Debunked: Fake City / "US Army Trains for Martial Law In US."

[Sarcastro]

Presumably they would also use that kind of set up to practice evacuation scenarios too wouldn't they? It seem to me that a martial law event would not be the sum total of exercises rehearsed. In addition to that if there was going to be some kind of civilian culling event going on, couldn't they just use existing facilities? Surely it wouldn't take too much rehearsal time to show a trained soldier how to take out a housewife wielding a handgun. This looks to be aimed at an urban war zone/disaster type environment.

AP Hill isn't really an ideal location for evacuation drills due to lack of people to evacuate. (BTW, I did video work for Fort Belvoir many years ago, and that meant frequently going down to AP Hill for shoots.) The troops training there are coming in from other locations, so they don't have their family members with them (many bases will get family members to volunteer to play "victims" in those scenarios) and AP Hill is in the middle of nowhere, so no local townfolk to use.

The urban environment is nothing new at AP Hill. I can think of a few others that I shot over the years (including one with a "church"). But this is the nicest setup I've seen.

I'm sure AP Hill will also try to get MP units to use this for things like Ft Hood shooter scenarios and bomb detection.

 

[cloudspotter]

Now wait a minute here. 'soccer' stadium? 'New London'? Just who are you planning on invading next?

 

[curtispenner]

I thought I should add this definition of martial law from Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martial_law

Martial law is the imposition of military power over designated regions on an emergency basis.

Martial law is usually imposed on a temporary basis when the civilian government or civilian authorities fail to function effectively (e.g., maintain order and security, or provide essential services), when there are extensive riots and protests, or when the disobedience of the law becomes widespread. Fundamentally it is a requirement put on civilian government when they fail to function correctly.

In most of the cases, military forces are deployed to subdue the crowds, to secure government buildings and key or sensitive locations, and to maintain order.[1] Generally, military personnel replace civil authorities and perform some or all of their functions. In full-scale martial law, the highest-ranking military officer would take over, or be installed, as themilitary governor or as head of the government, thus removing all power from the previous executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government.

Content from External Source

If the US military occupies a US city with their guns drawn, then that city is under martial law. If a military is training for this scenario, they are de-facto training for martial law.

I would hope that they would build a school in this city and use it to teach the soldiers about the Posse Comitatus Act and when the army is allowed to occupy an American city under law. In brief, the National Guard must be invited by that State's governor.

Given the definition of martial law, I'm not sure what has been debunked here, but you guys did some breathtakingly excellent research into this and other military training cities. Well done guys!

 

[Pete Tar]

What has been debunked is that the training facility's only purpose is martial law practice. And also that they only have a church and not a mosque. And that the subway cars are 'replicas' of current cars. And that the infowars spin on it is accurate or honest.

 

[NoParty]

I'm guessing the InfoWars argument is that if a martial law situation ever unfortunately arose,
they'd prefer that those running it would be entirely untrained.

 

[David Fraser]

Its not a very good facility for martial law training. There are far too few houses and flats.

 

[Landru]

Its not a very good facility for martial law training. There are far too few houses and flats.

It is a good site for urban counterterrorism training. Hostages in the subway and such as well as urban fighting like in Iraq or Afghanistan.

 

[NoParty]

Its not a very good facility for martial law training. There are far too few houses and flats.

A church and a mosque for one apartment building…probably not a very agnostic-friendly town...

 

[Lobster Johnson]

AP Hill isn't really an ideal location for evacuation drills due to lack of people to evacuate. (BTW, I did video work for Fort Belvoir many years ago, and that meant frequently going down to AP Hill for shoots.) The troops training there are coming in from other locations, so they don't have their family members with them (many bases will get family members to volunteer to play "victims" in those scenarios) and AP Hill is in the middle of nowhere, so no local townfolk to use.

The urban environment is nothing new at AP Hill. I can think of a few others that I shot over the years (including one with a "church"). But this is the nicest setup I've seen.

I'm sure AP Hill will also try to get MP units to use this for things like Ft Hood shooter scenarios and bomb detection.

