5 ms·

Pentagon readies 1,500 troops to possibly deploy to Minnesota, US media say

88 points by pera 9mo ago

aebtebeten 9mo ago
I've said elsewhere on HN that the military (here, specifically a battalion of the 11th airborne, presumably picked because they actually have cold weather gear?) could turn out to be a far more congenial occupier than ICE currently is. Note the two verbs, adjective, and adverb: "deescalate", "protect", "legal", and "legally"; does ICE operate as professionally? https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/ARN35675-ATP_3-39.33-000-WEB-1.pdf#page=11 https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/ARN35675-ATP_3-... > U.S forces responding to planned rallies and demonstrations, spontaneous crowds, and civil disturbances must follow the procedures best designed to deescalate crowd actions and to protect life, the rights and safety of the persons involved, and property. https://rdl.train.army.mil/catalog-ws/view/Army-Blue-Book/index.html https://rdl.train.army.mil/catalog-ws/view/Army-Blue-Book/in... > All Soldiers are required to obey the legal orders of their lawful seniors. https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/ARN34403-ADP_6-0-000-WEB-3.pdf#page=37 https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/ARN34403-ADP_6-... > Commanders are legally and ethically accountable for the decisions they make or do not make, and for the actions, accomplishments, and failures of their subordinates. EDIT: elsewhere I'd asked if the Soldier's Manual still (post 2002) includes the duty to disobey manifestly unlawful orders. I now guess that it does, as this duty is explicitly described on p.22 of FM-1 "THE ARMY: A PRIMER TO OUR PROFESSION OF ARMS" (01 May 2025).
- vjvjvjvjghv 9mo ago
  Probably not with the current leadership.
- mrtksn 9mo ago
  AFAIK countries that turn totalitarian often end up having alternative force directly under the regime control because the military is very strict in following rules and often non-partisan due to its composition and claim of high moral ground. To enforce an ideology you need people whom identity is based around the ideology, they need to be losers, goons who don't have anything else for them going on. Therefore the proper military can indeed be an attempt to de-escalate the situation.
  - actionfromafar 9mo ago
    Could be but this administration is just trying out its new Dictator Shoes for the first time, so I wouldn't bet on it.
  - autoexec 9mo ago
    > Therefore the proper military can indeed be an attempt to de-escalate the situation. Considering that our military swore an oath to the constitution and to defend the country against domestic threats the correct thing for them to do might instead be an escalation against that alternative force of losers operating in American cities. I wouldn't bet on the military occupiers marching into Minnesota upholding their oaths though.
    - sheikhnbake 9mo ago
      We need a new Smedley Butler
  - sheikhnbake 9mo ago
    Based on your reply, I suspect you've never served in the US military. I have. The majority of the US military is comprised of the poor or persons who otherwise have nothing going for them. There's a lot of internal jokes about US servicemembers being uniformed criminals. Further, under the current regime, you have to remember that military leadership and checks and balances has been systematically eroded for the last 12 months. Military leaders that would oppose trump are/have been removed or retired. Holsey is the latest/biggest example I can think of. Look what happened in Venezuela almost immediately after. Also, recall the address Hegseth and Trump gave to the gathering of generals in Quantico. They explicitly said if you aren't an ideologue aligned with the administration, there is no place for you in the military. Which is to say that the time of the US military being non-partisan is over. Lastly, I'd consider the kind of leadership Hegseth and Trump want leading that occupying unit. It's going to be somebody that will be receptive to their orders, legal or not.
- crote 9mo ago
  On the other hand, it was only a couple of months ago when the Navy did a double tap to kill the survivors of their attack on an alleged "drug boat". Clearly the military isn't strictly following the whole "don't follow unlawful orders" any more. But hey, perhaps things will be different when they are face-to-face with regular Americans who could've been their neighbors, instead of some anonymous pixels of foreigners on a computer screen.
  - GrowingSideways 9mo ago
    It's hard to think of an organization that has broken international law more consistently than the US Military.
    - hackable_sand 9mo ago
      The CIA, probably.
  - aebtebeten 9mo ago
    I'm hoping on the "things will be different"; for more context regarding the "couple of months ago" see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46671917 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46671917
- GrowingSideways 9mo ago
  I'd like fewer occupiers rather than more congenial ones, personally.
- biofunsf 9mo ago
  genuine question: What is the interpretation of the law such that ICE operations are wholly unlawful, and the military should broadly disobey an order to support/protect ICE operations? While there's certainly many instances where ICE breaks the law, what would be the rationale for the military wholly refusing to support ICE performing their stated duty of enforcing immigration law? (besides more specific orders like "disperse these legal protesters" which could be disobeyed for more narrow reasons, because peaceful protesting is legal)
  - aebtebeten 9mo ago
    No rationale for the military wholly refusing; that's a straw man. This suggestion is that the insurrection act could be moving from the fire into the frying pan: I'm not saying the military would be good occupiers, only that they're probably better occupiers than ICE. (and were they to be supporting ICE operations, from what I've seen in the news reported on this side of the Atlantic, they'd be more likely to ride herd on ICE than on the public*: keep the SOF LARPers on the up and up, as it were) * after all, the Arctic Angels have been training for going up against the ВДВ, not for playing "respect my authoritah!" games with civilians.
deleted 9mo ago
[deleted]
LightBug1 9mo ago
