"Both Germany and the US have something quite similar except they don't have a designated protector but instead put that duty on their citizens" and that's a f

"Both Germany and the US have something quite similar except they don't have a designated protector but instead put that duty on their citizens" and that's a fricking huge difference. Speaking of the military's freedom to topple governments as a duty, as if it was a burden and not a pure power of privilege? Imagine that the military fails in its "obligation" to topple governments. They let a government stay that should have been toppled. Will they pay? Will anyone punish them? Of course not. You say it "must be avoided if at all possible", but who gets to make that call? That's right, only the generals themselves. But for the people it's completely different. They - we - have skin in the game, it's we who will suffer if a tyrannical government is allowed to stay. Which is why we, and only we, none of our high-minded "protectors" internal or external should have the final word on whether revolution might be "worth it". > Unless the government, like Erdogan did, corrupted the military You think that the default status of a military is to be uncorrupt. Interestingly enough, that is a mistake the US founders didn't make - although their opposition to standing armies has fallen by the wayside long ago.