Interesting that family members would be roped in to playing victims. In a way it makes the whole thing more human. A lot of these conspiracies rely on a detatching of the military and the police from everyday life and that's essentially when they all start disappearing into the realms of fiction.

 

[curtispenner]

What has been debunked is that the training facility's only purpose is martial law practice. And also that they only have a church and not a mosque. And that the subway cars are 'replicas' of current cars. And that the infowars spin on it is accurate or honest.

While this may be true, what has not been proven is that this facility is not for training the army for situations in which the army would need to exercise military power over designated regions in the US on an emergency basis. IE martial law.

The press release at the beginning of this thread indicates that this is indeed a US Army training facility, in which the Army is trained for a "ready, robust, responsive and regionally-engaged (force) operating on the land". Because the training centre closely resembles an American city, it seems the readiness for which they are preparing is potential deployment in an American city. IE martial law.

I'm guessing the InfoWars argument is that if a martial law situation ever unfortunately arose, they'd prefer that those running it would be entirely untrained.

This thread is not to determine whether we think that the army should be trained for a martial law scenario, but rather whether they are training for a martial law scenario. There is nothing wrong with thinking that the US Army being trained for martial law is OK. Just as there is nothing wrong with thinking that the US Army being trained for martial law is bad. This is the beauty of a free and open society. This thread relates to whether the "US Army trains for martial law in (the) US". And the answer to that question is unequivocally "yes". Therefore it should not be marked as "debunked".

Its not a very good facility for martial law training. There are far too few houses and flats.

This is a good point. Perhaps the Army will add some more houses, or perhaps not. But again this relates to the nature of the martial law training and does not indicate that there is none. If the Army showed up at a Stadium, or a church, or a mosque, or a subway with guns drawn, then presumably this would be at the request of the State Governor and because the Governor has requested the exercise of military power over a designated region on an emergency basis. IE martial law. Therefore this thread should not be marked as "debunked".

It is a good site for urban counterterrorism training. Hostages in the subway and such as well as urban fighting like in Iraq or Afghanistan.

This again relates to the nature of the martial law training. If the site were a police/fire/EMS urban counterterrorism training centre, then I would agree that this thread should be marked as debunked, as the police/fire/EMS are generally the first responders in cases of terrorism. But presumably if the Army were called on by the Governor of a state to exercise military power over a designated region on an emergency basis, then the Governor and Army would have defacto declared martial law. Therefore this thread should not be marked as "debunked".

I notice that two of you specifically referenced "Infowars" in your latest responses. While I appreciate that Infowars' view on this topic is much more alarmist than your own, debunking an Infowars' article is not the topic of the thread. The topic of the thread is "US Army Trains for Martial Law In US." This has been very thoroughly confirmed here. We could debunk this by confirming that the training centre is meant for foreign cities only, but this would be difficult to prove. Especially with the recent Boston Bombing aftermath serving as a good example of a US martial law scenario that while many people supported, very obviously occurred in the US.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martial_law

Martial law is the imposition of military power over designated regions on an emergency basis.

Content from External Source

Metabunk should maintain its excellent integrity and remove the misleading and confusing "debunked" label. This has been confirmed. Not debunked.

 

[Soulfly]

Especially with the recent Boston Bombing aftermath serving as a good example of a US martial law scenario that while many people supported, very obviously occurred in the US.

That was not martial law it was a voluntary shelter in place, just like in a natural disaster situation like a hurricane or tornado.

 

[Mop]

no facts being brought to the table on my part sorry. but just a little opinion (the facts have been handled fantasticly by others).

whether you agree with having a military force or not, they (the military) have to be prepared, training facilities, even to this scale, make sense. be it local or foreign terrain, the wild or full cities. subways,streets,gardens or places of worship.

again, just opinion. i am not military, so i dont know just how prepared they want to be. makes sense to train in various surroundings though.

