A Message to ANTIFA from an American Infantryman - Salty Language Alert

[Scanker19]

I'll be honest I had no idea what these people are/am? I had to look them up. Turns out there's a bunch of videos on YouTube with them getting their asses kicked. Still not sure what they are or want.

[hollohas]

The OP rant had me on board until the "stateside kill". That's just effed up. I truly hope there is not a bunch of our military men itching to kill Americans, liberal or otherwise.

Also, the Federal Government might as well be a foreign government at this point. There is zero actual legit representation and it operates so far outside its constitutional limitations how can we possibly even call it American anymore?

And I am happy to see patriots stand up to the antifa. They get hit in the mouth enough, they will eventually stay home.

[Eggysrun]

I'd love to see the alt right and alt left settle things like gangs of new york style.

[funkymonkey1111]

The OP rant had me on board until the "stateside kill". That's just effed up. I truly hope there is not a bunch of our military men itching to kill Americans, liberal or otherwise.

Also, the Federal Government might as well be a foreign government at this point. There is zero actual legit representation and it operates so far outside it's constitutional limitations how can we possibly even call it American anymore?

And I am happy to see patriots stand up to the antifa. They get hit in the mouth enough, they will eventually stay home.

Exactly this. Once the U.S. Army is used against American citizens, they are my enemy, and the enemy of every other citizen within our borders. Now, you may [MOD Edit : Not here] to the thought of a "stateside kill" on an ANTIFA member, but just consider, next time, a hump on green welfare sailing SS109 through your brain because President Michelle or President Chelsea said so because they didn't care for your armed self.

[CS1983]

So you guys disagree with the portion of the oath which says domestic? How do you understand that, Americans or foreign enemies which have infiltrated the border -- do you have historical backing for your interpretation?

Is it ok for them to want to kill a human being overseas? If so, why?

[Irving]

Not that anyone asked me, but my primary issue with this piece in the OP is that it's way over blown compared to the level of threat. Like Scanker, I had to look up what Anitfa even is, except I didn't bother to look them up. Looks like at this stage they are pretty minimally a threat. Sure they're a bit more flamboyant than the usual protesters with the use of M80's and such, but the letter above seems to be putting them on the same level as ISIS or something. Where are they even showing up? Is it just one state? Is it all over the country? I've only even heard about them on here.

[Bailey Guns]

So you guys disagree with the portion of the oath which says domestic?

You're the only one that's come to that conclusion. I don't know how considering the context of the discussion and, like Irving said, the level of the threat. Just because these people don't think like you doesn't make them domestic enemies rising to a level of threat to where they need to be killed.

That's a pretty big step to take.

[CS1983]

You're the only one that's come to that conclusion. I don't know how considering the context of the discussion and, like Irving said, the level of the threat. Just because these people don't think like you doesn't make them domestic enemies rising to a level of threat to where they need to be killed.

That's a pretty big step to take.

I didn't write the OP. I didn't write the oath of enlistment. People took issue with the OP, and I pointed out that it is within the bounds of the oath of enlistment to kill domestic enemies.

I'm mainly interested in what allows a person to take umbrage with killing a Socialist who happens to be American but not a Muslim (or whatever flavor of enemy the "government" decides to pine-box good American young men for, in their generation), who happens to not be American. Pursuant to that, I'm wondering what the people taking umbrage with someone wanting to kill a domestic enemy (which is what the OP was addressing in that portion of the essay) have to say about that portion of the oath.

Personally speaking, my own views on "Antifa" et al., and the eradication of such folks, are probably much more nuanced than you might guess.

As I said in the thread about the "women's march", 99% of these people are being used for a global agenda and are useful idiots.

[funkymonkey1111]

I guess it all depends on what is a domestic enemy, and who is defining someone as such

[CS1983]

I guess it all depends on what is a domestic enemy, and who is defining someone as such

Well that's the rub, ain't it?

So what's your answer?

Here's a nitty gritty of the actual "law" behind it: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-0...-disturbances-