- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
- Messages
- 82,041
- Reaction score
- 87,098
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
You'd have justified the Boston Massacre. And not even for the usual 30 pieces of silver. Shame. Shame on you.Most folks would consider assault and battery on federal officers performing their duties as constituting a "clear understanding of the nature of [a] threat."
Most folks would consider assault and battery on federal officers performing their duties as constituting a "clear understanding of the nature of [a] threat."
They never meant any of their freedom talk. Never. Not once.Wow, talk about missing the forest for the trees.
For all their talk of the evils of government, conservatives spare no expense when it comes to supporting a police state.
Trump is using the military to stop riots. These rioters are attacking law enforcement officers and need to be arrested and put in prison. These people are not peaceful. They don't have the right to attack law enforcement, throw rocks at them, destroy their vehicles, ... Of course, those on the left think that all of this is alright. When these people attack law enforcement, isn't this an insurrection? That was a part of the argument on Jan. 6 by the left."Donald Trump’s desire to militarize American politics and politicize the American military is unfinished business. Militarizing American politics means defining all those who do not conform to his version of normality as mortal enemies to be confronted as though they were hostile foreign nations. Politicizing the military means dismantling its self-image as an institution that transcends partisan divisions, is broadly representative of the US population, and owes its primary loyalty not to the president but to the Constitution. These aims are intertwined, but the first cannot be consummated until the second has been accomplished. Trump failed to do this in his first term, but he is determined not to be thwarted again.
...Trump’s deployment of troops in Los Angeles thus had no military purpose. It can best be thought of as a counterdemonstration. For Trump, those who protest against him are “paid troublemakers, agitators, and insurrectionists.” He cannot imagine large-scale dissent as anything other than a professionally organized conspiracy. The US Army, by this logic, is his own professionally organized crowd. It must be seen on the streets to demonstrate his personal power. That military presence in turn redefines peaceful protesters as enemies of the United States. They cease to be citizens exercising constitutionally protected rights to free speech and assembly and become outlaws and aliens.
...putting troops on the streets of Los Angeles is a training exercise for the army, a form of reorientation. Soldiers are being retrained or loyalty to the president rather than the Constitution. They are meanwhile becoming accustomed to confronting that deviant and anomalous America. In his Fort Bragg speech, Trump invited the troops to see protesters in Los Angeles as invaders: “We will not allow an American city to be invaded and conquered by a foreign enemy, and that’s what they are.” But what was happening in LA was, he claimed, even worse than an armed incursion: If the army doesn’t know exactly who “they” are, it has to be told. Trump reminded the troops that their purpose is to spread fear: “For our adversaries, there is no greater fear than the United States Army.” Its job now is to spread that fear to an ununiformed and thus unknowable mass of internal enemies. Just as Trump transforms actual rebellion into the vague but omnipresent “danger of a rebellion,” he makes the invading army invisible, amorphous, and fluid. Traditional military doctrine demands a clear understanding of the nature of the threat and the shape of the opposing forces. Contrariwise, in the Trump doctrine the threat must be as nebulous as possible, and the opposing forces must be formless. Thus only the commander-in-chief can say at any given time what they are. The enemy the army must learn to face is one that he, and he alone, can conjure."
Link
Needless to say, this bad.
The sad part is that you probably believe that's true.You'd have justified the Boston Massacre. And not even for the usual 30 pieces of silver. Shame. Shame on you.
John Adams defended Captain Preston and his men at trial and won an acquittal on the basis of reasonable doubt. Adams valued law and order above personal beliefs.You'd have justified the Boston Massacre. And not even for the usual 30 pieces of silver. Shame. Shame on you.
Always with the attempt to soft sell, and the narrative switching, in defense of tyranny.John Adams defended Captain Preston and his men at trial and won an acquittal on the basis of reasonable doubt. Adams valued law and order above personal beliefs.
Actually, it is germane and analogous. Adams' defense relied on testimony that the soldiers were attacked by a mob and had the right to defend themselves. A Boston jury meted out correct verdicts. That's not Toryism. Just the facts of the matter.Always with the attempt to soft sell, and the narrative switching, in defense of tyranny.
Whether or not Adams did the right thing, and he may have (it's not germane here), what stands out, yet again, is this disgusting Toryism. Folks who defend the Boston Massacre* should only be ashamed. Whether or not they should be shamed, I'll leave to further dialogue.
The Tories are rampant in America.
* - ort its current analogues.
John Adams defended the British soldiers involved. Six were acquitted and two were found guilty of manslaughter. The first man killed was Crispus Attucks who was of African and Native American descent. Interesting that he was the the first man killed in the colonists fight for freedom and equality.You'd have justified the Boston Massacre. And not even for the usual 30 pieces of silver. Shame. Shame on you.
