Californian military base were deployed during the Los Angels Riots[/QUOTE] If they were not part of the national guard, then congress authorized it and they were under the command of the president. The national guard is always under state command unless they are federalized by the president. However, once they are federalized, they need congressional approval to operate in the U.S. That's how I understand it.

[QUOTE=wickedplayer494;47629279]No, because the retards that are rioting think a violent protest will get anything done. Spoiler alert: it doesn't.[/QUOTE] I must conquer this. I do not know what this riot is about but many revolutions in history were violent and bloody.