4 ms·

US immigration enforcement using military hardware and tactics on civilians

28 points by c420 1y ago

alphawhisky 1y ago
This just in - clown uses clown tactics on civilians.
- postflopclarity 1y ago
  call it what it is: fascist tactics.
NotGMan 1y ago
[flagged]
- postflopclarity 1y ago
  why would you assume this given all the video evidence to the contrary?
  - Jotra7 1y ago
    [dead]
  - RajT88 1y ago
    Reports of people in my neck of the woods yesterday being thrown into vans without checking paperwork. Anyone who looks Latino. I suspect anyone non-latino who tries to stand up for them, regardless of citizenship status, will end up in the same place.
- NomDePlum 1y ago
  Civilian: a person who is not a member of the armed forces.
- everdrive 1y ago
  Even if we grant both your points, then yes, those would still be civilians. Civilian =/= "good guy" or "innocent victim." It means they're not part of a military force. Mind you, I'm not weighing in on whether or not the tactics here are appropriate, but it's pretty clear that the article is trying to make the argument that civilians are being caught up _military_ tactics which could eventually cross the line into strict war crime territory.
- DiogenesKynikos 1y ago
  One of the central principles of a democratic country is that the military is not used against civilians. "But those civilians are criminals" is the excuse that every president who wants to use the military internally will make. Civilians have rights, and if they're suspected of a crime, that's a matter for the police and the courts, not for the military. If you give the executive the power to send the military onto the streets, that is an extremely dangerous concentration of power in one person's hands. The use of the military against civilians was one of the main grievances that led to the American Revolution (most notably, the British government sending the regular army into Boston to "restore order"). Many of the founders of the US were opposed to the idea of any standing army at all in peacetime, because of its potential use against the citizens of the country.
  - sys_64738 1y ago
    The military should never, ever be used to "police" their civilians. You could be forced to apprehend your relative. When the military attacks the civilian population then civil war is inevitable.
- IAmBroom 1y ago
  No. The ICE agents are presumably assuming that their victims are illegal immigrants, if we assume a best-case scenario where they aren't intentionally abusing their authority to attack random targets of their attention or racism. But by legal definition, their targets are all innocent of crimes. Without due process, they are not convicted criminals. Even if all this were true, your accusation would be false. Some came here legally, but in the eyes of the current administration violated the rules of their immigration while here.
- jmclnx 1y ago
  First of all, the "crime" you are referring to is a misdemeanor, you know, like jaywalking. >A first-time illegal entry is a federal misdemeanor https://legalclarity.org/18-u-s-c-1325-illegal-entry-and-its-legal-consequences/ https://legalclarity.org/18-u-s-c-1325-illegal-entry-and-its... How about going after felonies instead, you know, the people who B&E, rapist, murder, assaults, and other such crimes. This is nothing but a waste of resources.
  - RajT88 1y ago
    That is not even true that it is a misdemeanor (that is a criminal offense). Unlawful presence is a civil offense, like a parking ticket.
bilbo0s 1y ago
I mean.. We do this to civilians all the time. What do people think has been going on in our ghettos for the last 30 years? (Or even more in some places.) Not that we should tolerate it, but this is nothing new.
- taylodl 1y ago
  It's not new, but it's become more widespread and we're reaching the point people have been warning for years that we'd reach if we didn't take any efforts to reign it in. Americans, and perhaps much of the Western world, have been lulled into a sense of complacency since the end of WWII. Now everybody is discovering how fast a military state created during the Cold War can be transformed into a police state.
- UncleEntity 1y ago
  But, you know, I've never really heard of the police (local, state or federal) executing a general warrant against an entire apartment complex. How do you even get a judge to sign off on that? --edit-- Oh, flagged, guess we don't talk about that here...
  - RajT88 1y ago
    All forums these days are filled with malicious actors trying to control the narrative. You do not seem to be flagged to me right now.
  - UI_at_80x24 1y ago
    Read up on the MOVE bombing in Philly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1985_MOVE_bombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1985_MOVE_bombing
- carbonbioxide 1y ago
  not this way no, black hawk and tactical teams to illegally raid a build with innocent families?, I've never heard of that at this scale, it's pretty obvious they want to create a fictitious situation to convince people there's threat where there isn't any.
akagusu 1y ago
why this was flagged?

