‘I Think Things Are Going to Be Bad, Really Bad’: The US Military Debates Possible Deployment on US Soil Under Trump

[Guno צְבִי]

Some in the U.S. military fear next time could be different. According to nearly a dozen retired officers and current military lawyers, as well as scholars who teach at West Point and Annapolis, an intense if quiet debate is underway inside the U.S. military community about what orders it would be obliged to obey if President-elect Donald Trump decides to follow through on his previous warnings that he might deploy troops against what he deems domestic threats, including political enemies, dissenters and immigrants.

‘I Think Things Are Going to Be Bad, Really Bad’: The US Military Debates Possible Deployment on US Soil Under Trump

Trump has said he wants to use active duty U.S. troops to quell protests and round up immigrants. Will the military comply?

news.yahoo.com

 

[Guno צְבִי]

One fear is that domestic deployment of active-duty troops could lead to bloodshed given that the regular military is mainly trained to shoot at and kill foreign enemies. The only way to prevent that is establishing clear “rules of engagement” for domestic deployments that outline how much force troops can use — especially considering constitutional restraints protecting U.S. citizens and residents — against what kinds of people in what kinds of situations. And establishing those new rules would require a lot more training, in the view of many in the military community.


Trump has repeatedly said he might use the military to suppress a domestic protest, or to raid a sanctuary city to purge it of undocumented immigrants, or possibly defend the Southern border. Some in the military community say they are especially disturbed by the prospect that troops might be used to serve Trump’s political ends. In 1992, Covault said, he had no direct orders from Bush other than to deploy to restore peace. On his own volition, he said, he announced upon landing in LA at a news conference: “This is not martial law. The reason we’re here is to create a safe and secure environment so you can go back to normal.” Covault said he believes the statement had a calming effect.

But 28 years later, when the police killing of another Black American, George Floyd, sparked sporadically violent protests nationwide, then-President Trump openly considered using firepower on the demonstrators, according to his former defense secretary, Mark Esper. Trump asked, “Can’t you just shoot them? Just shoot them in the legs or something?” Esper wrote in his 2022 memoir,

 

[Stone]

 

[Stone]

But but but but,.....I thought the left has been saying since 2020 that the guard should have been marched in to mow down the J-6ers? Hmmm,....suddenly its all different now. The mouth gets you dumb fucks EVERY time.

 

[AProudLefty]

But but but but,.....I thought the left has been saying since 2020 that the guard should have been marched in to mow down the J-6ers? Hmmm,....suddenly its all different now. The mouth gets you dumb fucks EVERY time.

You voted. Accept the consequences.

 

[Hawkeye10]

Some in the U.S. military fear next time could be different. According to nearly a dozen retired officers and current military lawyers, as well as scholars who teach at West Point and Annapolis, an intense if quiet debate is underway inside the U.S. military community about what orders it would be obliged to obey if President-elect Donald Trump decides to follow through on his previous warnings that he might deploy troops against what he deems domestic threats, including political enemies, dissenters and immigrants.

‘I Think Things Are Going to Be Bad, Really Bad’: The US Military Debates Possible Deployment on US Soil Under Trump

Trump has said he wants to use active duty U.S. troops to quell protests and round up immigrants. Will the military comply?

news.yahoo.com

This being the same military that has already defied lawful orders from Trump....and dont forget Mileys promises to China.

 

[signalmankenneth]

One fear is that domestic deployment of active-duty troops could lead to bloodshed given that the regular military is mainly trained to shoot at and kill foreign enemies. The only way to prevent that is establishing clear “rules of engagement” for domestic deployments that outline how much force troops can use — especially considering constitutional restraints protecting U.S. citizens and residents — against what kinds of people in what kinds of situations. And establishing those new rules would require a lot more training, in the view of many in the military community.


Trump has repeatedly said he might use the military to suppress a domestic protest, or to raid a sanctuary city to purge it of undocumented immigrants, or possibly defend the Southern border. Some in the military community say they are especially disturbed by the prospect that troops might be used to serve Trump’s political ends. In 1992, Covault said, he had no direct orders from Bush other than to deploy to restore peace. On his own volition, he said, he announced upon landing in LA at a news conference: “This is not martial law. The reason we’re here is to create a safe and secure environment so you can go back to normal.” Covault said he believes the statement had a calming effect.

But 28 years later, when the police killing of another Black American, George Floyd, sparked sporadically violent protests nationwide, then-President Trump openly considered using firepower on the demonstrators, according to his former defense secretary, Mark Esper. Trump asked, “Can’t you just shoot them? Just shoot them in the legs or something?” Esper wrote in his 2022 memoir,

The US military has the right not to obey an unlawful order?!!

 

[Lionfish]

Some in the U.S. military fear next time could be different. According to nearly a dozen retired officers and current military lawyers, as well as scholars who teach at West Point and Annapolis, an intense if quiet debate is underway inside the U.S. military community about what orders it would be obliged to obey if President-elect Donald Trump decides to follow through on his previous warnings that he might deploy troops against what he deems domestic threats, including political enemies, dissenters and immigrants.

‘I Think Things Are Going to Be Bad, Really Bad’: The US Military Debates Possible Deployment on US Soil Under Trump

Trump has said he wants to use active duty U.S. troops to quell protests and round up immigrants. Will the military comply?

news.yahoo.com

 

[EdwinA]

Some in the U.S. military fear next time could be different. According to nearly a dozen retired officers and current military lawyers, as well as scholars who teach at West Point and Annapolis, an intense if quiet debate is underway inside the U.S. military community about what orders it would be obliged to obey if President-elect Donald Trump decides to follow through on his previous warnings that he might deploy troops against what he deems domestic threats, including political enemies, dissenters and immigrants.

