deputizing the military?

[Art Haberland]

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/...y6nCypBygJf6dM

[Reynard38]

I for one don’t have an issue with the US military guarding the border. I’d rather have them doing that than stirring up $hit in Iran, Syria, Venezuela or any other foreign nation. In fact I’d like to see ALL US military members and assets recalled within the US to provide security for THIS nation. Let the others fend for themselves.

However having them travel inwards from the border to conduct missions to round up and apprehend illegals is another matter as American citizens will undoubtedly get mistakingly targeted by uneducated, untrained and heavily armed individuals.
Guarding a line in the dirt is one thing, acting as a police force is another.

[oznabrag]

I for one don’t have an issue with the US military guarding the border. I’d rather have them doing that than stirring up $hit in Iran, Syria, Venezuela or any other foreign nation. In fact I’d like to see ALL US military members and assets recalled within the US to provide security for THIS nation. Let the others fend for themselves.

However having them travel inwards from the border to conduct missions to round up and apprehend illegals is another matter as American citizens will undoubtedly get mistakingly targeted by uneducated, untrained and heavily armed individuals.
Guarding a line in the dirt is one thing, acting as a police force is another.

I, for one, have a HUGE problem with the US military enforcing civilian law.

This is a MAJOR step toward the imposition of martial law.

I'll say it again: With all the investigations and the general sleaze combined with the toadying to every, single despot on the planet and the fact that being 'President' is the only thing between Donald F Trump's continued spitshow and dying in prison, his only rational choice is to impose martial law, dissolve the House (he'll leave the Senate), and declare himself Dictator for Life.

If he does not pull a coup, he will die in prison.

If he does not pull a coup, McConnell et al will die in prison.

Because he is completely amoral and solipsistic, his only rational choice is to pull a coup.


The US Constitution seems to be rapidly approaching the curious position where the only thing that will save her is a military coup.

If the military leadership take their oaths to defend her against all enemies, foreign and domestic, they will arrest that scumbag, and render him to Guantanamo, then suppress the civil unrest of the pinhead bursteds who believe Trump is their Messiah.

IMO, THERE IS NO LONGER ANY PATH OUT OF THIS MESS THAT DOES NOT INVOLVE CIVIL WAR.

Good luck.

[paulf]

I for one don’t have an issue with the US military guarding the border. I’d rather have them doing that than stirring up $hit in Iran, Syria, Venezuela or any other foreign nation. In fact I’d like to see ALL US military members and assets recalled within the US to provide security for THIS nation. Let the others fend for themselves.

However having them travel inwards from the border to conduct missions to round up and apprehend illegals is another matter as American citizens will undoubtedly get mistakingly targeted by uneducated, untrained and heavily armed individuals.
Guarding a line in the dirt is one thing, acting as a police force is another.

I tend to agree, however, Border Patrol officers are just one "fraction slightly better" group of highly armed, uneducated, not properly trained folks recruited from the same troops you speak of. So it's a wash.

At least they have stinking badges!

[Osborne Russell]

Oznabrag is right. Deputizing the military is a bad idea, and in the current circumstances, could be catastrophic.

As for the Insurrection Act, mentioned in the article :

The Insurrection Act allows the deployment of federal troops “whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any State by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings.”

The United State has had decades to improve "the ordinary course of judicial proceedings" to the point where it is "practicable to enforce the laws of the United States". The consequences of the failure to do so do not amount to an "insurrection". That would be like closing the courts and then declaring martial law because crime was going unpunished.

[Jim Bow]

The duty of the military is to kill the people they are ordered to kill.

[Old Dryfoot]

silly TV quote

"There's a reason you separate military and the police. One fights the enemies of the state, the other serves and protects the people. When the military becomes both, then the enemies of the state tend to become the people."

[paulf]

The duty of the military is to kill the people they are ordered to kill.

The weird thing is that the Border patrol are not Police or Military. Their command structure and mission are different, but here in Washington, they sometimes respond to 911 Police calls with local Law Enforcement.

[Osborne Russell]

The duty of the military is to kill the people they are ordered to kill.

Never forget.

Supposedly it's limited to lawful orders to kill, but who wants to learn a bunch of law.

[Nicholas Scheuer]

From the very start, the US military has a tradition of NOT involving itself with the political addairs of the USA. Even the wisest figures in US military history, Washington himself, or Marshal, even Eisenhower, (notice I did not include McArthur) would consider long and extremely carefully before moving against their "Commander In Chief".

I, for one, have a HUGE problem with the US military enforcing civilian law.

This is a MAJOR step toward the imposition of martial law.

I'll say it again: With all the investigations and the general sleaze combined with the toadying to every, single despot on the planet and the fact that being 'President' is the only thing between Donald F Trump's continued spitshow and dying in prison, his only rational choice is to impose martial law, dissolve the House (he'll leave the Senate), and declare himself Dictator for Life.

If he does not pull a coup, he will die in prison.

If he does not pull a coup, McConnell et al will die in prison.