 

[curtispenner]

That was not martial law it was a voluntary shelter in place, just like in a natural disaster situation like a hurricane or tornado

Many did not feel the shelter in place was voluntary. Many guns were pointed at civilians that did not want guns pointed at them. The Governor seemed to feel it appropriate in the circumstances.

Here is the Massecheusets Governor acknowledging he requested the assistance of the National Guard as required under the Posse Comitatus Act:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=CWAQsguOkdY

This was by definition Martial Law. If only the police had responded and the Army had not been asked to assist then it might be different. But the reality was that the army had boots on the ground in Boston. Whether it was voluntary or not is not the point. The point is they were there in Boston. And for that reason it would be very very difficult to argue that the training facility that is the subject of this thread is not at least partially for training in American cities.

Therefore this thread should not be marked "debunked".

 

[Melbury's Brick]

Metabunk should maintain its excellent integrity and remove the misleading and confusing "debunked" label. This has been confirmed. Not debunked.

The debunking seems to be of the idea that martial law training is going on at this facility because of claims that the military being sent to the streets is somehow imminent. I agree that such a claim was not actually made in the original post. However, it does not take a long journey around the internet to find individuals who imply that that is the purpose of this "town". Here, the suggestion is made just by the use of the word "upcoming"...........

Embedded media from this media site is no longer available

Fake city built to train soldiers for upcoming martial law
U.S. Army Builds ‘Fake City’ in Virginia to Practice Military Occupation





Martial law training? 300 acre town includes sports stadium, school, underground subway



February 14, 2014
The U.S. Army has built a 300 acre ‘fake city’ complete with a sports
stadium, bank, school, and an underground subway in order to train for
unspecified future combat scenarios.

The recently opened site is located in Virginia and was
built at a cost of $96 million dollars, taking just two years to
complete.
While the city was ostensibly built to prepare U.S.
troops for the occupation of cities abroad, some will undoubtedly fear
that the real intention could be closer to home. Although the site
includes a mosque, the town looks American in every other way, with
signs in English.
The fact that, as the Telegraph reports,
“The subway carriages even carry the same logo as the carriages in
Washington DC,” could suggest that the site was built to double both as a
foreign city and a mock domestic town.
According to Colonel John P. Petkosek, “This is the
place where we can be creative, where we can come up with solutions for
problems that we don’t even know we have yet….This is where we’ll look
at solutions for the future–material solutions and non-material
solutions…anything from how you’re going to operate in a subterranean
environment to how you dismount a Humvee to avoid an IED strike.”
The increasing demonization of domestic political groups
as extremists has prompted numerous scenarios where commentators have
suggested that U.S. Army and National Guard personnel could be needed to
quell civil unrest.
In 2012, an academic study about
the future use of the military as a peacekeeping force within the
United States written by a retired Army Colonel depicted a shocking
scenario in which the U.S. Army is used to restore order to a town that
has been seized by Tea Party “insurrectionists”.
The study dovetailed with a leaked U.S. Army manual which
revealed plans for the military to carry out “Civil Disturbance
Operations” during which troops would be used domestically to quell
riots, confiscate firearms and even kill Americans on U.S. soil during
mass civil unrest.
The manual also describes how prisoners will be
processed through temporary internment camps under the guidance of U.S.
Army FM 3-19.40 Internment/Resettlement Operations, which outlines how internees would be “re-educated” into developing an “appreciation of U.S. policies” while detained in prison camps inside the United States.
Fort Hood soldiers are also being taught by their
superiors that Christians, Tea Party supporters and anti-abortion
activists represent a radical terror threat, mirroring rhetoric backed by the Department of Homeland Security which frames “liberty lovers” as domestic extremists.
Last year, former Navy SEAL Ben Smith warned that
the Obama administration is asking top brass in the military if they
would be comfortable with disarming U.S. citizens, a litmus test that
includes gauging whether they would be prepared to order NCOs to fire on
Americans.
During a recent Ohio National Guard exercise, second amendment proponents were portrayed as domestic terrorists as part of a mock disaster drill.

