• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Trump administration 2024-2028

FJAG said:
I think where you go off the rails is where you equate "being opposed to actions being taken by the state" with being "enemies of the state."

"Obstruction," "rebellion" and " insurrection," are not a continuum at all. "Rebellion" and "insurrection" are basically synonymous while "obstruction" is a completely different thing. One person's "obstruction" is another person's "peaceful voicing of their 1st amendment rights." A peaceful demonstration, which has a handful of individuals who commit criminal acts during its course, does not equate to an "insurrection," any more than "January 6th" was an insurrection by the Republican Party.
Click to expand...
If you've read any appreciable amount of what I've written here, you must know I don't think everyone on the spectrum of opposition to the state is an enemy of the state. I am confident that I am much more tolerant of dissent and opposed to potential state tyranny than most contributors on this site. I was responding to a fatuous indirect suggestion that the US is on the road to some kind of tyranny.

Obstruction is something that some people used to get quite worked up about here. If you're obstructing or interfering with the legimate business of the state, you're obstructing or interfering. The particular thing being obstructed doesn't matter.
FJAG said:
One of the problems with the current White House and those who support it are that it is entirely too quick to label voiced opposition to its policies and procedural ways of enforcing those policies as "enemies of the state." That's blatant nonsense bordering on hysterical paranoia.
Click to expand...
Agreed, but a pointless complaint. Go watch Joe Biden's "Battle for the Soul of the Nation" speech. Politicians routinely vilify Americans as threats or enemies because of mere policy disagreement. It's as normalized as claiming someone didn't pay enough taxes. People should not have ignored, condoned, or defended that shit the previous times around.
FJAG said:
What ought to be of much greater concern to the nation than a handful of people waving flags on the streets of Los Angeles is an executive that is riding roughshod over the legislature and judiciary and the constitution and who holds political rallies with the nation's military.
Click to expand...
There's a lot more going on than waving (Mexican) flags. People act as if none of this would be happening if no soldiers were involved, which is untrue by observation. The only satisfactory outcome for the agitators will be for the administration to concede that it will not enforce particular federal law in areas where people demand it not be enforced.

Instead of drawing a cloud-shaped diagram of imagined lawless acts of the administration to create the impression it's common as dirt, it would be better to enumerate the specific cases where all dispute processes in the courts have been exhausted and the administration is defying the final judgement. I raise this point because every couple of weeks or so I read articles by lawyers who are not enamoured of Trump - conservatives and progressives, Republicans and Democrats - who note that the administration (and his previous one) pretty much abide by all decisions after there are no further processes for appeal. They're allowed to push boundaries and keep testing them in the courts.

It would be better if everyone sucked back their anti-Trump priors and admitted as first principles that the administration has the duty to enforce federal laws, irrespective of whether people or state or local governments prefer otherwise; and, that the federal government has the duty to protect its people and institutions, including the use of soldiers; and, that instances of errors or unlawful actions or apparent hypocrisy do not delegitimize anything else the administration might do; and, that battles being fought in courts are not lawlessness; and, that presidents challenging Congress to assert itself against presidential over-reach is undesirable but normalized.
 
  • Like
Reactions: QV
CBH99 said:
Given how fluid this situation is at the moment, I'm sure those papers will be sent to their units within a day or so
Click to expand...
Federalized troops cannot be used for anything beyond Federal installation protection, unless the Insurrection Act is used.

SCOTUS has already wacked POTUS’s peepee when it comes to the IA.

The Fed Gov has many many many lawyers telling the Administration to reel their neck in wrt Military troops, as Federalized ARNG (or USAR, USMCR etc) are the same as Active Duty when it comes to Posse Comittatus.
 
Meanwhile, elsewhere in POTUS47-ville, a hearty "Хорошего дня, товарищи!" to USSR 2.0 ...
1749734329222.png
... and a "what choo talkin' 'bout nuke subs, Willis?" for some allies
www.theguardian.com

Pentagon launches review of US-UK-Australia Aukus security alliance

Future of $240bn defense pact in doubt as Trump administration reviews it to see if it aligns with ‘America first’ agenda
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
apnews.com

Australia's defense minister downplays concerns over Pentagon review of multi-billion submarine deal

Australia’s defense minister has dismissed concerns that a deal between the U.S., Australia and Britain to provide his country with nuclear-powered submarines could be in jeopardy, following a report that the Pentagon had ordered a review.
apnews.com apnews.com
www.aljazeera.com

Australia confident AUKUS security pact will proceed despite US review

Australia says the plan to deliver nuclear submarines remains unchanged, despite opposition from a top Trump official.
www.aljazeera.com www.aljazeera.com
 
CBH99 said:
Given how fluid this situation is at the moment, I'm sure those papers will be sent to their units within a day or so
Click to expand...
The next stupidity will be over who foots the bill- California or the feds? I have no difficulty imagining the troops might be left hanging for a while in the midst of that squabble.
 