I think the USA needs a coup like the rest of the banana republics. I've heard some very decent Generals speak recently about an America I remember. Need to exit Don the Long Con Man with a Pong stage left and deport him to Greenland.
- embedding-shape 9mo ago
  Judging from the outside, many (most?) still believe in change through elections. It seems like Senate and House elections are happening in 2026, and seemingly people are waiting for those and hoping that this will trigger change, otherwise hold out to 2028 I suppose. It seems like the administration been toying with the idea of cancelling both the upcoming 2026 elections, and the 2028, but how feasible that is, I don't know, as far as I know the US always have elections, even when at war, but then also lots of things that has happened had requirements and precedents that were never broken but still were, so not sure what will actually happen. I'm personally not super optimistic the administration won't at least try to stop them from happening.
- dandanua 9mo ago
  And what to do with all of his supporters, which include the entire caste of billionaires, who control media and many other spheres of life, including the development of AGI?
  - krapp 9mo ago
    Something something Tree of Liberty something something blood of tyrants. We could even create a ton of new jobs in the guillotine sector. And if it means we destroy AI, modern media and most of the web, all the better. I'm honestly struggling to see a downside here.
deleted 9mo ago
[deleted]
Traubenfuchs 9mo ago
So the gameplan is provoking a civil war to declare a state of emergency before midterms?
tbossanova 9mo ago
Good luck with that
tclancy 9mo ago
A good rule of thumb coming out of this, if your country rebrands the military to the Department of War, it’s not to fight Johnny Foreigner. Who knew the capitalism loop of fighting wars for oil and then selling the lightly used weapons to our domestic police could come back to bite us in our collective GLP-1 thinned ass?
- OgsyedIE 9mo ago
  Foucault, you mean?
dudefeliciano 9mo ago
people who voted for Trump: do you still defend your choice? If yes, how?
- bitlax 9mo ago
  https://www.reuters.com/world/us/pentagon-readies-1500-soldiers-possibly-deploy-minnesota-washington-post-reports-2026-01-18/ https://www.reuters.com/world/us/pentagon-readies-1500-soldi...
  - dudefeliciano 9mo ago
    are you trying to say that you like seeing military deployed to US cities?
    - bitlax 9mo ago
      no
      - piva00 9mo ago
        Spell out what you are trying to say, why be coy?
- cdad5b1 9mo ago
  [flagged]
  - Tadpole9181 9mo ago
    Shocking, a green name made of random characters. I can only imagine where the IP would be from.
    - cdad5b1 9mo ago
      [flagged]
austin-cheney 9mo ago
I don’t think this will work the way the administration thinks it work. They can dictate where the military will deploy but they cannot dictate the conduct of the military once they arrive. In fact, this might prove to be extremely counterproductive to the authoritarian objectives the administration is hoping for.
- autoexec 9mo ago
  Something tells me the military won't be joining the protesters
  - austin-cheney 9mo ago
    Why not? Serious question. The military cannot join law enforcement, Posse Comitatus, and protesters have a right to protest. The military can only take action to limit violence and property destruction. So what happens if law enforcement is the more violent party? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act
    - sheikhnbake 9mo ago
      People keep citing law as if this administration has ever respected them. Realize that laws are just pieces of paper with words that are useless without enforcement. The administration has systematically removed leadership in both the military and the DoJ that aren't ideologues. Case in point: SOUTHCOM Further, internal DoJ and military checks and balances have been eviscerated for the last 12 months. Specifically military lawyers and inspectors general that are concerned with lawful conduct.
    - maxerickson 9mo ago
      You are talking as if law is something more than a construct. Should we be optimistic that current law will be followed? Maybe. Does the existence of the law ensure it? Not at all.
    - sparrish 9mo ago
      Because the 'protesters' are all riled up against 'the law' and will see these troops as opponents (like they see ICE). They'll attack the troops first and I firmly believe federal troops will respond (in defense) violently and in unison. That's the training. Minnesota has no clue how serious a can of whoop-ass they're about to pry open.
hairofadog 9mo ago
Two interesting bits I've read/seen on this recently: Can Trump Really Use the Insurrection Act? https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/can-trump-really-use-the-insurrection-act https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/can-trump-really-use-... > The other point that I want to make is that if the military were being deployed to try to bring ice under control, that would be one thing. That’s not the purpose. The purpose of deploying the military here would be to enable the violence and lawlessness that we’re seeing from ice. And so even if the military itself is not engaging in these kinds of destructive actions, it is there to insure that ice is able to do so. It would serve in that way as a force amplifier for ice. And then a more optimistic take in which Jamelle Bouie talks about how difficult it would be for Trump to disrupt upcoming elections in any meaningful way: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRV-9vO4Grs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRV-9vO4Grs
expedition32 9mo ago
They are only demonstrating against the ICE goons nobody is setting fire to buildings or lynching folks in the streets. If ICE gets the fuck out everything returns to normal. But MAGA and their Repub fellow travellers want to burn down America and rebuild to their fascist ideology.
- goatlover 9mo ago
  It's shocking to see how many fellow Americans don't actually care about democracy and want a strong man to solve all their grievances with society. That plus all the Americans who don't pay attention or claim everything is still normal.
cosmicgadget 9mo ago
I'm old enough to remember people shitting themselves over Jade Helm. Then they voted for this.