Read more at http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a7c_1392436607#YUb06TfhexfAAS0S.99[/EX]

The press release at the beginning of this thread indicates that this is indeed a US Army training facility, in which the Army is trained for a "ready, robust, responsive and regionally-engaged (force) operating on the land". Because the training centre closely resembles an American city, it seems the readiness for which they are preparing is potential deployment in an American city. IE martial law.

Content from External Source

That's assumption. The features of this "town" are present in many cities worldwide. Are soccer stadiums not more common outside the USA?
(And where's the Starbucks?)

 

[Soulfly]

Many did not feel the shelter in place was voluntary. Many guns were pointed at civilians that did not want guns pointed at them. The Governor seemed to feel it appropriate in the circumstances.

Here is the Massecheusets Governor acknowledging he requested the assistance of the National Guard as required under the Posse Comitatus Act:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=CWAQsguOkdY

This was by definition Martial Law. If only the police had responded and the Army had not been asked to assist then it might be different. But the reality was that the army had boots on the ground in Boston. Whether it was voluntary or not is not the point. The point is they were there in Boston. And for that reason it would be very very difficult to argue that the training facility that is the subject of this thread is not at least partially for training in American cities.

Therefore this thread should not be marked "debunked".

Lots of hyperbole and not much else. I hope they do train for that sort of thing. I get why you feel this isn't debunked since no one here can debunk the emotion of fear you have over this.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/photogr...ng-milk-to-family-during-lockdown-goes-viral/

 

[Balance]

From the creator of the thread...

This report has been picked up by Infowars and commented on under the title "Breaking: US Army Trains for Martial Law In US"
http://www.infowars.com/breaking-us-army-trains-for-martial-law-in-us/ (http://archive.is/VD8as)
The arguments seem strong in support of the suggestion that a possible martial law situation might be ensuing, especially related to gun control measures in view of other very recent reports:

The point is not so much who claims it, but whether the claim that martial law in the US is now being prepared for in this training facility is bunkum.

Obviously Lode is best to answer, but it does appear quite specific to me.

 

[Mick West]

I added the title "Debunked" because:

A) It's not a fake city, or even "a whole town". It's just a few buildings and mocked-up areas.
B) There's no evidence of training for martial law in the US.
C) Urban training areas like these are very common both in the US and other militaries. This is simply a new one.

Something that was not raised is that "training for martial law" would involved the training of hundreds of thousands of troops in mostly logistic and administrative duties. This is a very small facility, and seems more obviously suited to training small teams for very specific scenarios such as hostage rescue.

 

[Jazzy]

this thread should not be marked "debunked".

Nor, I hope, will it ever be.

Noparty's post had it in one. Hostage situations are martial. There has to be a training place for them.

General violent anarchy (worst case scenario) always involves hostage situations, so such training is bound to cover either or both.

It isn't an issue in civilized discourse.

 

[Trigger Hippie]

There are loads of these types of training facilities, and not just for the military.


Secret service urban training center.





Orange County Sheriff's Tactical Training Center.



Infowars needs to support their claims with evidence. It would be like me claiming the picture above is evidence the Sheriff’s Department is training for a nation wide confiscation of Big Gulps. Then sitting back and saying, "prove me wrong."

 

[curtispenner]

...I hope they do train for that sort of thing. I get why you feel this isn't debunked since no one here can debunk the emotion of fear you have over this.

Pardon me?

I specifically made the point that "there is nothing wrong with thinking that the US Army being trained for martial law is OK. Just as there is nothing wrong with thinking that the US Army being trained for martial law is bad. This is the beauty of a free and open society."

Do you think there is something wrong with someone holding a different view than you? Does this notion raise "fear" in your psyche? If so then I'd suggest you read some Karl Popper. I specifically recommend "The Open Society and It's Enemies".

I entered this thread having seen what looked like an a priori fact declared "dubunked". I would have the same reaction if I had seen a bunch of people agree that 2+2=5. No matter how many people agree that 2+2=5 is true, I would always be willing to argue that the answer is actually "4".