Diplomacy and Dissent are Dismantled under Dysfunctional Donald."Donald Trump’s desire to militarize American politics and politicize the American military is unfinished business. Militarizing American politics means defining all those who do not conform to his version of normality as mortal enemies to be confronted as though they were hostile foreign nations. Politicizing the military means dismantling its self-image as an institution that transcends partisan divisions, is broadly representative of the US population, and owes its primary loyalty not to the president but to the Constitution. These aims are intertwined, but the first cannot be consummated until the second has been accomplished. Trump failed to do this in his first term, but he is determined not to be thwarted again.
...Trump’s deployment of troops in Los Angeles thus had no military purpose. It can best be thought of as a counterdemonstration. For Trump, those who protest against him are “paid troublemakers, agitators, and insurrectionists.” He cannot imagine large-scale dissent as anything other than a professionally organized conspiracy. The US Army, by this logic, is his own professionally organized crowd. It must be seen on the streets to demonstrate his personal power. That military presence in turn redefines peaceful protesters as enemies of the United States. They cease to be citizens exercising constitutionally protected rights to free speech and assembly and become outlaws and aliens.
...putting troops on the streets of Los Angeles is a training exercise for the army, a form of reorientation. Soldiers are being retrained or loyalty to the president rather than the Constitution. They are meanwhile becoming accustomed to confronting that deviant and anomalous America. In his Fort Bragg speech, Trump invited the troops to see protesters in Los Angeles as invaders: “We will not allow an American city to be invaded and conquered by a foreign enemy, and that’s what they are.” But what was happening in LA was, he claimed, even worse than an armed incursion: If the army doesn’t know exactly who “they” are, it has to be told. Trump reminded the troops that their purpose is to spread fear: “For our adversaries, there is no greater fear than the United States Army.” Its job now is to spread that fear to an ununiformed and thus unknowable mass of internal enemies. Just as Trump transforms actual rebellion into the vague but omnipresent “danger of a rebellion,” he makes the invading army invisible, amorphous, and fluid. Traditional military doctrine demands a clear understanding of the nature of the threat and the shape of the opposing forces. Contrariwise, in the Trump doctrine the threat must be as nebulous as possible, and the opposing forces must be formless. Thus only the commander-in-chief can say at any given time what they are. The enemy the army must learn to face is one that he, and he alone, can conjure."
Link
Needless to say, this bad.
The military can’t be used for this purpose.Trump is using the military to stop riots. These rioters are attacking law enforcement officers and need to be arrested and put in prison. These people are not peaceful. They don't have the right to attack law enforcement, throw rocks at them, destroy their vehicles, ... Of course, those on the left think that all of this is alright. When these people attack law enforcement, isn't this an insurrection? That was a part of the argument on Jan. 6 by the left.
The military can’t be used for this purpose.
Trump doesn't: he pardoned quite a few of those folks from January 6th.Most folks would consider assault and battery on federal officers performing their duties as constituting a "clear understanding of the nature of [a] threat."
Riots aren't insurrections. But storming the Capitol to overturn a legal election and to possibly kill the Vice President is.Trump is using the military to stop riots. These rioters are attacking law enforcement officers and need to be arrested and put in prison. These people are not peaceful. They don't have the right to attack law enforcement, throw rocks at them, destroy their vehicles, ... Of course, those on the left think that all of this is alright. When these people attack law enforcement, isn't this an insurrection? That was a part of the argument on Jan. 6 by the left.
Sorry to break this to you, but I'm not Trump. Were it up to me every person who crossed that barricade on Jan 6 and went into the Capitol building should have served jail time.Trump doesn't: he pardoned quite a few of those folks from January 6th.
I have reviewed this post and do not find in violation of the TOS to be reported by another poster nor do the moderators need to act on their own or on behalf of a poster as it does not violate the TOS.
"Donald Trump’s desire to militarize American politics and politicize the American military is unfinished business. Militarizing American politics means defining all those who do not conform to his version of normality as mortal enemies to be confronted as though they were hostile foreign nations. Politicizing the military means dismantling its self-image as an institution that transcends partisan divisions, is broadly representative of the US population, and owes its primary loyalty not to the president but to the Constitution. These aims are intertwined, but the first cannot be consummated until the second has been accomplished. Trump failed to do this in his first term, but he is determined not to be thwarted again.
...Trump’s deployment of troops in Los Angeles thus had no military purpose. It can best be thought of as a counterdemonstration. For Trump, those who protest against him are “paid troublemakers, agitators, and insurrectionists.” He cannot imagine large-scale dissent as anything other than a professionally organized conspiracy. The US Army, by this logic, is his own professionally organized crowd. It must be seen on the streets to demonstrate his personal power. That military presence in turn redefines peaceful protesters as enemies of the United States. They cease to be citizens exercising constitutionally protected rights to free speech and assembly and become outlaws and aliens.