88 points by pera 9mo ago

I've said elsewhere on HN that the military (here, specifically a battalion of the 11th airborne, presumably picked because they actually have cold weather gear?) could turn out to be a far more congenial occupier than ICE currently is. Note the two verbs, adjective, and adverb: "deescalate", "protect", "legal", and "legally"; does ICE operate as professionally? https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/ARN35675-ATP_3-39.33-000-WEB-1.pdf#page=11 https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/ARN35675-ATP_3-... > U.S forces responding to planned rallies and demonstrations, spontaneous crowds, and civil disturbances must follow the procedures best designed to deescalate crowd actions and to protect life, the rights and safety of the persons involved, and property. https://rdl.train.army.mil/catalog-ws/view/Army-Blue-Book/index.html https://rdl.train.army.mil/catalog-ws/view/Army-Blue-Book/in... > All Soldiers are required to obey the legal orders of their lawful seniors. https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/ARN34403-ADP_6-0-000-WEB-3.pdf#page=37 https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/ARN34403-ADP_6-... > Commanders are legally and ethically accountable for the decisions they make or do not make, and for the actions, accomplishments, and failures of their subordinates. EDIT: elsewhere I'd asked if the Soldier's Manual still (post 2002) includes the duty to disobey manifestly unlawful orders. I now guess that it does, as this duty is explicitly described on p.22 of FM-1 "THE ARMY: A PRIMER TO OUR PROFESSION OF ARMS" (01 May 2025).