The definition of martial law training is met in the US Army's use of this facility. I therefore believe that disproving that "the facility will used for training" is required to meet the threshold of declaring this "debunked". Mick has given his reasons for declaring it "debunked" and I respect his opinion. I agree with Mick regarding the "Fake City" claim in A). We obviously disagree regarding "B) Evidence of training for martial law." C) has nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not the claim is true and shouldn't have been included in his list in my opinion.

To sign off, there is nothing bad or fearful about healthy disagreement and discourse. To specifically address your alleged "emotion of fear (I) have over this", Like Winston Smith in 1984, I'm always happy to answer "NO" to the question of "if everybody believes it, does that make it true?" This is not because I am fearful but because I am free.

As a person that desires nothing more than liberty and the pursuit of happiness, I will always have healthy reservations towards anything that moves society in anything resembling the trajectory that broke Winston Smith. Martial law is certainly on that list. I will end on the unsourced but I think fitting quotation that "government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action."

 

[Soulfly]

Pardon me?

I specifically made the point that "there is nothing wrong with thinking that the US Army being trained for martial law is OK. Just as there is nothing wrong with thinking that the US Army being trained for martial law is bad. This is the beauty of a free and open society."

Do you think there is something wrong with someone holding a different view than you? Does this notion raise "fear" in your psyche? If so then I'd suggest you read some Karl Popper. I specifically recommend "The Open Society and It's Enemies".

I entered this thread having seen what looked like an a priori fact declared "dubunked". I would have the same reaction if I had seen a bunch of people agree that 2+2=5. No matter how many people agree that 2+2=5 is true, I would always be willing to argue that the answer is actually "4".

While the definition of martial law training is met in the US Army's use of this facility, and I believe that disproving use of the facility is for such training is required to meet the threshold of declaring it "debunked", Mick has given his reasons for declaring it "debunked" and I respect his opinion. I agree with Mick regarding the "Fake City" claim in A). And we obviously disagree regarding "B) Evidence of training for martial law." C) has nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not the claim is true and shouldn't have been included in his list in my opinion.

To sign off, there is nothing bad or fearful about healthy disagreement and discourse. To specifically address your alleged "emotion of fear (I) have over this", Like Winston Smith in 1984, I'm always happy to answer "NO" to the question of "if everybody believes it, does that make it true?"

As a person that desires nothing more than liberty and the pursuit of happiness, I will always have healthy reservations towards anything that moves society in anything resembling the trajectory that broke Winston Smith. Martial law is certainly on that list. I will end on the unsourced but I think fitting quotation that "government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action."

People who think training for martial law is bad are well, politeness policy!

 

[Sarcastro]

Honestly, if the military was going to start training all of it's troops for an imminent martial law, they probably wouldn't even bother with something like this. As mentioned already, it's very small and lacks housing units. Meanwhile, there are plenty of vacant military bases that has everything they need. Houses, apartments, grocery stores (PX/BX), shopping mall(AAFES), gas stations, churches, schools, bowling alleys, movie theaters, the list goes on and on. But somehow this new facility at APHill doesn't have all that. It's like it was created for very specific situations.

 

[Soulfly]

CTers think martial law starts tomorrow and they want the troops untrained, makes about as much sense as everything else they spout.

The only reason I can think of that someone might not want troops trained in martial law, is that if martial law happens that person plans on fighting no matter the reason for martial law.

 

[Mick West]

Here's a very reasonable article on the topic of martial law in the US. Recommended reading in this context:
https://www.metabunk.org/sk/ADA372427.pdf

 

[Jason]

I thought I should add this definition of martial law from Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martial_law

Martial law is the imposition of military power over designated regions on an emergency basis.

Martial law is usually imposed on a temporary basis when the civilian government or civilian authorities fail to function effectively (e.g., maintain order and security, or provide essential services), when there are extensive riots and protests, or when the disobedience of the law becomes widespread. Fundamentally it is a requirement put on civilian government when they fail to function correctly.