The Bread Guy said:
Meanwhile, elsewhere in POTUS47-ville, a hearty "Хорошего дня, товарищи!" to USSR 2.0 ...
View attachment 93858
... and a "what choo talkin' 'bout nuke subs, Willis?" for some allies
www.theguardian.com

Pentagon launches review of US-UK-Australia Aukus security alliance

Future of $240bn defense pact in doubt as Trump administration reviews it to see if it aligns with ‘America first’ agenda
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
apnews.com

Australia's defense minister downplays concerns over Pentagon review of multi-billion submarine deal

Australia’s defense minister has dismissed concerns that a deal between the U.S., Australia and Britain to provide his country with nuclear-powered submarines could be in jeopardy, following a report that the Pentagon had ordered a review.
apnews.com apnews.com
www.aljazeera.com

Australia confident AUKUS security pact will proceed despite US review

Australia says the plan to deliver nuclear submarines remains unchanged, despite opposition from a top Trump official.
www.aljazeera.com www.aljazeera.com
Click to expand...

Rubio has turned out to be such a spineless disappointment.
 
QV said:
As a soldier, in every kind of public interaction we were always under constant threat to not embarrass the chain of command in any way shape or form (looking like a bag of shit, heckling the guest speaker...etc)

This is not a new thing, but it's a thing because Trump.
Click to expand...
As a soldier you are not supposed to be cheering for the inflammatory rhetoric and personal attacks against rival politicians. We are above politics when the uniform goes on. I'm sure @KevinB can confirm the same applies in the States. Hopefully their chains of command are tracking who brought dishonour to their uniforms.
 
PrairieFella said:
As a soldier you are not supposed to be cheering for the inflammatory rhetoric and personal attacks against rival politicians. We are above politics when the uniform goes on. I'm sure @KevinB can confirm the same applies in the States. Hopefully their chains of command are tracking who brought dishonor to their uniforms.
Click to expand...
The unfortunate aspect is that the CoC is effectively hamstrung by the fact the CinC is egging this shit on.

Every 0-6 to 0-9 needs to be very careful to pick their battles, as it’s often better to not fight a battle and to be ready for a more important one, than to fall on one’s sword and not be around for when actually needed to give command leadership.
 
KevinB said:
The unfortunate aspect is that the CoC is effectively hamstrung by the fact the CinC is egging this shit on.

Every 0-6 to 0-9 needs to be very careful to pick their battles, as it’s often better to not fight a battle and to be ready for a more important one, than to fall on one’s sword and not be around for when actually needed to give command leadership.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, but all it would take to have avoided this embarrassment would be to have the various First Sergeants and Master Sergeants threaten them with the smoking of a lifetime if they did anything political. They should have been ordered to sit there in silence and look pretty for the cameras.
 
PrairieFella said:
Fair enough, but all it would take to have avoided this embarrassment would be to have the various First Sergeants and Master Sergeants threaten them with the smoking of a lifetime if they did anything political. They should have been ordered to sit there in silence and look pretty for the cameras.
Click to expand...
And then one MAGA guy complains to the organizers and the E-7 thru 9 crew is in the shitter.

It sucks and the current Administration is absolutely deplorable for how they are acting.
 
PrairieFella said:
As a soldier you are not supposed to be cheering for the inflammatory rhetoric and personal attacks against rival politicians. We are above politics when the uniform goes on. I'm sure @KevinB can confirm the same applies in the States. Hopefully their chains of command are tracking who brought dishonour to their uniforms.
Click to expand...

Yes, correct. Remain non-political. But where were your comments and the uproar here when Biden did something similar?

Now if the soldiers remained non-reactionary I can almost read the headlines now: "Trump speaks to military audience who defied him with their silence, staring ahead, it's obvious no military support Trump and all loathed to be present."

HavokFour said:
Not boding well, for anyone.

www.theguardian.com

Troops and marines deeply troubled by LA deployment: ‘Morale is not great’

Several service members told advocacy groups they felt like pawns in a political game and assignment was not necessary
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

Marines deployed near LA have not completed training on use of force, nonlethal weapons
Click to expand...


Conservative estimate: 70% of these headlines are medial bullshit lies/embellishments. History has demonstrated this when it comes to anything and everything Trump. The establishment continuously works hard to undermine in everyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top