Because he is completely amoral and solipsistic, his only rational choice is to pull a coup.


The US Constitution seems to be rapidly approaching the curious position where the only thing that will save her is a military coup.

If the military leadership take their oaths to defend her against all enemies, foreign and domestic, they will arrest that scumbag, and render him to Guantanamo, then suppress the civil unrest of the pinhead bursteds who believe Trump is their Messiah.

IMO, THERE IS NO LONGER ANY PATH OUT OF THIS MESS THAT DOES NOT INVOLVE CIVIL WAR.

Good luck.

[skuthorp]

I agree with ozna, careful there lest you lose your republic. The Emperor donald is on the move and congress do not seem unhappy with his siezure of powers so far.

[paulf]

I agree with ozna, careful there lest you lose your republic. The Emperor donald is on the move and congress do not seem unhappy with his siezure of powers so far.

We might lose it? It's already gone and up for sale, has been going for at least 3 decades.

Worry about your own.

[BrianW]

So we're headed for civil war? Then it's a good thing the 2nd Amendment and the NRA have been able to fight the attempts to disarm the public.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,.."

We have to have an military, but now that military may be used against us. So therefore...

"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Because some day, you might have a civil war. Just ask Oznabrag.

Cause if you gonna have one, might as well have a gun.

[Osborne Russell]

The two sides of the civil war will be the loyal troops killing the traitors in the ranks first. Then on to the traitorous civilians.

[paulf]

So we're headed for civil war? Then it's a good thing the 2nd Amendment and the NRA have been able to fight the attempts to disarm the public.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,.."

We have to have an military, but now that military may be used against us. So therefore...

"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Because some day, you might have a civil war. Just ask Oznabrag.

Cause if you gonna have one, might as well have a gun.

Got several, and know how to use them, but gun ownership a reasonable society does not make

[oznabrag]

So we're headed for civil war? Then it's a good thing the 2nd Amendment and the NRA have been able to fight the attempts to disarm the public.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,.."

We have to have an military, but now that military may be used against us. So therefore...

"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Because some day, you might have a civil war. Just ask Oznabrag.

Cause if you gonna have one, might as well have a gun.

What a steaming load of pretzel sophistry.

Full of misdirection, disingenuous 'who, me?' and outright garbage.

I know you're proud, but you have said nothing.

[BrianW]

I know I didn't say there's going to be a civil war because of Trump.

[Domesticated_Mr. Know It All]

[CWSmith]

Because some day, you might have a civil war. Just ask Oznabrag.

Who do you picture fighting this war? Who is on the other side from you?

Inquiring minds want to know.

[BrianW]

Who do you picture fighting this war? Who is on the other side from you?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Somebody else.

[CWSmith]

Somebody else.

Almost clever. Now, do you have the courage to answer the question?

[BrianW]

Almost clever. Now, do you have the courage to answer the question?

Well poop... you put smiley face in the beginning and the end of you post... how was I supposed to know you were serious?

Just to backtrack a bit, it was not me, but rather Oznabrag who says we're headed to a civil war. I simply commented that those who may intend to take up arms against their government should be grateful for the NRA's support of their right to own said arms.

Would I take up arms to defend Trump if he were to not respect the outcome of the next election? Certainly not.

Of course liberals have yet to accept the results of the last one. First thing they wanted to do was a recount. Now they want to dismantle the electoral college. Beyond that, it was an investigation for collusion which failed, so now they're trying other avenues to remove the elected President. Whatever... just admit your trying to circumvent an election.

No... I'm pretty sure any cause I thought necessary to take up arms over, you'd agree with me, and I with you. Where that line lies is a bit undefined now, but if we come across it, I'm sure we'll recognize it together.

[skuthorp]

Selective reasoning(?) is well in evidence. The NRA is not, and will not be, on the side of the Republic and Constitution.
And neither are donald and his courtiers/sycophants.


But not all members will support their position of course.

[oznabrag]

Well poop... you put smiley face in the beginning and the end of you post... how was I supposed to know you were serious?

Just to backtrack a bit, it was not me, but rather Oznabrag who says we're headed to a civil war. I simply commented that those who may intend to take up arms against their government should be grateful for the NRA's support of their right to own said arms.

Would I take up arms to defend Trump if he were to not respect the outcome of the next election? Certainly not.

Of course liberals have yet to accept the results of the last one. First thing they wanted to do was a recount. Now they want to dismantle the electoral college. Beyond that, it was an investigation for collusion which failed, so now they're trying other avenues to remove the elected President. Whatever... just admit your trying to circumvent an election.

No... I'm pretty sure any cause I thought necessary to take up arms over, you'd agree with me, and I with you. Where that line lies is a bit undefined now, but if we come across it, I'm sure we'll recognize it together.

Who said anything about taking up arms against the government?

The elected 'President' has been engaged in obstruction of justice since the moment he took office.

I suppose you are willfully ignorant of the fact that nobody seems to know what is going on with the national security investigations into Trump.

I suppose you are willfully ignorant of the fact that Trump's 'charity' has been shut down for fraudulent self-dealing.