vjvjvjvjghv 9mo ago
Probably not with the current leadership.
mrtksn 9mo ago
AFAIK countries that turn totalitarian often end up having alternative force directly under the regime control because the military is very strict in following rules and often non-partisan due to its composition and claim of high moral ground. To enforce an ideology you need people whom identity is based around the ideology, they need to be losers, goons who don't have anything else for them going on. Therefore the proper military can indeed be an attempt to de-escalate the situation.
- actionfromafar 9mo ago
  Could be but this administration is just trying out its new Dictator Shoes for the first time, so I wouldn't bet on it.
- autoexec 9mo ago
  > Therefore the proper military can indeed be an attempt to de-escalate the situation. Considering that our military swore an oath to the constitution and to defend the country against domestic threats the correct thing for them to do might instead be an escalation against that alternative force of losers operating in American cities. I wouldn't bet on the military occupiers marching into Minnesota upholding their oaths though.
  - sheikhnbake 9mo ago
    We need a new Smedley Butler
- sheikhnbake 9mo ago
  Based on your reply, I suspect you've never served in the US military. I have. The majority of the US military is comprised of the poor or persons who otherwise have nothing going for them. There's a lot of internal jokes about US servicemembers being uniformed criminals. Further, under the current regime, you have to remember that military leadership and checks and balances has been systematically eroded for the last 12 months. Military leaders that would oppose trump are/have been removed or retired. Holsey is the latest/biggest example I can think of. Look what happened in Venezuela almost immediately after. Also, recall the address Hegseth and Trump gave to the gathering of generals in Quantico. They explicitly said if you aren't an ideologue aligned with the administration, there is no place for you in the military. Which is to say that the time of the US military being non-partisan is over. Lastly, I'd consider the kind of leadership Hegseth and Trump want leading that occupying unit. It's going to be somebody that will be receptive to their orders, legal or not.
crote 9mo ago
On the other hand, it was only a couple of months ago when the Navy did a double tap to kill the survivors of their attack on an alleged "drug boat". Clearly the military isn't strictly following the whole "don't follow unlawful orders" any more. But hey, perhaps things will be different when they are face-to-face with regular Americans who could've been their neighbors, instead of some anonymous pixels of foreigners on a computer screen.
- GrowingSideways 9mo ago
  It's hard to think of an organization that has broken international law more consistently than the US Military.
  - hackable_sand 9mo ago
    The CIA, probably.
- aebtebeten 9mo ago
  I'm hoping on the "things will be different"; for more context regarding the "couple of months ago" see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46671917 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46671917
GrowingSideways 9mo ago
I'd like fewer occupiers rather than more congenial ones, personally.
biofunsf 9mo ago
genuine question: What is the interpretation of the law such that ICE operations are wholly unlawful, and the military should broadly disobey an order to support/protect ICE operations? While there's certainly many instances where ICE breaks the law, what would be the rationale for the military wholly refusing to support ICE performing their stated duty of enforcing immigration law? (besides more specific orders like "disperse these legal protesters" which could be disobeyed for more narrow reasons, because peaceful protesting is legal)
- aebtebeten 9mo ago
  No rationale for the military wholly refusing; that's a straw man. This suggestion is that the insurrection act could be moving from the fire into the frying pan: I'm not saying the military would be good occupiers, only that they're probably better occupiers than ICE. (and were they to be supporting ICE operations, from what I've seen in the news reported on this side of the Atlantic, they'd be more likely to ride herd on ICE than on the public*: keep the SOF LARPers on the up and up, as it were) * after all, the Arctic Angels have been training for going up against the ВДВ, not for playing "respect my authoritah!" games with civilians.

deleted 9mo ago

[deleted]

LightBug1 9mo ago

I think the USA needs a coup like the rest of the banana republics. I've heard some very decent Generals speak recently about an America I remember. Need to exit Don the Long Con Man with a Pong stage left and deport him to Greenland.

embedding-shape 9mo ago
Judging from the outside, many (most?) still believe in change through elections. It seems like Senate and House elections are happening in 2026, and seemingly people are waiting for those and hoping that this will trigger change, otherwise hold out to 2028 I suppose. It seems like the administration been toying with the idea of cancelling both the upcoming 2026 elections, and the 2028, but how feasible that is, I don't know, as far as I know the US always have elections, even when at war, but then also lots of things that has happened had requirements and precedents that were never broken but still were, so not sure what will actually happen. I'm personally not super optimistic the administration won't at least try to stop them from happening.
dandanua 9mo ago
And what to do with all of his supporters, which include the entire caste of billionaires, who control media and many other spheres of life, including the development of AGI?
- krapp 9mo ago
  Something something Tree of Liberty something something blood of tyrants. We could even create a ton of new jobs in the guillotine sector. And if it means we destroy AI, modern media and most of the web, all the better. I'm honestly struggling to see a downside here.

deleted 9mo ago

[deleted]

Traubenfuchs 9mo ago

So the gameplan is provoking a civil war to declare a state of emergency before midterms?

tbossanova 9mo ago

Good luck with that

tclancy 9mo ago

A good rule of thumb coming out of this, if your country rebrands the military to the Department of War, it’s not to fight Johnny Foreigner. Who knew the capitalism loop of fighting wars for oil and then selling the lightly used weapons to our domestic police could come back to bite us in our collective GLP-1 thinned ass?