...putting troops on the streets of Los Angeles is a training exercise for the army, a form of reorientation. Soldiers are being retrained or loyalty to the president rather than the Constitution. They are meanwhile becoming accustomed to confronting that deviant and anomalous America. In his Fort Bragg speech, Trump invited the troops to see protesters in Los Angeles as invaders: “We will not allow an American city to be invaded and conquered by a foreign enemy, and that’s what they are.” But what was happening in LA was, he claimed, even worse than an armed incursion: If the army doesn’t know exactly who “they” are, it has to be told. Trump reminded the troops that their purpose is to spread fear: “For our adversaries, there is no greater fear than the United States Army.” Its job now is to spread that fear to an ununiformed and thus unknowable mass of internal enemies. Just as Trump transforms actual rebellion into the vague but omnipresent “danger of a rebellion,” he makes the invading army invisible, amorphous, and fluid. Traditional military doctrine demands a clear understanding of the nature of the threat and the shape of the opposing forces. Contrariwise, in the Trump doctrine the threat must be as nebulous as possible, and the opposing forces must be formless. Thus only the commander-in-chief can say at any given time what they are. The enemy the army must learn to face is one that he, and he alone, can conjure."
Link
Needless to say, this bad.
The military can be temporarily deployed to restore order when local authorities are unable to do so. The anti ICE uprising is an organized, coordinated effort by violent Leftists attempting to create new lawless CHOP zones nationwide.The military can’t be used for this purpose.
OMG. people have the same Mexican flag! Are there any alternative Mexican flags, you know, like this?The military can be temporarily deployed to restore order when local authorities are unable to do so. The anti ICE uprising is an organized, coordinated effort by violent Leftists attempting to create new lawless CHOP zones nationwide.
Believing the LA uprising was a spontaneous riot requires suspending critical analysis to accept the ambush of 6 Waymo cars was spontaneous, passersby just happened to have commercial grade fireworks and sledgehammers to break off pieces of cement to throw, in their backpacks. Or, innocent bystanders just happened to have high powered laser pointers to attempt to blind law enforcement. All of these tactics use classic radical Leftist techniques.
Identical Mexican flags, no doubt spontaneously generated, were prominently displayed at scenes of violence. American flags set on fire to the cheers of the violent thugs.
That isn’t happening here. Trump can’t use the military in this manner.The military can be temporarily deployed to restore order when local authorities are unable to do so.
The anti ICE uprising is an organized, coordinated effort by violent Leftists attempting to create new lawless CHOP zones nationwide.
Believing the LA uprising was a spontaneous riot requires suspending critical analysis to accept the ambush of 6 Waymo cars was spontaneous, passersby just happened to have commercial grade fireworks and sledgehammers to break off pieces of cement to throw, in their backpacks. Or, innocent bystanders just happened to have high powered laser pointers to attempt to blind law enforcement. All of these tactics use classic radical Leftist techniques.
Identical Mexican flags, no doubt spontaneously generated, were prominently displayed at scenes of violence. American flags set on fire to the cheers of the violent thugs.
Silly librul! Free speech does not include attacking cops and ICE agents, torching police cars, etc."Donald Trump’s desire to militarize American politics and politicize the American military is unfinished business. Militarizing American politics means defining all those who do not conform to his version of normality as mortal enemies to be confronted as though they were hostile foreign nations. Politicizing the military means dismantling its self-image as an institution that transcends partisan divisions, is broadly representative of the US population, and owes its primary loyalty not to the president but to the Constitution. These aims are intertwined, but the first cannot be consummated until the second has been accomplished. Trump failed to do this in his first term, but he is determined not to be thwarted again.
...Trump’s deployment of troops in Los Angeles thus had no military purpose. It can best be thought of as a counterdemonstration. For Trump, those who protest against him are “paid troublemakers, agitators, and insurrectionists.” He cannot imagine large-scale dissent as anything other than a professionally organized conspiracy. The US Army, by this logic, is his own professionally organized crowd. It must be seen on the streets to demonstrate his personal power. That military presence in turn redefines peaceful protesters as enemies of the United States. They cease to be citizens exercising constitutionally protected rights to free speech and assembly and become outlaws and aliens.
...putting troops on the streets of Los Angeles is a training exercise for the army, a form of reorientation. Soldiers are being retrained or loyalty to the president rather than the Constitution. They are meanwhile becoming accustomed to confronting that deviant and anomalous America. In his Fort Bragg speech, Trump invited the troops to see protesters in Los Angeles as invaders: “We will not allow an American city to be invaded and conquered by a foreign enemy, and that’s what they are.” But what was happening in LA was, he claimed, even worse than an armed incursion: If the army doesn’t know exactly who “they” are, it has to be told. Trump reminded the troops that their purpose is to spread fear: “For our adversaries, there is no greater fear than the United States Army.” Its job now is to spread that fear to an ununiformed and thus unknowable mass of internal enemies. Just as Trump transforms actual rebellion into the vague but omnipresent “danger of a rebellion,” he makes the invading army invisible, amorphous, and fluid. Traditional military doctrine demands a clear understanding of the nature of the threat and the shape of the opposing forces. Contrariwise, in the Trump doctrine the threat must be as nebulous as possible, and the opposing forces must be formless. Thus only the commander-in-chief can say at any given time what they are. The enemy the army must learn to face is one that he, and he alone, can conjure."
Link
Needless to say, this bad.
Trump is using the military to stop riots.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?