The Training Exercise Heard Round the World

[Arctic1]

Off topic

[Arctic1]

I am not one who sees a boogeyman behind every government edict. I do, however, harbor a healthy distrust (not paranoia) of motives.

I don't disagree.

Many politicians, although towing the party line is important, have a personal agenda as well. They want to succeed in pushing something through, to make their mark.

There are often way less than six degrees of separation between government and powerful businesses, and this can definitely influence policy.

The unfortunate thing in politics is that the non-BS, cut straight to the chase politicians do not last very long. While people might like what they say and stand for, they won't get the necessary support from their own party to get into an influential position.

[MountainRaven]

So, what are the general public's expectations regarding this so called "transparency"?

Should the general public be privy to all that goes on at all levels of government? Should they be clued in to all decisions made, and be able to influence these decisions?

For me, it is hard to fathom that someone in a pretty well off, civilized western country would see a threat to themselves where their own government is concerned.

Not everything is an agenda. Not everything is a conspiracy.

The human imagination is a fascinating thing, and the mind will often see connections where there aren't any.

Stop being sensible.

That being said, I do believe that it says pretty negative things about the government of the United States that people readily believe such theories. It doesn't say much positive about the American people so readily believe such things, either.

It seems to me that most Americans - regardless of politics - seem to love believing that their side does not enjoy as much success as they should because of a massive, nefarious conspiracy by those who inhabit the other side.

Both sides see the other as a careless, powerful monolith that desires to destroy everything that makes this country great and impose their vision of ultra-orthodoxy on all - rounding up the opposition and sending them to death camps.

[NCPatrolAR]

The attitudes and name calling stop now

[Frailer]

...It seems to me that most Americans - regardless of politics - seem to love believing that their side does not enjoy as much success as they should because of a massive, nefarious conspiracy by those who inhabit the other side.

Both sides see the other as a careless, powerful monolith that desires to destroy everything that makes this country great and impose their vision of ultra-orthodoxy on all - rounding up the opposition and sending them to death camps.

The only thing you left out is that both sides see the other as mindless sheep. And on this point they're both right.

[glocktogo]

So, what are the general public's expectations regarding this so called "transparency"?

Should the general public be privy to all that goes on at all levels of government? Should they be clued in to all decisions made, and be able to influence these decisions?

For me, it is hard to fathom that someone in a pretty well off, civilized western country would see a threat to themselves where their own government is concerned.

Not everything is an agenda. Not everything is a conspiracy.

The human imagination is a fascinating thing, and the mind will often see connections where there aren't any.

Doc pretty much covered it. I don't think we need to know anything about what secrets we're keeping from foreign threats, or what secrets of theirs we have, nor should we know about the secrets we have on our "allies". However, when you want to run a military training op in the midst of the free American civilian population, you need to be VERY open about it.

As for the threat, the end result doesn't care whether it was done with the best of intentions or pure evil in the hearts of the perpetrators, people suffer as a result. Claiming some moral imperative when choosing to make one group suffer, in order to appease the desires of another is the road to hell. The American government has become exceedingly good at paving said road, regardless of which political party is in charge.

[Arctic1]

http://soldiersystems.net/2015/03/30...t-an-exercise/

By looking at the slides provided in this article, it seems I was spot on - the territorial designations are scenario specific.

As for not being open about it, who says that the military hasn't been? The brief described in the SoldierSys articel was PROVIDED to local government.

Here is the entire presentation:

http://disinfo.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-c.../Jade-Helm.pdf

Also, do you feel it is the responsibility of the government to inform people about military training drills?
That is not the way it works here, all activity is regulated by, and controlled by, the military itself. The Prime Minister and Defense Minister does not have anything to do with the day to day routine of the military.
The Prime Minister does not approve, or reject any peacetime military activity.

They might make an appearance during larger multi-national exercise, but that is about it.

Since I never had the pleasure of partnering with US forces in CONUS, do they normally go on FTX's on military training sites/federal land?

[Doc Safari]

Once again, the thrust of this thread is that mistrust of the government has reached a point where the perception of this as a precursor to martial law has actually gotten the Pentagon to respond defensively.

The military is adding gasoline to the fires of paranoia that were already there.

It doesn't bode well for fostering more trust in the government.

[sevenhelmet]

Since I never had the pleasure of partnering with US forces in CONUS, do they normally go on FTX's on military training sites/federal land?

Normally, yes. Not always, but it isn't always possible to do so. One's unit has to get from A to B, for example.

[Outlander Systems]

http://soldiersystems.net/2015/03/30...t-an-exercise/

Also, do you feel it is the responsibility of the government to inform people about military training drills?
That is not the way it works here, all activity is regulated by, and controlled by, the military itself.

If the exercises take place in, or adjacent to, private property, then absolutely.

http://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment3.html