Your hero is a criminal, and you are OK with that.

You support that.

[skuthorp]

"I simply commented that those who may intend to take up arms against their government should be grateful for the NRA's support of their right to own said arms."
RW self-delusions at work. donald and his party would have the support of those likely to 'take up arms'.
They have been demonising the supposed 'left' for being a threat to the Constitution, the Republic and the nation when in reality the ideological hard right, the selective religionists, the bribed and power hungry and the gun lobbyists are the actual danger.

[Garret]

OK - so this sounds completely over the top - which I believe is what Brian is pointing out.

So - in this day & age, how does one tell what we really need to worry about? A few years ago, the concept of worrying about the military acting as police would've been absolutely laughable - except for a few tinfoil headgear wearers.

Now? I just don't know. Once upon a time, I'd have said that congress & the courts wouldn't allow it. Not anymore - McConnell & his lackeys seem hellbent on letting Trump do anything he pleases - rule of law be damned.

[oznabrag]

OK - so this sounds completely over the top - which I believe is what Brian is pointing out.

So - in this day & age, how does one tell what we really need to worry about? A few years ago, the concept of worrying about the military acting as police would've been absolutely laughable - except for a few tinfoil headgear wearers.

Now? I just don't know. Once upon a time, I'd have said that congress & the courts wouldn't allow it. Not anymore - McConnell & his lackeys seem hellbent on letting Trump do anything he pleases - rule of law be damned.

A few years ago, Reagan got himself in hot water with a whole lot of people, including some Conservatives, who were outraged and horrified that he was using military personnel to enforce drug laws.



Remember Conservatives? I never thought I'd miss 'em.

BTW, Brian's opinion is merely a tweak, and has no real substance.

[ccmanuals]

OK - so this sounds completely over the top - which I believe is what Brian is pointing out.

So - in this day & age, how does one tell what we really need to worry about? A few years ago, the concept of worrying about the military acting as police would've been absolutely laughable - except for a few tinfoil headgear wearers.

Now? I just don't know. Once upon a time, I'd have said that congress & the courts wouldn't allow it. Not anymore - McConnell & his lackeys seem hellbent on letting Trump do anything he pleases - rule of law be damned.

Have you forgotten Jade Helm?

[oznabrag]

Well poop... you put smiley face in the beginning and the end of you post... how was I supposed to know you were serious?

Just to backtrack a bit, it was not me, but rather Oznabrag who says we're headed to a civil war. I simply commented that those who may intend to take up arms against their government should be grateful for the NRA's support of their right to own said arms.

Would I take up arms to defend Trump if he were to not respect the outcome of the next election? Certainly not.

Of course liberals have yet to accept the results of the last one. First thing they wanted to do was a recount. Now they want to dismantle the electoral college. Beyond that, it was an investigation for collusion which failed, so now they're trying other avenues to remove the elected President. Whatever... just admit your trying to circumvent an election.

No... I'm pretty sure any cause I thought necessary to take up arms over, you'd agree with me, and I with you. Where that line lies is a bit undefined now, but if we come across it, I'm sure we'll recognize it together.

Once again: Who said anything about taking up arms against the government?

Taking up arms against the government is known as a 'revolution'.

When the citizens of a nation become so bitterly divided against one another that the people on Maple Street go over to Hickory Lane and kill everybody, that's a civil war.

It may interest you to know that our US Civil War was just baby poop compared to the modern version.

It probably doesn't interest you to know, though.

You seem quite happy in your ignorance.

It gives you a warm and fuzzy comfort zone from which to ridicule that which you refuse to understand.

I know from long experience that it is pointless to ask you any sort of meaningful question, but I would like to know what you mean by this statement:

those who may intend to take up arms against their government should be grateful for the NRA's support of their right to own said arms. Would I take up arms to defend Trump if he were to not respect the outcome of the next election? Certainly not.

I ask, because your position seems to be a little muddled.

It is crystal clear, to me anyway, that those who would take up arms to defend Donald Trump were he not to respect the outcome of the next election, would be committing Treason of the first order, yet you think they should be grateful to the Constitution they would be actively destroying.

[oznabrag]

Have you forgotten Jade Helm?

It can't happen here.

[John of Phoenix]

Sweet Mother of God reds are Stupid.

[Garret]

Sweet Mother of God reds are Stupid.

Nah - Brian is just having fun yanking chains & he's turned on a few lights by doing so!

[Garret]

Have you forgotten Jade Helm?

They're coming to take us away ha ha.

[BrianW]

Nah - Brian is just having fun yanking chains & he's turned on a few lights by doing so!

Heck, I said I wouldn't support Trump if he refuses to step down in 2020, and oznabrag still went nuts enough to quote my post twice, and reply to it twice.

Guess I'm doing something right.

[oznabrag]

Heck, I said I wouldn't support Trump if he refuses to step down in 2020, and oznabrag still went nuts enough to quote my post twice, and reply to it twice.

Guess I'm doing something right.

It's not all about you.