OgsyedIE 9mo ago
Foucault, you mean?

dudefeliciano 9mo ago

people who voted for Trump: do you still defend your choice? If yes, how?

bitlax 9mo ago
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/pentagon-readies-1500-soldiers-possibly-deploy-minnesota-washington-post-reports-2026-01-18/ https://www.reuters.com/world/us/pentagon-readies-1500-soldi...
- dudefeliciano 9mo ago
  are you trying to say that you like seeing military deployed to US cities?
  - bitlax 9mo ago
    no
    - piva00 9mo ago
      Spell out what you are trying to say, why be coy?
cdad5b1 9mo ago
[flagged]
- Tadpole9181 9mo ago
  Shocking, a green name made of random characters. I can only imagine where the IP would be from.
  - cdad5b1 9mo ago
    [flagged]

austin-cheney 9mo ago

I don’t think this will work the way the administration thinks it work. They can dictate where the military will deploy but they cannot dictate the conduct of the military once they arrive. In fact, this might prove to be extremely counterproductive to the authoritarian objectives the administration is hoping for.

autoexec 9mo ago
Something tells me the military won't be joining the protesters
- austin-cheney 9mo ago
  Why not? Serious question. The military cannot join law enforcement, Posse Comitatus, and protesters have a right to protest. The military can only take action to limit violence and property destruction. So what happens if law enforcement is the more violent party? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act
  - sheikhnbake 9mo ago
    People keep citing law as if this administration has ever respected them. Realize that laws are just pieces of paper with words that are useless without enforcement. The administration has systematically removed leadership in both the military and the DoJ that aren't ideologues. Case in point: SOUTHCOM Further, internal DoJ and military checks and balances have been eviscerated for the last 12 months. Specifically military lawyers and inspectors general that are concerned with lawful conduct.
  - maxerickson 9mo ago
    You are talking as if law is something more than a construct. Should we be optimistic that current law will be followed? Maybe. Does the existence of the law ensure it? Not at all.
  - sparrish 9mo ago
    Because the 'protesters' are all riled up against 'the law' and will see these troops as opponents (like they see ICE). They'll attack the troops first and I firmly believe federal troops will respond (in defense) violently and in unison. That's the training. Minnesota has no clue how serious a can of whoop-ass they're about to pry open.

hairofadog 9mo ago

Two interesting bits I've read/seen on this recently: Can Trump Really Use the Insurrection Act? https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/can-trump-really-use-the-insurrection-act https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/can-trump-really-use-... > The other point that I want to make is that if the military were being deployed to try to bring ice under control, that would be one thing. That’s not the purpose. The purpose of deploying the military here would be to enable the violence and lawlessness that we’re seeing from ice. And so even if the military itself is not engaging in these kinds of destructive actions, it is there to insure that ice is able to do so. It would serve in that way as a force amplifier for ice. And then a more optimistic take in which Jamelle Bouie talks about how difficult it would be for Trump to disrupt upcoming elections in any meaningful way: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRV-9vO4Grs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRV-9vO4Grs

expedition32 9mo ago

They are only demonstrating against the ICE goons nobody is setting fire to buildings or lynching folks in the streets. If ICE gets the fuck out everything returns to normal. But MAGA and their Repub fellow travellers want to burn down America and rebuild to their fascist ideology.

goatlover 9mo ago
It's shocking to see how many fellow Americans don't actually care about democracy and want a strong man to solve all their grievances with society. That plus all the Americans who don't pay attention or claim everything is still normal.

cosmicgadget 9mo ago

I'm old enough to remember people shitting themselves over Jade Helm. Then they voted for this.