• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Trump is trying to politicize the military

 
 
 
S

SLD

Contributor
Joined
Feb 25, 2001
Messages
6,402
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
Basic Beliefs
Freethinker
So this past week has seen several initiatives by Trump to turn the military into an arm of the Republican Party, and him in particular. It started with the open meeting with the generals and admirals where, after talking about the way Obama walked down stairs, said that they needed to be ready to fight the enemy within, and then proceeded to say they’d get training by fighting in an urban setting in the U.S. The statements were stunning. But the flag officers refused to respond with applause or anything but stony silence. Trump apparently was unhappy with the response he got.

Trump has also called for the deployment of National Guard troops to Portland and Chicago. A judge just struck down the deployment in Portland, but it will likely be appealed to the Trump friendly Supreme Court. I haven’t read the opinion so I can’t predict if it will be upheld. But regardless, the danger to civil military relations is seriously threatened. If the military is ever seen as being used against the people, or even ever is seen as an element of conservatism in the United States, the people will lose all respect for it. It will be a disaster for the military, and I think the generals and admirals know it.

I used to be against the draft. Now I’ve reconsidered. We don’t need a professional military, we need a citizen one. One where its leaders can’t be sure that the ranks will simply obey their orders. We need a military made up of people who are not concerned with making the military a career, but are willing to serve their country and take the oath to the Constitution for a period of time. A draft will sweep up liberals and conservatives alike. MAGATs will be forced to work with liberals. Races will be mixed. It could not be politicized.

Hopefully our military leaders understand the dangers that Trump poses to them and will respond with honor, telling him to no. But I’m not holding my breath.
 
SLD said:
I used to be against the draft. Now I’ve reconsidered. We don’t need a professional military, we need a citizen one. One where its leaders can’t be sure that the ranks will simply obey their orders. We need a military made up of people who are not concerned with making the military a career, but are willing to serve their country and take the oath to the Constitution for a period of time.
Click to expand...
The draft eliminates that word I have highlighted.

You have a citizen military, made up of people who are willing to serve their country and take the oath to the Constitution for a period of time.

Of course those people are also "concerned with making the military a career", but you can't avoid that without taking away the "willing to", and replacing it with "told to".
 
Last edited:
Sounds like disciplinary issues waiting to happen. You're forcing millions of people who don't want to be there, may have better options, or both to do military service. It's when and how many, not if, people aren't going to be willing to play ball. Not to mention most 18 year olds are not qualified to be in the military.

Military Times article

At least some of these people will have talents that can be put to better use elsewhere, you're delaying their ability to do so. It's also going to cost a bunch of money, those people have physical needs, that will cost tax dollars to fulfill, and those people are going to want paychecks. They're not going to be happy if they could get higher pay elsewhere and are barred from doing so.
 
Terrell said:
Sounds like disciplinary issues waiting to happen. You're forcing millions of people who don't want to be there, may have better options, or both to do military service. It's when and how many, not if, people aren't going to be willing to play ball. Not to mention most 18 year olds are not qualified to be in the military.

Military Times article

At least some of these people will have talents that can be put to better use elsewhere, you're delaying their ability to do so. It's also going to cost a bunch of money, those people have physical needs, that will cost tax dollars to fulfill, and those people are going to want paychecks. They're not going to be happy if they could get higher pay elsewhere and are barred from doing so.
Click to expand...
Many disciplinary issues stem from supervisors letting the small things go, the stuff that doesn't warrant action by the commanding officer. People with disciplinary issues or just bad attitudes will have them no matter where they are or what they are doing.

If we want a qualified pool of individuals, mandatory registration and calling up a portion of them as needed will do. Affects to careers that are put on hold can be mitigated by law just as there are laws in place now to protect service members and their family financially. Remember, for the vast majority of the human population, careers in the hard sciences are not going to be disrupted. Most people are just filling cubicles.

Plenty of countries have mandatory conscription Switzerland, Norway, Greece and Finland which I'm told is the happiest place on earth. Finland is six months to a year. That's a high turnover rate and they seem to find the money for it.

Peoples perception of the military must largely come from movies, that there needs to be some warrior attitude to serve. Or maybe it's piss poor marketing on the part of the military. It floors me that people willingly take on a mountain of student loan debt that will take them on average 20 years to pay off when for three years of active duty between high school and college the government would pay for it all for four years and provide a monthly tax free allowance along the way. Here that allowance would be about $1400, in Southern California, about $4000. For most, this is way better than mom and dad can do.
 
