416
this post was submitted on 18 Nov 2024
416 points (98.1% liked)
politics
19224 readers
2189 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's not an on/off switch. Of course the military will be less efficient and more error-prone; that doesn't mean they wouldn't be able to do anything.
Need to put down a big protest in St Louis? Send in troops with live rounds, none of that less lethal bullshit. Maybe it takes a couple days longer to get them there, maybe there aren't quite as many boots on the ground as you wanted, maybe they get deployed in kind of dumb ways.
They're still far better armed, far more cohesive, and far more replenishable than the protesters they seek to trample. The military would still win, they don't have to be perfect, they just have to be better enough than their opponent.
Now imagine if the opponent isn't "protesters," but "these brown people we've conditioned you to feel animosity towards, and they're iLlEgAlS!" Those brown people aren't even loosely organized into a protest, and as long as the troops aren't popping "my" people (yet), the public pushback is going to be weak as fuck.
This is so fucking stupid I'm wondering if you're beginning to troll me.
So what happens to St. Louis police in this scenario? You're saying that the Police will give up their authority to the Federal level? That's severely anti-Republican on all fronts.
There's political forces at play here that you're seemingly completely ignorant about. Do you think the local chapter of the Fraternal Order of Police would allow military action to take place in their jurisdiction? Do you think that soldiers would be treated more (or less) specially than the local police? Do you not see how this causes distrust in the two groups?
Do you think Trump is effective at recruiting and merging organizations so that such political actions proceed smoothly? (IE: Do you think St. Louis Police would deputize the US Military, or vice versa, to share authority in a way that both sides agree upon?)
And that ignores the long-standing US Military tradition of staying the fuck out of local issues. The military command knows they're a bunch of killers. They don't want to deploy locally.
What are they going to do to stop it?
Refuse to hand over their jurisdiction to the military. Declare the military to be an unlawful invasion and a break of 10th Amendment rights. Etc. etc.
At that point, you're turning the local police over to the Protester's side. And the Police hold strong sway over the local judges and politicians. FOP in particular is powerful lobbying group because they hold the blessings of the Police.
What is Trump going to do? Order the military to fire upon the Police? Lulz. That's not how any of this works, and its not how coups work either. Over control of fucking St. Louis? Its not even worth the hassle.
"Refuse." "Declare." "Unconstitutional."
Yeah, those "saying things" tactics have worked so well to ensure that criminal acts are swiftly and appropriately addressed in the face of the new paradigm of "do whatever I want and dare anyone to stop me."