3 ms·

What I found so remarkable was Trump's address to the generals. I am a little queasy of throwing the fascism word around willy nilly, but the story of "interna

by srean 1y ago

What I found so remarkable was Trump's address to the generals. I am a little queasy of throwing the fascism word around willy nilly, but the story of "internal enemies" could not have been more formulaic.

actionfromafar 1y ago
Yes. The "swear an oath to the leader" comes a bit later in the game. At this pace though, who knows? It could be really soon. Something drastic must be done about the midterms, or Trump could be impeached, and that is not in the cards of these people.
- AnimalMuppet 1y ago
  I fear that, yes, Trump is on a path to do something drastic to prevent the midterms. It will either be 1) war, 2) martial law, or 3) declaring an insurrection. 1 is dicey. It will require, first, a declared war, not just Trump saying so, and second, the courts agreeing (against all precedent) that we can't hold elections in wartime. This isn't Ukraine; our constitution doesn't have a provision for elections not happening during war. So, while Trump has sounded like he likes the idea, this one is unlikely to work. 2 or 3 seem more workable. At the moment at least some members of the administration seem to be leaning toward 3 (see, for example, Miller stating that a judge ruling against Trump sending troops to Portland was "a judicial insurrection"). Note that when I say "Trump is on the path to", that does not mean that he will inevitably do so. We will see whether he will restrain himself, or whether others around him can restrain him. And if they don't, then we will see whether the courts can. And if they can't, then we'll see if there's ever a point where the military will decide that his orders are illegal, and their oath is to the constitution.
  - actionfromafar 1y ago
    Kinda thankful that you didn't continue the if-then after the military. Many possible outcomes after that are really depressing. Almost all options involve China laughing all the way to hegemony.
    - johnnyanmac 1y ago
      >Kinda thankful that you didn't continue the if-then after the military. There's so many possibilities of what happens if elections are halted that you no one can truly predict anything. It never happened for nationals and it very very rarely happens in state elections. Having a hostile takeover of the ballot box will truly throw things into chaos. In what way and against who, it's hard to tell. And yes. Of all things I think having a civil war as Russia is teetering on attacking Europe and China is at the peak of its power is a great way to reverse 80 years of progress. Or of course, erase eons of civilization all at once.
      - actionfromafar 1y ago
        There are so many options besides halting elections outright You could - close Congress ignore Congress declare a sufficient number of Democrats "antifa" and arrest/disappear require a special passport for traveling to DC (magically, some democrats are denied) Whatever happens, the midterms is a ticking clok.
        AnimalMuppet 1y ago
        "Ignore Congress" isn't an option. Congress can impeach.
        sethammons 1y ago
        "How did you run that red light? It is illegal!" Enforcement is key. Who would enforce congressional impeachment? The hope is the military. The same military that is being sent out to "democrat strongholds" already.
        AnimalMuppet 1y ago
        Would the military still obey him if he were impeached? I really doubt it. Would the Secret Service? Would the federal bureaucracy? Even the Supreme Court says he has immunity for what he does while in office. If he's impeached, he's no longer in office. So yeah, if he's impeached, it's over.
  - JohnFen 1y ago
    > We will see whether he will restrain himself There's a 0% chance that this will happen. Self-restraint has never been in his nature. That said, Trump isn't the real danger. He's the Useful Idiot for the ones who are.
tdeck 1y ago
This was after Trump's secretary of war said the following on the same stage: “We unleash overwhelming and punishing violence on the enemy,” Hegseth said. “We also don’t fight with stupid rules of engagement. We untie the hands of our warfighters to intimidate, demoralize, hunt and kill the enemies of our country. No more politically correct and overbearing rules of engagement.” It's not exactly subtle. The message is "we're going to commit war crimes more" and "we plan to use the military against people inside the US".
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- BLKNSLVR 1y ago
  > stupid rules of engagement This should be repeated far and wide in the media for, as you have specified, what it really means. I mean, Secretary Pete Hegseth, in his prior role as a Fox News mouthpiece, he defended the actions of a convicted war criminal[0][1], so he has form in displaying a total lack of ethics. [0]: https://time.com/7176342/pete-hegseth-donald-trump-pardon-war-crimes-military/ https://time.com/7176342/pete-hegseth-donald-trump-pardon-wa... [1]: https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/turning-a-blind-eye-to-war-crimes https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/turning-a-blind-eye...
- foogazi 1y ago
  All very vague We all have an understanding of the power of the US military and its foreign agencies But it’s tough to square this quote with that - what is going to change ? What does a nuclear superpower need to be untied ? Mass world surveillance, bombing foreign countries? All of that has happened - what more is needed and why ?
  - ModernMech 1y ago
    > All of that has happened - what more is needed and why ? Who they are threatening: 1) Latin American people and countries 2) Canada + Greenland 3) US Liberal cities. The American war machine has come home to the Western hemisphere. This is a declaration of war against us. As for the why... again listen to them. Trump said it: "I am your retribution". This is all about settling petty vindictive scores.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
JohnFen 1y ago
That entire event was the loud, blaring claxon that the current administration has actually declared war on the US. It was straight-up treasonous.

by srean 1y ago

actionfromafar 1y ago

Yes. The "swear an oath to the leader" comes a bit later in the game. At this pace though, who knows? It could be really soon. Something drastic must be done about the midterms, or Trump could be impeached, and that is not in the cards of these people.

AnimalMuppet 1y ago
I fear that, yes, Trump is on a path to do something drastic to prevent the midterms. It will either be 1) war, 2) martial law, or 3) declaring an insurrection. 1 is dicey. It will require, first, a declared war, not just Trump saying so, and second, the courts agreeing (against all precedent) that we can't hold elections in wartime. This isn't Ukraine; our constitution doesn't have a provision for elections not happening during war. So, while Trump has sounded like he likes the idea, this one is unlikely to work. 2 or 3 seem more workable. At the moment at least some members of the administration seem to be leaning toward 3 (see, for example, Miller stating that a judge ruling against Trump sending troops to Portland was "a judicial insurrection"). Note that when I say "Trump is on the path to", that does not mean that he will inevitably do so. We will see whether he will restrain himself, or whether others around him can restrain him. And if they don't, then we will see whether the courts can. And if they can't, then we'll see if there's ever a point where the military will decide that his orders are illegal, and their oath is to the constitution.
- actionfromafar 1y ago
  Kinda thankful that you didn't continue the if-then after the military. Many possible outcomes after that are really depressing. Almost all options involve China laughing all the way to hegemony.
  - johnnyanmac 1y ago
    >Kinda thankful that you didn't continue the if-then after the military. There's so many possibilities of what happens if elections are halted that you no one can truly predict anything. It never happened for nationals and it very very rarely happens in state elections. Having a hostile takeover of the ballot box will truly throw things into chaos. In what way and against who, it's hard to tell. And yes. Of all things I think having a civil war as Russia is teetering on attacking Europe and China is at the peak of its power is a great way to reverse 80 years of progress. Or of course, erase eons of civilization all at once.
    - actionfromafar 1y ago
      There are so many options besides halting elections outright You could - close Congress ignore Congress declare a sufficient number of Democrats "antifa" and arrest/disappear require a special passport for traveling to DC (magically, some democrats are denied) Whatever happens, the midterms is a ticking clok.
      - AnimalMuppet 1y ago
        "Ignore Congress" isn't an option. Congress can impeach.
        sethammons 1y ago
        "How did you run that red light? It is illegal!" Enforcement is key. Who would enforce congressional impeachment? The hope is the military. The same military that is being sent out to "democrat strongholds" already.
        AnimalMuppet 1y ago
        Would the military still obey him if he were impeached? I really doubt it. Would the Secret Service? Would the federal bureaucracy? Even the Supreme Court says he has immunity for what he does while in office. If he's impeached, he's no longer in office. So yeah, if he's impeached, it's over.
- JohnFen 1y ago
  > We will see whether he will restrain himself There's a 0% chance that this will happen. Self-restraint has never been in his nature. That said, Trump isn't the real danger. He's the Useful Idiot for the ones who are.

tdeck 1y ago

This was after Trump's secretary of war said the following on the same stage: “We unleash overwhelming and punishing violence on the enemy,” Hegseth said. “We also don’t fight with stupid rules of engagement. We untie the hands of our warfighters to intimidate, demoralize, hunt and kill the enemies of our country. No more politically correct and overbearing rules of engagement.” It's not exactly subtle. The message is "we're going to commit war crimes more" and "we plan to use the military against people inside the US".

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
BLKNSLVR 1y ago
> stupid rules of engagement This should be repeated far and wide in the media for, as you have specified, what it really means. I mean, Secretary Pete Hegseth, in his prior role as a Fox News mouthpiece, he defended the actions of a convicted war criminal[0][1], so he has form in displaying a total lack of ethics. [0]: https://time.com/7176342/pete-hegseth-donald-trump-pardon-war-crimes-military/ https://time.com/7176342/pete-hegseth-donald-trump-pardon-wa... [1]: https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/turning-a-blind-eye-to-war-crimes https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/turning-a-blind-eye...
foogazi 1y ago
All very vague We all have an understanding of the power of the US military and its foreign agencies But it’s tough to square this quote with that - what is going to change ? What does a nuclear superpower need to be untied ? Mass world surveillance, bombing foreign countries? All of that has happened - what more is needed and why ?
- ModernMech 1y ago
  > All of that has happened - what more is needed and why ? Who they are threatening: 1) Latin American people and countries 2) Canada + Greenland 3) US Liberal cities. The American war machine has come home to the Western hemisphere. This is a declaration of war against us. As for the why... again listen to them. Trump said it: "I am your retribution". This is all about settling petty vindictive scores.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

JohnFen 1y ago

That entire event was the loud, blaring claxon that the current administration has actually declared war on the US. It was straight-up treasonous.