In most of the cases, military forces are deployed to subdue the crowds, to secure government buildings and key or sensitive locations, and to maintain order.[1] Generally, military personnel replace civil authorities and perform some or all of their functions. In full-scale martial law, the highest-ranking military officer would take over, or be installed, as themilitary governor or as head of the government, thus removing all power from the previous executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government.

Content from External Source

If the US military occupies a US city with their guns drawn, then that city is under martial law. If a military is training for this scenario, they are de-facto training for martial law.

I would hope that they would build a school in this city and use it to teach the soldiers about the Posse Comitatus Act and when the army is allowed to occupy an American city under law. In brief, the National Guard must be invited by that State's governor.

Given the definition of martial law, I'm not sure what has been debunked here, but you guys did some breathtakingly excellent research into this and other military training cities. Well done guys!

I also think its important to note that as recently as;

March 10, 2009, active duty U.S. Army Military Police troops from Fort Rucker were deployed to Samson, Alabama, in response to a murder spree. Samson officials confirmed that the soldiers assisted in traffic control and securing the crime scene. The governor of Alabama did not request military assistance nor did PresidentObama authorize their deployment. Subsequent investigation found that the Posse Comitatus Act was violated and several military members received "administrative actions".[12][13]

Content from External Source

It's obvious by this admission in the wiki link Posse Comitatus Act from above, that the government takes this act very seriously, as evidenced by "administrative actions" after they determined these troops aided without direction from the Governor. This law is the very essence of what it means to be an American. My cousin is a Navy Seal, and honestly its not uncommon for them to train in environments like this. The US military wasn't prepared for urban fighting going into the last 2 wars, and as a result many of our military personnel would train in Israel and England to learn urban warfare in a residential platform. We also need to keep in mind that the future theater for war will most likely take place in these types of environments with increases in population on our planet.

 

[ThatGuyZach]

The irony in this situation is that if the group of people that believe these conspiracy theories start to act on their fantasies, the US government may very well have an incredibly justified reason to actually declare martial law in order to stop the problem. Thus, the circle would be complete...

 

[Soulfly]

If the military decides to occupy a city for (insert hyperbole scenario here) then what you really have is not martial law but civil war. Though I'm sure martial law would be part of that.

 

[curtispenner]

Here's a very reasonable article on the topic of martial law in the US. Recommended reading in this context:
https://www.metabunk.org/sk/ADA372427.pdf

This is a very good paper. Very detailed and tons of really good info.

The author kind of goes off the deep end on page 59 and concludes with four pages of scary urban terrorism stuff. To put this threat in perspective, approximately 29 Americans die every year because a television, furniture piece or appliance falls on them. This is 5 more than the number of Americans that die every year from terrorism, at 24. Likewise, more than 40 Americans are killed each year because of allergic reactions to stings by bees, wasps and hornets.

Source:
http://www.allgov.com/news/top-stor...ng-televisions-than-by-terrorists?news=844603

 

[Gary Cook]

This seems a bit like biased thread administration. No offence Mick. If this was debunking something government claimed I dont think it would be allowed but because it is just another dig at conspiracy researchers it is.

The reason I am writing that is because I started to read this thread hoping for some correction about the claim about the military base and then OP just made a seemingly almost random dig at the theory of marshal law even though executive orders and such point to it as an option being considered.

Plus financial trends show that it may actually become needed, for example. Whether it was manufactured or not completely is another question of course.

Correct me if I am wrong.

Scaremongering for attention is not desirable but encouraging people not to be complacent about their governments surely is, no?

Just being objective. Not being nasty.

 

[Jason]

This seems a bit like biased thread administration. No offence Mick. If this was debunking something government claimed I dont think it would be allowed but because it is just another dig at conspiracy researchers it is.

The reason I am writing that is because I started to read this thread hoping for some correction about the claim about the military base and then OP just made a seemingly almost random dig at the theory of marshal law even though executive orders and such point to it as an option being considered.

Plus financial trends show that it may actually become needed, for example. Whether it was manufactured or not completely is another question of course.

Correct me if I am wrong.

Scaremongering for attention is not desirable but encouraging people not to be complacent about their governments surely is, no?

