My alarm at this bit of news is probably a bit greater than yours because the potential for army regulars to be shooting at citizens is a rumor that should have just blown away on account of its own ridiculous implications and impossibility. But seems it won't go away.
The finger pointing in the aftermath of Kent State shootings did not feel like justice to either the Viet Nam war protest movement or its opponents. The questions we have to ask at the mere hint that we are a nation yet again preparing to kill our own civilians ought to be in more minds...maybe that would lessen the likelihood of history repeating itself.
- Who gains from such unrest?
- Who gains if the military must be visibly present on our city streets, armed and leathal?
- Who wants this kind of control? Who thinks marshal law is good in any way or at any time?
- Do those who brought so much economic pain and dislocation on us face gun barrels and tear gas as potential rioters would? Do they even get an indictment?
- What will be the dividing lines between common soldiers and those that give the orders? Who are we if we are not all on the same side in this country?
- What will voting or economic reforms mean in an era of marshal law?