Among circumstances noted by the Daily Mail:
The Houston Chronicle reports that, among the planned exercises, soldiers will attempt to operate undetected among civilian populations.
Residents, in turn, will be asked to report suspicious activity in order to gauge the effectiveness of the soldiers.Here's where claims by the military that the exercise is designed to better equip soldiers for overseas deployment shows a credibility gap.
Seems to me, it should easier for American soldiers to operate on American terrain and undetected among an American population, than it would be to operate on foreign turf, where a foreign presence and cultural differences would set them apart.
So much for the argument of "realistic" training.
Want realistic training? Find a region near where troops might actually be deployed, a place where the native population is culturally similar. Go practice there.
Regardless of intent, to know there's a military exercise planned in six or seven states where the training scenario is to put down an insurgency, and the tactics involve moving and operating active duty forces undetected is a bit unnerving.
Yes, military exercises on civilian turf are nothing new in America. But the scope and scale is widening at the same time the executive branch of the government has chosen to go in some very rogue directions, bypassing constitutional limits or checks and balances.
Can't say I blame those who find this whole Jade Helm 15 thing a bit unnerving.