28 points by c420 1y ago

alphawhisky 1y ago

This just in - clown uses clown tactics on civilians.

postflopclarity 1y ago
call it what it is: fascist tactics.

NotGMan 1y ago

[flagged]

postflopclarity 1y ago
why would you assume this given all the video evidence to the contrary?
- Jotra7 1y ago
  [dead]
- RajT88 1y ago
  Reports of people in my neck of the woods yesterday being thrown into vans without checking paperwork. Anyone who looks Latino. I suspect anyone non-latino who tries to stand up for them, regardless of citizenship status, will end up in the same place.
NomDePlum 1y ago
Civilian: a person who is not a member of the armed forces.
everdrive 1y ago
Even if we grant both your points, then yes, those would still be civilians. Civilian =/= "good guy" or "innocent victim." It means they're not part of a military force. Mind you, I'm not weighing in on whether or not the tactics here are appropriate, but it's pretty clear that the article is trying to make the argument that civilians are being caught up _military_ tactics which could eventually cross the line into strict war crime territory.
DiogenesKynikos 1y ago
One of the central principles of a democratic country is that the military is not used against civilians. "But those civilians are criminals" is the excuse that every president who wants to use the military internally will make. Civilians have rights, and if they're suspected of a crime, that's a matter for the police and the courts, not for the military. If you give the executive the power to send the military onto the streets, that is an extremely dangerous concentration of power in one person's hands. The use of the military against civilians was one of the main grievances that led to the American Revolution (most notably, the British government sending the regular army into Boston to "restore order"). Many of the founders of the US were opposed to the idea of any standing army at all in peacetime, because of its potential use against the citizens of the country.
- sys_64738 1y ago
  The military should never, ever be used to "police" their civilians. You could be forced to apprehend your relative. When the military attacks the civilian population then civil war is inevitable.
IAmBroom 1y ago
No. The ICE agents are presumably assuming that their victims are illegal immigrants, if we assume a best-case scenario where they aren't intentionally abusing their authority to attack random targets of their attention or racism. But by legal definition, their targets are all innocent of crimes. Without due process, they are not convicted criminals. Even if all this were true, your accusation would be false. Some came here legally, but in the eyes of the current administration violated the rules of their immigration while here.
jmclnx 1y ago
First of all, the "crime" you are referring to is a misdemeanor, you know, like jaywalking. >A first-time illegal entry is a federal misdemeanor https://legalclarity.org/18-u-s-c-1325-illegal-entry-and-its-legal-consequences/ https://legalclarity.org/18-u-s-c-1325-illegal-entry-and-its... How about going after felonies instead, you know, the people who B&E, rapist, murder, assaults, and other such crimes. This is nothing but a waste of resources.
- RajT88 1y ago
  That is not even true that it is a misdemeanor (that is a criminal offense). Unlawful presence is a civil offense, like a parking ticket.

bilbo0s 1y ago

I mean.. We do this to civilians all the time. What do people think has been going on in our ghettos for the last 30 years? (Or even more in some places.) Not that we should tolerate it, but this is nothing new.

taylodl 1y ago
It's not new, but it's become more widespread and we're reaching the point people have been warning for years that we'd reach if we didn't take any efforts to reign it in. Americans, and perhaps much of the Western world, have been lulled into a sense of complacency since the end of WWII. Now everybody is discovering how fast a military state created during the Cold War can be transformed into a police state.
UncleEntity 1y ago
But, you know, I've never really heard of the police (local, state or federal) executing a general warrant against an entire apartment complex. How do you even get a judge to sign off on that? --edit-- Oh, flagged, guess we don't talk about that here...
- RajT88 1y ago
  All forums these days are filled with malicious actors trying to control the narrative. You do not seem to be flagged to me right now.
- UI_at_80x24 1y ago
  Read up on the MOVE bombing in Philly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1985_MOVE_bombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1985_MOVE_bombing
carbonbioxide 1y ago
not this way no, black hawk and tactical teams to illegally raid a build with innocent families?, I've never heard of that at this scale, it's pretty obvious they want to create a fictitious situation to convince people there's threat where there isn't any.

akagusu 1y ago

why this was flagged?