Gen. Franks: "WMD attack in U.S. will lead to martial law, no Constitution"

S

steelheart

Moderator
Retired Army General Tommy Franks says a WMD attack on U.S.soil by terrorists will lead to discarding the Constitution and Bill of Rights, to be replaced by martial law.



Gen. Tommy Franks says that if the United States is hit with a weapon of mass destruction that inflicts large casualties, the Constitution will likely be discarded in favor of a military form of government.

Franks, who successfully led the U.S. military operation to liberate Iraq, expressed his worries in an extensive interview he gave to the men's lifestyle magazine Cigar Aficionado.

In the magazine's December edition, the former commander of the military's Central Command warned that if terrorists succeeded in using a weapon of mass destruction (WMD) against the U.S. or one of our allies, it would likely have catastrophic consequences for our cherished republican form of government.

Discussing the hypothetical dangers posed to the U.S. in the wake of Sept. 11, Franks said that "the worst thing that could happen" is if terrorists acquire and then use a biological, chemical or nuclear weapon that inflicts heavy casualties.

If that happens, Franks said, "... the Western world, the free world, loses what it cherishes most, and that is freedom and liberty we've seen for a couple of hundred years in this grand experiment that we call democracy."

Franks then offered "in a practical sense" what he thinks would happen in the aftermath of such an attack.

"It means the potential of a weapon of mass destruction and a terrorist, massive, casualty-producing event somewhere in the Western world - it may be in the United States of America - that causes our population to question our own Constitution and to begin to militarize our country in order to avoid a repeat of another mass, casualty-producing event. Which in fact, then begins to unravel the fabric of our Constitution. Two steps, very, very important."

Franks didn't speculate about how soon such an event might take place.

Already, critics of the U.S. Patriot Act, rushed through Congress in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, have argued that the law aims to curtail civil liberties and sets a dangerous precedent.

But Franks' scenario goes much further. He is the first high-ranking official to openly speculate that the Constitution could be scrapped in favor of a military form of government.

The usually camera-shy Franks retired from U.S. Central Command, known in Pentagon lingo as CentCom, in August 2003, after serving nearly four decades in the Army.

Franks earned three Purple Hearts for combat wounds and three Bronze Stars for valor. Known as a "soldier's general," Franks made his mark as a top commander during the U.S.'s successful Operation Desert Storm, which liberated Kuwait in 1991. He was in charge of CentCom when Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda attacked the United States on Sept. 11.

Franks said that within hours of the attacks, he was given orders to prepare to root out the Taliban in Afghanistan and to capture bin Laden.

Franks offered his assessment on a number of topics to Cigar Aficionado, including:

President Bush: "As I look at President Bush, I think he will ultimately be judged as a man of extremely high character. A very thoughtful man, not having been appraised properly by those who would say he's not very smart. I find the contrary. I think he's very, very bright. And I suspect that he'll be judged as a man who led this country through a crease in history effectively. Probably we'll think of him in years to come as an American hero."

On the motivation for the Iraq war: Contrary to claims that top Pentagon brass opposed the invasion of Iraq, Franks said he wholeheartedly agreed with the president's decision to invade Iraq and oust Saddam Hussein.

"I, for one, begin with intent. ... There is no question that Saddam Hussein had intent to do harm to the Western alliance and to the United States of America. That intent is confirmed in a great many of his speeches, his commentary, the words that have come out of the Iraqi regime over the last dozen or so years. So we have intent."

"If we know for sure ... that a regime has intent to do harm to this country, and if we have something beyond a reasonable doubt that this particular regime may have the wherewithal with which to execute the intent, what are our actions and orders as leaders in this country?"

The Pentagon's deck of cards: Asked how the Pentagon decided to put its most-wanted Iraqis on a set of playing cards, Franks explained its genesis. He recalled that when his staff identified the most notorious Iraqis the U.S. wanted to capture, "it just turned out that the number happened to be about the same as a deck of cards. And so somebody said, 'Aha, this will be the ace of spades.'"

Capturing Saddam: Franks said he was not surprised that Saddam has not been captured or killed. But he says he will eventually be found, perhaps sooner than Osama bin laden.

"The capture or killing of Saddam Hussein will be a near term thing. And I won't say that'll be within 19 or 43 days. ... I believe it is inevitable."

Franks ended his interview with a less-than-optimistic note. "It's not in the history of civilization for peace ever to reign. Never has in the history of man. ... I doubt that we'll ever have a time when the world will actually be at peace."
Click to expand...
 
Capturing Saddam: Franks said he was not surprised that Saddam has not been captured or killed. But he says he will eventually be found, perhaps sooner than Osama bin laden.

"The capture or killing of Saddam Hussein will be a near term thing. And I won't say that'll be within 19 or 43 days. ... I believe it is inevitable."
Click to expand...

????
Is this old? :confused:
 
A WMD Attack will push people off dead center

Any attack of this nature, with the government standing around with their thumbs in their "exhaust pipes" will lead to citizens taking care of things that should have been done years ago.

The Militia movement will no longer consist of Fat Old Men and Military Rejects playing in the woods with their Custom Assault Rifles, it will be a return to 1776 and the type of militia that freed this country from a government that oppressed with taxes (Deja Vu???). The Constitution will survive but will half the liberals that camp out in congress?
 
Yes, it's old.

The militia never did consist of such fat old men, just the "militia" that always wanted to be in the spotlight. The rest of us never had a problem with that ;) .

The Constitution and BoR can be discarded at any time. All "they" have to do is DO IT. Then the ball is in our court and, frankly, I don't think there's enough people left to do anything about it. Look at some of the threads on this board alone, lately. If FedGov decided tomorrow to become some form of Totalitarian regime(pick your poison, the type and motivations aren't important here) I pretty much guarantee this board would be full of those telling us, the "militants", to sit down, shut up and stop being wanna-be commandos, the government is just doing what needs done and, hey, we're all paranoid tin-hat wackos anyway...

But maybe I'm just cynical....
 
Franks offered his assessment on a number of topics to Cigar Aficionado, including:
Click to expand...

An old interview given by a retired general to a cigar magazine. Not exactly the venue I worry about too much.

When Zarqawi gives interviews to Playboy, I'll definitely get a copy. For the articles, of course ...
 
Uh, yeah, it's a little old. From the interview:
Cigar Aficionado: What is today's date?
Gen. Tommy Franks: It's the second anniversary of 9/11.

And no, he didn't say a WMD leads to martial law and no Constitution. He said: "It means the potential of a weapon of mass destruction and a terrorist, massive casualty-producing event somewhere in the western world - it may be in the United States of America - that causes our population to question our own Constitution and to begin to militarize our country in order to avoid a repeat of another mass-casualty-producing event. Which, in fact, then begins to potentially unravel the fabric of our Constitution."

Not that that would be a happy event, but not quite so alarmist as you posit.
 
Well we had a big 'un, round about Sept 01, and it brought us Patriot Acts I & II, along with taking nail clippers at airports. So yes, it will (unfortunately), but not in one fell swoop - it happens incrementally - each WMD attack will cause a chipping and eroding away - they can't do it all at once or the general public fence-sitters would become patriots and take up arms. But us true patriots in the minority are toast without the fence-sitters, and the gummint knows that you must boil the fence-sitting frogs slowly.
 
Your nail-clippers are back, along with small knives, as well. The Patriot Act, flawed as it is, hasn't allowed the United States to slip into Facism yet, either.

I hate to say this, but there are a lot of kids "crying wolf" around. No matter what happens, it's met with cries that we're all doomed to live under tyranny. Now, there aren't enough "true patriots" left to stop it. Did anyone ever stop to think that constantly finding evil conspiracies in every facet of American life results in LESS credibility, rather than more? Perhaps the problem lies in the ranter, who's vision of America really isn't a vision, but a pipe-dream. As far as the Framers of the Constitution go, it would appear that we pick and choose what to believe. You constantly hear about what "this signer" later said in his papers. Get a grip, that was his personal opinion, they all had them, and some weren't nearly as palatable to you.

As far as "true patriots" go, there are still a lot of them. Not all of us are conspiracy buffs. Most of us put our lives on the line in the military, and have spent a life in service to America, and Americans. Tossing about high-handed claims of what you consider true or real simply shows that you have no idea what a patriot resembles. I'm afraid that many of these so-called "patriots" of whom you belong would envision patriots along the lines of the Brown-shirts of Mussolini.
 
Yes, it is an old interview - I found it interesting nonetheless. As far as martial law, don't overlook the interviever's comments:
But Franks' scenario goes much further. He is the first high-ranking official to openly speculate that the Constitution could be scrapped in favor of a military form of government.
Click to expand...
It sounds like he is privy to some information that the rest of us are not...
 
The Constitution and BoR can be discarded at any time. All "they" have to do is DO IT.
Click to expand...

And we will still have those rights "endowed by our Creator"...

...if "they" still want to infringe upon them in an emergency situation, then "they" can take it up with the GOD who gave those rights to me...

...if necessary, I'll arrange the face-to-face meetings... ;)
 
As far as martial law, don't overlook the interviever's comments:
Quote:
But Franks' scenario goes much further. He is the first high-ranking official to openly speculate that the Constitution could be scrapped in favor of a military form of government.
Click to expand...

Granted, it's an interesting comment, but it's also published in a cigar magazine, not a media outlet with some actual "street cred" when it comes to political, legal, or military affairs; presumably the interviewer is from the same magazine. It's akin to checking "Cat Fancy" for references to Constitutional issues.

It sounds like he is privy to some information that the rest of us are not...
Click to expand...

If Franks really had some inside information, I'd think he'd look for a more prominent and suitable news source for his 'scoop' than "Cigar Aficionado."

Added to all that ... it's speculation.
 
It sounds like he is privy to some information that the rest of us are not...
Click to expand...

No, he's not. He's simply making observations based on his experience. Which, granted is significantly different from most folks'. And while the interviewer said the Constitution could be scrapped, Franks did not. His concern was about militarization and erosion of rights. Which is a more likely and dangerous possibility anyway.

To harp on a familiar subject here; would it have been possible to go from the gun laws of 1920 to today's in one swell foop?::cool: Of course not. But incrementally....

I didn't hear him say anything about a military government.
 
And we will still have those rights "endowed by our Creator"...
Click to expand...

Ah, huh. And look at the number of people and groups attacking anything which remotely appears to be acknowledging a "Creator". :eek:

May God help us all.
 
I havent seen anywhere yet that this has been posted, so I figured I would add it...



Martial Law is not a permanent state, nor a permanent government. It is a temporary state of govern until the state of emergency has been taken care of. Martial Law can also be called both locally and nationally. Everyone is throwing a fit over the threat of Martial Law, and what people dont seem to realize is that in certain parts of the country, it has already been declaired more than once. Everyone lived through it all of the previous times, so why is it suddenly such a big deal?

No weapons will be confiscated during martial law, that has been proven time and time again.
 
I wasn't throwing a big fit over martial law.

I was simply pointing out that the U.S. Government cannot simply scrap the Constitution. Our country is the Constitution. If they scrap that then they scrap our country, and as I said earlier, everyobdy would be on their own. You make some very good points. Martial law is indeed not intended to be permanent. It is for when things get bad (insert scenario). Once things get better we are back to normal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top