[Kazan]

front page of http://www.democrats08.com/

and here is the video http://www.democrats08.com/media/tanks-on-la-streets.mov


of course certain indidivuals on this forum who i already talk to object to the authenticity of this video for such various bull**** reasons as
"we haven't heard about it in the national news!" (irrelevent),
"that's too high quality for a home video!" (bull****),
"look at that jump!" (ever heard of having turned the camera off and put it up only to have to get it out again)

[.::Tin Can::.]

Oh my! Tanks going down the streets! What could possibly be worse? Oh I know, the tanks actually opening fire on the crowd!

Honestly, who gives a ****?

[vyper]

Interesting. Probably coincidence... ?

[vyper]

Originally posted by .::Tin Can::.
Oh my! Tanks going down the streets! What could possibly be worse? Oh I know, the tanks actually opening fire on the crowd!

Honestly, who gives a ****?

Tin, I don't know where you live but if I had tanks rolling down my high street I'd be a bit put off...

[.::Tin Can::.]

Its California. If the tanks roll down the street (and only two I might add) but dont really take any action on the crowd but to pass it up, then fine. We have military bases in California. Also:

I think we were more sophisticated than that, realizing that many soldiers are victims themselves who were recruited through propaganda, guile, and economic incentives that the very poor can find it difficult to refuse.

Only on a democratic site....

[Liberator]

Demonstrators immediately stepped in front of the lead tank, blocking its path...

Only deluded idiots step into the path of a moving tank.



Also, those aren't tanks.  They look like a relative of a Bradley, it's on wheels for crying out loud.

Kazan, this is getting old.  You intimated that the government was using tanks to oppress citizens.  When it's the other way around, the protestors were on the verge of riot(granted there was only 400 of them) and were the one's that were acting as the agressor.

Please quit acting like a brat who hasn't gotten his way.

[Rictor]

Originally posted by Liberator

Kazan, this is getting old.  You intimated that the government was using tanks to oppress citizens.  When it's the other way around, the protestors were on the verge of riot(granted there was only 400 of them) and were the one's that were acting as the agressor.

Dude, its tanks. Tanks in the streets. If this doesn't bring to mind the phrase "police state", there's something wrong.

You think that protestors should just stand in place, hold one sign (and in a non-threating manner) and keep their voice down? No, they're protestors. Also, "on the verge of a riot" is very, very subjective. You can't arrest someone on the suspicion that they might riot, until actual violence is perpatrated, protestors have a right to free speech and free assembly.

Originally posted by Liberator


Only deluded idiots step into the path of a moving tank.

Really? What, like Tianamen Square?
I would say that only an idiot points a tank are civilians. The tank had to right to be there, the people did.

[Jetmech Jr.]

I'm with Lib in that that doesn't look like a tank. Resembles a troop carrier.

Personally, I think those protestors were idiots.

[.::Tin Can::.]

Roger That.

Rictor, did the tank open fire on the civilians? Or for that matter, interfere in any way besides driving past? No. They ecompassed it, and  the drivers had to wait for someone to get the civie's out of the way.

[Rictor]

doesn't matter what you think of them, they were well within their rights to be there. I too think they were acting like idiots, but that doesn't mean you can start putting tanks on the street.

[Jetmech Jr.]

Sounds like you think the vehicles were sent there for the sole purpose of dispersing the protestors. I saw nothing of the sort, just a couple of military guys driving down a highway. It's not like driving is violating their rights either...

[Rictor]

The way it seemed to me is that they weren't just driving down the highway.

If that was the case, I take back what I said.

[Jetmech Jr.]

quoted from the Democrats08 site:

About 7:30pm, two tanks barreled past going East on Wilshire, rounded the corner onto Veteran going South, and disappeared.



About ten or fifteen minutes later, two tanks (apparently the same ones) appeared again going East on Wilshire and stopped for the light there. Demonstrators immediately stepped in front of the lead tank, blocking its path, and started to chant "U.S. Out!" at the soldiers, whose heads and torsos were clearly visible and who evidently exchanged a few words with protestors.

Doesn't sound like they were doing anything 'cept driving by...

[redmenace]

And of course we all know that people in LA never riot....

They have a right of assembly.

THEY DON'T HAVE A RIGHT TO BANG PASSING CARS WITH PROTEST SIGNS.
The video show this.

Third point, ITS LA.

However, it is immature of pilot of the tanks to purposefully go around the block and intimmidate the protesters.  The protesters also should not be acting like morons. What person with the minimum IQ of a rudebega would step infront of an tank.

[Bobboau]

from what I've gathered, the offical explaination is that they were returning from an exercise somewere and when they came through this street people jumped in front of them and they couldn't move for a few minutes.

however, it is also reported that the circled the blockonce or twice before this incedent.

and those are LAV-25s, not a tank, but close enough.

[SadisticSid]

Originally posted by Rictor


Dude, its tanks. Tanks in the streets. If this doesn't bring to mind the phrase "police state", there's something wrong.

You think that protestors should just stand in place, hold one sign (and in a non-threating manner) and keep their voice down? No, they're protestors. Also, "on the verge of a riot" is very, very subjective. You can't arrest someone on the suspicion that they might riot, until actual violence is perpatrated, protestors have a right to free speech and free assembly.

I'm not sure what the situation is over the pond but we have military bases dotted all over the UK and military vehicles - APCs and tanks, as well as countless transport trucks use the roads all the time. I doubt this is any less innocent.

The protestors were fully within their rights to be there though, and personally I think their goals are justified given the wretched mess the US has made of itself in Iraq and Fallujah, but screaming about it in the street doesn't advance their cause one iota

[Rictor]

tank=anything big, metal and intimidating with a turret and/or machine-guns.

redmenace: Well, lets see. Aside from the fact that the cause was completely different, the people completely different, the race of the people for the most part completely different and the decade completely different, I'de say you're right on.

They should just not allow protests in LA anymore, since people are so violent there, and prone to rioting. Better make that all of California, and New York too, I hear they once had a riot in the 30s. Hell, just make it all of America, better safe than sorry.

[Bobboau]

I live very near one of the biggest militay bases in the nation, I almost never see any military vehicles (aside from aircraft wich practicly block out the sun with there numbers) and never an armored vehicle of any kind, but it is an air force base.

[Liberator]

Wretched mess in Fallujah?  

Virtually the whole city has been taken with 25 confirmed fatal casualties for the Coalition Forces and over 1200 confirmed dead terrorists in a period of less that 72 hours.  

They found where they were doing those awful beheadings.  They found a "torture house" by following tips from confirmed civvies in the combat zone and then they located it by following the screams once they got close.  The only problem there has been in Fallujah is that they got halted by the damned politicians the first time.  There are few problems in Fallujah now, it's not a mess.

[redmenace]

Originally posted by Rictor
tank=anything big, metal and intimidating with a turret and/or machine-guns.

redmenace: Well, lets see. Aside from the fact that the cause was completely different, the people completely different, the race of the people for the most part completely different and the decade completely different, I'de say you're right on.

They should just not allow protests in LA anymore, since people are so violent there, and prone to rioting. Better make that all of California, and New York too, I hear they once had a riot in the 30s. Hell, just make it all of America, better safe than sorry.

Wonderful job putting ****ing words in my mouth, bastard.
People should have an absolute to protest. BUT ****ING DISORDERLY CONDUCT IS NOT PROTESTING. You should learn to listen before you open your big mouth. However, your right this is a completly different issue, race, people ect. But the point still stands. LA has a riotest past. I probably wouldn't have stopped if I were the pilot.