Just being objective. Not being nasty.

I don't see a bias in this thread. I think both sides have illustrated their opinions and feelings adequately. I think seeing a bias is the eye of the reader, based on their beliefs and concerns. If you believe that our government is conspiring to declare martial law on this country, then its probably hard to read opposing opinions on the matter. I think peoples increasing distrust towards our government over the decade plus has created the catalyst for these beliefs. There's no doubt in my mind that our government has been tightening the noose over the last 20yrs, but if you look across the Atlantic or Pacific you can see that this trend isn't just an American Trend, its a world wide trend. Terrorism has played a role in this trend, and we can't discount it.

As far as correction for the base, what were you expecting. For it to be nonexistent. Would its nonexistents have sat better with you. Truth of the matter is they did build it, and they do practice there. There is no escaping that fact, but its clearly being used to practice urban warfare.

 

[curtispenner]

I don't see a bias in this thread. I think both sides have illustrated their opinions and feelings adequately. I think seeing a bias is the eye of the reader, based on their beliefs and concerns. If you believe that our government is conspiring to declare martial law on this country, then its probably hard to read opposing opinions on the matter. I think peoples increasing distrust towards our government over the decade plus has created the catalyst for these beliefs. There's no doubt in my mind that our government has been tightening the noose over the last 20yrs, but if you look across the Atlantic or Pacific you can see that this trend isn't just an American Trend, its a world wide trend. Terrorism has played a role in this trend, and we can't discount it.
As far as correction for the base, what were you expecting. For it to be nonexistent. Would its nonexistents have sat better with you. Truth of the matter is they did build it, and they do practice there. There is no escaping that fact, but its clearly being used to practice urban warfare.

I don't think anyone who has argued that this thread should not be marked "debunked" has opined on whether martial law training should be occurring or not. We have rather pointed out that the fact that the training is occurring. On this note, here is a 115 page US Army manual on how to impose martial law.

I am sure that a debate on whether martial law training should be occurring would immediately invoke Godwin's law and quickly spiral into the rabbit hole.

 

[Mick West]

I don't think anyone who has argued that this thread should not be marked "debunked" has opined on whether martial law training should be occurring or not. We have rather pointed out that the fact that the training is occurring. On this note, here is a 115 page US Army manual on how to impose martial law.

The only mention of martial law in there is on page 40:

(2) Imposed Restrictions. Except in the unlikely event of martial law, federal military forces will not have the authority to impose restrictions such as a curfew on the civilian population.

Content from External Source

Hence it's not about martial law. It's about "is to help local and state authorities to restore and maintain law and order. " - i.e. provide assistance in implementing civil law.

The point of this thread is debunking the notion that this particular training ground is evidence for impending martial law.

 

[curtispenner]

Hence it's not about martial law. It's about "is to help local and state authorities to restore and maintain law and order. " - i.e. provide assistance in implementing civil law.

Mick, when the army "helps local and state authorities to restore and maintain law and order" this is martial law by definition. You have obviously read the definition but here it is again. Unless you are proposing that the definition of martial law should change, then please let us agree on at least that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martial_law

Martial law is the imposition of military power over designated regions on an emergency basis.

Martial law is usually imposed on a temporary basis when the civilian government or civilian authorities fail to function effectively (e.g., maintain order and security, or provide essential services), when there are extensive riots and protests, or when the disobedience of the law becomes widespread. Fundamentally it is a requirement put on civilian government when they fail to function correctly.

Content from External Source

We are only going in circles now, so I'm out. Thanks everyone for the good debate! We'll agree to disagree on this having been debunked.

 

[Mick West]

Mick, when the army "helps local and state authorities to restore and maintain law and order" this is martial law by definition. You have obviously read the definition but here it is again. Unless you are proposing that the definition of martial law should change, then please let us agree on at least that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martial_law

Martial law is the imposition of military power over designated regions on an emergency basis.

Martial law is usually imposed on a temporary basis when the civilian government or civilian authorities fail to function effectively (e.g., maintain order and security, or provide essential services), when there are extensive riots and protests, or when the disobedience of the law becomes widespread. Fundamentally it is a requirement put on civilian government when they fail to function correctly.

Content from External Source

We are only going in circles now, so I'm out. Thanks everyone for the good debate! We'll agree to disagree on this having been debunked.

You are just quoting a general overall description, scroll down to the US definition:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martial_law#United_States

The martial law concept in the United States is closely tied with the right of habeas corpus, which is in essence the right to a hearing on lawful imprisonment, or more broadly, the supervision of law enforcement by the judiciary. The ability to suspend habeas corpus is often equated with martial law.[citation needed] Article 1, Section 9 of the US Constitution states, "The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it."

In United States law, martial law is limited by several court decisions that were handed down between the American Civil War and World War II. In 1878, Congress passed the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids military involvement in domestic law enforcement without congressional approval.

Content from External Source

In the US "martial law" is not simply the army helping civil authorities. If you want to quote "the definition", then perhaps one from a legal dictionary might be better than Wikipedia?
http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=1219

martial law
n. a system of complete control by a country's military over all activities, including civilian, in a theoretical or actual war zone, or during a period of emergency caused by a disaster such as an earthquake or flood, with the military commander having dictatorial powers. In the United States martial law must be ordered by the President as commander-in-chief and must be limited to the duration of the warfare or emergency.

Content from External Source

Or:
http://definitions.uslegal.com/m/martial-law/

Martial law is a system of absolute miltary control over all military and civilian activities of a country, in a theoretical or actual war zone, during civil disorder, in occupied territory, after a coup d'etat, or during a state of emergency caused by a natural disaster such as an earthquake or flood. In the United States only the President as commander-in-chief has authority to impose martial law and it must be limited to the duration of the warfare or emergency. It cannot be imposed in a manner resulting in a long-term denial of constitutional rights.

Content from External Source

or
https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Martial_law.html

Martial law is the imposition of military rule by military authorities over designated regions on an emergency basis—usually only temporary—when the civilian government or civilian authorities fail to function effectively (e.g., maintain order and security, and provide essential services), when there are extensive riots and protests, or when the disobedience of the law becomes widespread. In most cases, military forces are deployed to quiet the crowds, to secure government buildings and key or sensitive locations, and to maintain order.[1] Generally, military personnel replace civil authorities and perform some or all of their functions. The constitution could be suspended, and in full-scale martial law, the highest ranking military General would take over, or be installed, as the military governor or as head of the government, thus removing all power from the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the federal government.[1]

Content from External Source

Or as the Supreme Court put it in 1876:
https://www.courtlistener.com/scotus/sxM/united-states-v-diekelman/

Martial law is the law of military necessity in the actual presence of war. It is administered by the general of the army, and is in fact his will. Of necessity it is arbitrary; but it must be obeyed.

Content from External Source

Your definition of "helps local and state authorities to restore and maintain law and order" is very far from this. .

 

[Bruno D.]

I think we should just change the topic to:
Debunked: Fake City / "US Army Is Training For Impending Martial Law In US."

Than the discussion is over because this is in fact debunked.

 

[Gary Cook]

I think we should just change the topic to:
Debunked: Fake City / "US Army Is Training For Impending Martial Law In US."

Than the discussion is over because this is in fact debunked.

Do you think there has been zero training in the USA for potential Marshall law?

 

[Mick West]

Do you think there has been zero training in the USA for potential Marshall law?

What definition of martial law are you using? And what training would be required? And why is this simulated environment evidence for that?

(Note: "martial law", not Marshall law)

 

[Josh Heuer]

Do you think there has been zero training in the USA for potential Marshall law?

That's not even the point at all...

 

[Gary Cook]

That's not even the point at all...

It was a question and not a point. Are questions not allowed in this forum?

 

[Gary Cook]

What definition of martial law are you using? And what training would be required?

(Note: "martial law", not Marshall law)

Thanks. I know I just had a lapse of braining. =)