‘I Think Things Are Going to Be Bad, Really Bad’: The US Military Debates Possible Deployment on US Soil Under Trump

Trump has said he wants to use active duty U.S. troops to quell protests and round up immigrants. Will the military comply?

news.yahoo.com

Good!

You and the other commies and racists need to flee ASAP, before it's too late. Only a little more than a week left. You need to head for the border now.

 

[Tobytone]

Some in the U.S. military fear next time could be different. According to nearly a dozen retired officers and current military lawyers, as well as scholars who teach at West Point and Annapolis, an intense if quiet debate is underway inside the U.S. military community about what orders it would be obliged to obey if President-elect Donald Trump decides to follow through on his previous warnings that he might deploy troops against what he deems domestic threats, including political enemies, dissenters and immigrants.

‘I Think Things Are Going to Be Bad, Really Bad’: The US Military Debates Possible Deployment on US Soil Under Trump

Trump has said he wants to use active duty U.S. troops to quell protests and round up immigrants. Will the military comply?

news.yahoo.com

I love it, the following story is how the average hit piece might go if the right used the left's tired tactics of writing stories with little or no named sources. The left claims their worst fears are being realized with un-named former members of whatever institutions supposedly lending credibility to there ridiculous fears.

BREAKING NEWS: Word on the street is that the far-left's wacko border security ideas are about to take the wheel. Border agents, according to a source who's a friend of a friend of a guy who once saw a border patrol car, are whispering about the apocalypse these policies could unleash.
Consider this gem: cocaine should not only skip across the border like it's in a dance competition but also be distributed in schools, with a "Just Say Yes" coloring book. Over a dozen "experts" have declared this extreme left wing idea is goes beyond insane.
Libtard Chronicles, with its finger on the pulse, has it from a mole in the White House's janitor's cousin's babysitter's book club that this lunacy is racing to the top like a greased pig. Border agents, according to a source who's the ex-roommate of a security guard who once worked near a border, are contemplating resignations or at least a heavy dose of some cartel candy.
But wait, there's more! A leak from the President's barber's neighbor's dog walker's ex-wife's yoga instructor's chiropractor claims there's a sinister plan to hand out high-caliber handguns with the cocaine to America's impressionable youth.
The fears are not just palpable; they're doomsday. With "facts" so thoroughly documented by a cadre of "really good and smart people", brace yourselves, dear citizens. The end of the world might come with free party favors, courtesy of a government policy so absurd it could only exist in a Libtards brain or a very badly run country.

Story by: Dboy Dingleberry at the Libtard Chronicles.

 

[Phantasmal]

I can’t worry about things that may not happen.

 

[Nomad]

<<retarded gifs cartoons and memes - typical Stone nonsense>>

Grow up, sonny boy. Stop posting like little kid.

But but but but,.....I thought the left has been saying since 2020 that the guard should have been marched in to mow down the J-6ers? Hmmm,....suddenly its all different now. The mouth gets you dumb fucks EVERY time.

Given how much you lie - which is pretty much constantly - you'll have to show us several examples of people saying that.

 

[Stone]

You voted. Accept the consequences.

View attachment 40144

I LOVE the consequences! 15 steps ahead......

 

[Callinectes]

The US military has the right not to obey an unlawful order?!!

Remember your oath of enlistment, dumbass?

I, (state name of enlistee), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. (So help me God)."

Or, if enlisting in the National Guard:

I, (state name of enlistee), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and of the State of (applicable state) against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to them; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the Governor of (applicable state) and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to law and regulations. (So help me God)."

If these people want to determine who the foreign and domestic enemies of the United States are, they need to take off those uniforms and run for office so they can change the definitions.

 

[IBDaMann]

I Think Things Are Going to Be Bad, Really Bad: The US Military Debates Possible Deployment on US Soil Under Trump

Wait, don't tell me ... this is another fear-hyping, panic-peddling hack-piece, right?

Some in the U.S. military fear ...

Such cowards probably shouldn't be in the military.

... next time could be different. According to nearly a dozen retired officers and current military lawyers,

Why are the only ones being asked people who are safe from going into combat?

.... as well as scholars who teach at West Point and Annapolis,

... but you aren't going to tell us which ones, right? There might not be any, right?

... an intense if quiet debate is underway inside the U.S. military community

You just explained how it's NOT in the US military community. You explained how it's in the US coward community.

... about what orders it would be obliged to obey if President-elect Donald Trump decides to follow through on his previous warnings that he might deploy troops against what he deems domestic threats,

Trump never threatened anything of the sort. This must be why there isn't any such "debate" in the first place.

including political enemies, dissenters and immigrants.

Still clinging to the total dishonesty, I see.

 

[AProudLefty]

Remember your oath of enlistment, dumbass?


Or, if enlisting in the National Guard:



If these people want to determine who the foreign and domestic enemies of the United States are, they need to take off those uniforms and run for office so they can change the definitions.

That's how fascism starts.

 

[Hawkeye10]

That's how fascism starts.

We started crossing that line all the way back in the 80's with public private partnerships.

The running the nation through NGO's started soon after.

The Constitution was nothing but a speed bump.

 

[Hawkeye10]

Public Private Partnerships are a big part of the story of the incineration of our universities.

 

[IBDaMann]

That's how fascism starts.

Nope.

 

[AProudLefty]

Nope.

Oath.