SLD said:
So this past week has seen several initiatives by Trump to turn the military into an arm of the Republican Party, and him in particular. It started with the open meeting with the generals and admirals where, after talking about the way Obama walked down stairs, said that they needed to be ready to fight the enemy within, and then proceeded to say they’d get training by fighting in an urban setting in the U.S. The statements were stunning. But the flag officers refused to respond with applause or anything but stony silence. Trump apparently was unhappy with the response he got.
Click to expand...
Members of the military are not allowed to make political gestures, such as applauding the political speech of Trump, while in uniform.
 
ZiprHead said:
SLD said:
So this past week has seen several initiatives by Trump to turn the military into an arm of the Republican Party, and him in particular. It started with the open meeting with the generals and admirals where, after talking about the way Obama walked down stairs, said that they needed to be ready to fight the enemy within, and then proceeded to say they’d get training by fighting in an urban setting in the U.S. The statements were stunning. But the flag officers refused to respond with applause or anything but stony silence. Trump apparently was unhappy with the response he got.
Click to expand...
Members of the military are not allowed to make political gestures, such as applauding the political speech of Trump, while in uniform.
Click to expand...
It is convention not to do so but I am guessing that Hegseth and Trump would allow it.

It is like saying that the Hatch Act disallows behavior currently being undertaken by agencies of the government.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SLD
Shadowy Man said:
It is convention not to do so but I am guessing that Hegseth and Trump would allow it.
Click to expand...
They absolutely already did it at the rally they had at the Army base. Remember the soldiers behind Trump laughing and whooping it up?
 
  • Like
Reactions: SLD
All I will say is watch what happens next time there is a military meeting and Trump pressures to applaud. It will happen and those who do not applaud will be purged eventually. Probably he will mention this at the next State of the Union as well, even to the Supreme Court. They will cave eventually, too.
 
ZiprHead said:
Shadowy Man said:
It is convention not to do so but I am guessing that Hegseth and Trump would allow it.
Click to expand...
They absolutely already did it at the rally they had at the Army base. Remember the soldiers behind Trump laughing and whooping it up?
Click to expand...
At at least one of these events, there was discussion/leak about how they were recruiting those details based specifically on traits that would indicate they would behave in such a way as to show support. This happened/happens against normal military procedures, and also the constitution and Hatch Act.
 
bilby said:
SLD said:
I used to be against the draft. Now I’ve reconsidered. We don’t need a professional military, we need a citizen one. One where its leaders can’t be sure that the ranks will simply obey their orders. We need a military made up of people who are not concerned with making the military a career, but are willing to serve their country and take the oath to the Constitution for a period of time.
Click to expand...
The draft eliminates that word I have highlighted.

You have a citizen military, made up of people who are willing to serve their country and take the oath to the Constitution for a period of time.

Of course those people are also "concerned with making the military a career", but you can't avoid that without taking away the "willing to", and replacing it with "told to".
Click to expand...
I started a thread awhile back about how the draft needs to be reinstated, but it didn't get a lot of interest. Despite that, I still believe the draft is needed.

It's one thing to have your young adult child shipped off to X Hellhole when they've 100% made the decision to do so. It's quite another when your young adult child is taken from college and shipped off to the same Hellhole. One causes heartbreak, the other cause heartbreak AND outrage among the family, the drafted soldier, and the young people who are potential draftees.

The all volunteer army means that the minimum number of people have skin in the game. It's easy to get on board with any military action when you and yours have nothing to lose.

It was Nixon who led the charge to get rid of the draft. He did so because he hoped it would quell protests. It's worked perfectly.

Afghanistan for 20 years? Iraq for 20 years? No problem!

Finally, young people are very loud on the internet but they don't vote. Maybe if they faced boot camp and potential combat they might decide that filling out a ballot might be worth not playing Elden Ring for half an hour.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SLD
SLD said:
www.nbcnews.com

Trump administration officials seriously discussing invoking Insurrection Act, sources say

A decision isn't expected to be imminent, one source said, but debate within the administration has shifted recently to more deeply exploring how and when the act might be invoked.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com

Now he says that he’ll use the insurrection act. That will destroy the military.
Click to expand...
OF COURSE he will use the insurrection act. It will probably not be until it is too late for SCROTUS to rule until after the election though … nothing in the Constitution is going to stop this malaised orange madman. Neither is his own junta, unless he appoints RFK Jr as his personal physician.
 
Where is there an insurrection? Trump refused to call in the National Guard when there was an actual insurrection, so I’d think the courts may not look kindly on this.
 
laughing dog said:
Where is there an insurrection? Trump refused to call in the National Guard when there was an actual insurrection, so I’d think the courts may not look kindly on this.
Click to expand...
Oh no… not the courts… they will have an unkind look…. That’ll teach that bully…

</dripping sarcasm>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom