• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Was Milley Out of LIne? (1 Viewer)

Was Milley Out of LIne?


  • Total voters
    43
Like I said, we’ll see. I can’t see into the future and neither can you. If he attempts to carry through with his threats I believe he’ll be humiliated.
Trump doesn't need Kash Patel to destroy America.

Trump has been doing it without a Kash Patel as AG who can only accelerate it.

Putin-MAGAs-Trump will do just fine by them without a Kash Patel or a Tulsi Gabbard-Putin-Assad or K jr.

I reiterate, at this point and going into a return of Trump to the WH, the military is the single and only guard rail as it were against Putin-MAGAs-Trump.
 
Trump doesn't need Kash Patel to destroy America.

Trump has been doing it without a Kash Patel as AG who can only accelerate it.

Putin-MAGAs-Trump will do just fine by them without a Kash Patel or a Tulsi Gabbard-Putin-Assad or K jr.

I reiterate, at this point and going into a return of Trump to the WH, the military is the single and only guard rail as it were against Putin-MAGAs-Trump.
I think you’re over thinking my response about Trump’s seemingly unusual lack of bluff and bluster by using his attack dogs to pick up the slack. I agree with most of what you’ve said, but I’m cautiously optimistic (hoping) he’ll pull back on his threats on General Milley. Like many on here, I’m sick and tired of the childish behavior and lack of forethought by the next Trump admin administration and some people on this forum. Too may on here think you’re supposed to be all in or you’re all out. I’m neither.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PoS
I think you’re over thinking my response about Trump’s seemingly unusual lack of bluff and bluster by using his attack dogs to pick up the slack. I agree with most of what you’ve said, but I’m cautiously optimistic (hoping) he’ll pull back on his threats on General Milley. Like many on here, I’m sick and tired of the childish behavior and lack of forethought by the next Trump admin administration and some people on this forum. Too may on here think you’re supposed to be all in or you’re all out. I’m neither.
Cruelty has always been their point. It is who they are and what they're about. Now they have what they've long wanted and labored for, which is the power and the authority. So and as I've posted, the long standing military doctrine that the C'nC has the right to be wrong no longer applies. That this is because of Trump, who Trump is and who Trump puts into the civilian positions of power and authority. Trump as C'nC does not have the right to be wrong. He had long since forfeit this historical and cultural right of the American C'nC.
 
Neither Trump nor Esper told him to do what he did.
MAGAs just go on forever with whatever it is no matter what.

It's been said a hundred times at numerous threads Milley acted with the approval of Esper then the approval of Miller. And that that's all Milley needed.

Yet this is another keep Milley alive thread among numerous Milley threads until some MAGA lunatic can do a Luigi against Milley. Or until Trump can try to arrest and court martial Milley which the military will not accept or do. We can bet anyway Milley is well armed and super capable at all times.

MAGAs are not about debate, discussion, discourse. They are about keeping it going no matter what. This election is the MAGA Triumph of The Will 2.0 and it is just the beginning.
 
Absolutely, there's no question about it. Playing politics in such a high position shows the mentality of the liberal mindset.
Nonsensical bullshit.

Stop defending the orange anus.
 
I don't think Luce does either.
You do not think @Luce knows what treason is? Trump is the poster boy of treason. Trumps point on January 6th was treason and nothing else. Trumps point in being President-elect is treason. He's engaging in it right now. The traitor is already talking staying in control beyond Constitutional limits. There will be blood shed, I do not promote it; only stating the obvious. There is no avenue for a good outcome. No one likes being oppressed.
 
You do not think @Luce knows what treason is? Trump is the poster boy of treason. Trumps point on January 6th was treason and nothing else. Trumps point in being President-elect is treason. He's engaging in it right now. The traitor is already talking staying in control beyond Constitutional limits. There will be blood shed, I do not promote it; only stating the obvious. There is no avenue for a good outcome. No one likes being oppressed.
No, Trump does not meet the standard, either.

I suggest people look up the requirements for a treason charge in the constitution, and also 18 U.S.C. § 2381.

First, we must be in a state of war or armed conflict.

Second, the accused must wage war against the United States, or adhere to our enemies in a tangible way (espionage, sabotage, supply of the enemy, etc).

Neither Milley nor Trump has met these requirements. The only people who have, in recent times, are the American Taliban assholes.
 
No, Trump does not meet the standard, either.

I suggest people look up the requirements for a treason charge in the constitution, and also 18 U.S.C. § 2381.

First, we must be in a state of war or armed conflict.

Second, the accused must wage war against the United States, or adhere to our enemies in a tangible way (espionage, sabotage, supply of the enemy, etc).

Neither Milley nor Trump has met these requirements. The only people who have, in recent times, are the American Taliban assholes.
"or" is a legalize. One does not have to be at war to commit treason. The argument can be made that purposely dividing the country by mirroring disinformation campaigns by our enemies is aiding and abetting the enemy. But then insurrection is waging war, but our inept Congress dropped the ball like usual.

Had this happened 100 years ago Trump would have been imprisoned or put to death already for treason. As the Constitution demands. But here we are less than a month from a treasonist becoming President. The USA is over. There is no rule of law. There will be no economy. Millions will die. And you do not even know what the word or means.
 
"or" is a legalize. One does not have to be at war to commit treason. The argument can be made that purposely dividing the country by mirroring disinformation campaigns by our enemies is aiding and abetting the enemy. But then insurrection is waging war, but our inept Congress dropped the ball like usual.

Had this happened 100 years ago Trump would have been imprisoned or put to death already for treason. As the Constitution demands. But here we are less than a month from a treasonist becoming President. The USA is over. There is no rule of law. There will be no economy. Millions will die. And you do not even know what the word or means.
No, not in the statute. Enemies is defined as those we are at war with or enemies taking tangible threats against the USA.

For example, if you gave network access to a North Korean and North Korea committed a cyber-attack against the USA, you could be charged with treason.

If you gave information to Russia and they did not use it in an attack, you'd be hammered with an espionage case, but not treason.
 
Any member of the armed forces...whether the lowest private or the highest general...who goes outside the chain of command and communicates with the enemy...and tells them he will let them know if his country is about to attack them is committing treason.

View attachment 67546460
So, where did you get the bolded above? He didn't say that he would tell them if the US decided to attack them. He told them they were not going to attack them. There's a huge difference and if you can't see it, well, that tells us a lot about your inability to discern one thing from its opposite.
 
There is no right reason to engage in treason.

It wasn't treason if it was for the right reasons

Also, the USA wasn't at war with China, so it could not have been treason anyway.
 
Treason has a viable and valid rhetorical meaning and value. It is being applied to describe the reality of Trump-MAGAs.

Trump & MAGAs are and always have been engaged in treason. Consciously. Willfully. Systemically.

Their primary strategy and tactic is and always has been to exploit democracy to destroy democracy. J6 and the electoral college scheme is the ultimate of the treason which is ongoing.

In 2025 the armed forces will be the only institutionally remaining guardrail as it were against the organized, disciplined and aggressive treason by Trump-MAGA in control of the government and of state power.

Putin's Russia is their template.
 
Treason has a viable and valid rhetorical meaning and value. It is being applied to describe the reality of Trump-MAGAs.

Trump & MAGAs are and always have been engaged in treason. Consciously. Willfully. Systemically.

Their primary strategy and tactic is and always has been to exploit democracy to destroy democracy. J6 and the electoral college scheme is the ultimate of the treason which is ongoing.

In 2025 the armed forces will be the only institutionally remaining guardrail as it were against the organized, disciplined and aggressive treason by Trump-MAGA in control of the government and of state power.

Putin's Russia is their template.

It is widely accepted that a soldier should refuse an immoral or illegal order
This falls into that category.
 
Military Mutiny is the refusal to accept a legal order such as to use the uniformed active duty armed forces bearing weapons of war to flood American streets, cities, states, interstate roads with military vehicles to include the air weapons platforms that helicopters are to crash in on unarmed civilians in their homes, workplaces and fields, churches, schools and community centers to haul 'em out in a Gestapo kind of military operation.

Trump's mass deportation OberKommando, the field marshal Thos. Homan says camps will be needed that include food and shelter, places to sleep, facilities of physical hygiene -- and guards as well as managers and so on.

The classic military mutiny on land is to remain in the barracks which is a passive and non violent and static resistance against a legal order that is obnoxious to the military which executing a mass deportation is to the USA armed forces. A military mutiny resists a legal order which is what makes it a mutiny. So it's not simply and superficially about "illegal" orders. A passive military mutiny against any such legal order will provide time for the Congress and for the American people to react to include civil organizations ranging from NGO's and academics to other public interest groups.

Talking about "illegal orders" only is glib. It misses the entire point of a military mutiny and what a mutiny is and does without violence. Talking about only "illegal orders" is a trite and shallow view of the complexities and the actual simplicity of military matters that, moreover, are current and pressing.
 
Military Mutiny is the refusal to accept a legal order such as to use the uniformed active duty armed forces bearing weapons of war to flood American streets, cities, states, interstate roads with military vehicles to include the air weapons platforms that helicopters are to crash in on unarmed civilians in their homes, workplaces and fields, churches, schools and community centers to haul 'em out in a Gestapo kind of military operation.

Sorry, that's a legal order ?

Trump's mass deportation OberKommando, the field marshal Thos. Homan says camps will be needed that include food and shelter, places to sleep, facilities of physical hygiene -- and guards as well as managers and so on.

It'll be like his promise to "build the wall"
All he did was erect a few miles of poorly constructed fence.

The classic military mutiny on land is to remain in the barracks which is a passive and non violent and static resistance against a legal order that is obnoxious to the military which executing a mass deportation is to the USA armed forces. A military mutiny resists a legal order which is what makes it a mutiny. So it's not simply and superficially about "illegal" orders. A passive military mutiny against any such legal order will provide time for the Congress and for the American people to react to include civil organizations ranging from NGO's and academics to other public interest groups.

I'd say a classic army mutiny would be the refusal of French soldiers to fight, in 1917
A classic naval mutiny would be the unlawful seizure of a ship by its crew - such as the mutiny on HMS Bounty.

Talking about "illegal orders" only is glib. It misses the entire point of a military mutiny and what a mutiny is and does without violence. Talking about only "illegal orders" is a trite and shallow view of the complexities and the actual simplicity of military matters that, moreover, are current and pressing.

The whole refusing illegal orders was to negate the classic "Nuremburg Defense" of "I was just following orders".
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom