Trump Believes Military Will Obey His Illegal Orders

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Good luck doing that without machine guns.

funny. but...Why? do you believe the military or police will be using machine guns against a well armed militia that is defending American Democracy?.. or even use tear gas, for that matter? I don't. I think they would politely step to the side and say, "the man you are looking for is over there".

I am extrapolating.

Crazy militias have been taken out by the govt before. The tech used by govt is far more efficient and effective.

Police and military oth are big supporters of Trump. And there is an incredibly strong propaganda. So, why would a Trump-supportive military stand aside for a bunch of people with weak weapons labeled terrorists, pedophiles, and whackadoos?

 

[Worldtraveller]

Good luck doing that without machine guns.

funny. but...Why? do you believe the military or police will be using machine guns against a well armed militia that is defending American Democracy?.. or even use tear gas, for that matter? I don't. I think they would politely step to the side and say, "the man you are looking for is over there".

I am extrapolating.

Crazy militias have been taken out by the govt before. The tech used by govt is far more efficient and effective.

Police and military oth are big supporters of Trump. And there is an incredibly strong propaganda. So, why would a Trump-supportive military stand aside for a bunch of people with weak weapons labeled terrorists, pedophiles, and whackadoos?

I wouldn't be so sure about the military. I don't meet many enlisted in my job, but the officers mostly think bonespurs is a fuckin' idjit.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

How would that help you in any way, shape or form?

The knowledge that millions of Americans are armed to the teeth, and gun murder rates show they are not afraid to use them, would give pause to any would be King from so much as getting out from under his bed in the morning.

How so? If that king decided to use a modern military to attack them, what value would their guns add to their defense? Have you noticed that when the US government wants to kill someone, they shoot a missile at him? Owning guns doesn't contribute to the ability to fight back.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

How would that help you in any way, shape or form?

The knowledge that millions of Americans are armed to the teeth, and gun murder rates show they are not afraid to use them, would give pause to any would be King from so much as getting out from under his bed in the morning.

How so? If that king decided to use a modern military to attack them, what value would their guns add to their defense? Have you noticed that when the US government wants to kill someone, they shoot a missile at him? Owning guns doesn't contribute to the ability to fight back.

Soleimani likely was with guards that had guns when the vehicle was attacked.

 

[jonatha]

How so? If that king decided to use a modern military to attack them, what value would their guns add to their defense? Have you noticed that when the US government wants to kill someone, they shoot a missile at him? Owning guns doesn't contribute to the ability to fight back.

Soleimani likely was with guards that had guns when the vehicle was attacked.

Yeah, but unless he was personally carrying it doesn't count....

 

[Gun Nut]

How would that help you in any way, shape or form?

The knowledge that millions of Americans are armed to the teeth, and gun murder rates show they are not afraid to use them, would give pause to any would be King from so much as getting out from under his bed in the morning.

How so? If that king decided to use a modern military to attack them, what value would their guns add to their defense? Have you noticed that when the US government wants to kill someone, they shoot a missile at him? Owning guns doesn't contribute to the ability to fight back.

I reject your illogical and highly unlikely jump from "king wants.." to "military does...".

The value of a well armed militia, with respect to a complete and blatantly rogue president, is that he won't live long to do much damage to the country. I'm not saying our military or secret service will murder him, but I am certainly saying that they will cease to protect him, and as a result his remaining lifespan will be measurable in hours.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

I am extrapolating.

Crazy militias have been taken out by the govt before. The tech used by govt is far more efficient and effective.

Police and military oth are big supporters of Trump. And there is an incredibly strong propaganda. So, why would a Trump-supportive military stand aside for a bunch of people with weak weapons labeled terrorists, pedophiles, and whackadoos?

I wouldn't be so sure about the military. I don't meet many enlisted in my job, but the officers mostly think bonespurs is a fuckin' idjit.

The most recent poll gives about half military having an unfavorable opinion. Unfavorable is not as extreme as hatred or radicalization though it's a distribution. For the same time period, Obama actually was less popular. Also, this is approximately in line with the general population. Things would have to change drastically for the military to step aside. To flip them it would seem to take a draft or a serious murderous conspiracy by the administration...

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Trump is likely one of the least popular GOP leaders amongst the military.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

How so? If that king decided to use a modern military to attack them, what value would their guns add to their defense? Have you noticed that when the US government wants to kill someone, they shoot a missile at him? Owning guns doesn't contribute to the ability to fight back.

I reject your illogical and highly unlikely jump from "king wants.." to "military does...".

The value of a well armed militia, with respect to a complete and blatantly rogue president, is that he won't live long to do much damage to the country. I'm not saying our military or secret service will murder him, but I am certainly saying that they will cease to protect him, and as a result his remaining lifespan will be measurable in hours.

I ... have absolutely no response to that.

Other than ... what? That’s really deranged.

 

[Patooka]

How so? If that king decided to use a modern military to attack them, what value would their guns add to their defense? Have you noticed that when the US government wants to kill someone, they shoot a missile at him? Owning guns doesn't contribute to the ability to fight back.

I reject your illogical and highly unlikely jump from "king wants.." to "military does...".

The value of a well armed militia, with respect to a complete and blatantly rogue president, is that he won't live long to do much damage to the country. I'm not saying our military or secret service will murder him, but I am certainly saying that they will cease to protect him, and as a result his remaining lifespan will be measurable in hours.

I ... have absolutely no response to that.

Other than ... what? That’s really deranged.

Yeah, not even Tom Clancy would believe such naive crap. A well armed militia is generally the first thing a rogue leader creates so as to consolidate their power. Can't think of a precedent where a militia was needed to either create or restore democracy.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Remember the BLM occupiers and the guy that wrote the BLM anti-gov porn fantasizing about double tapping government agents... and when facing the FBI, was shot dead before he even pulled his gun up.

#2ndamendment v FBI loses. Forget a drone!

 

[Jayjay]

Other well-armed militias around the world:

Hezbollah in Lebanon
Kata'ib Hezbollah in Iraq
Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Gaza

...and so on. They don't protect the people from tyranny, they are the tyranny.

 

[Worldtraveller]

Trump is likely one of the least popular GOP leaders amongst the military.

I can verify this. At least among the officers. I don't interact with many enlisted on a daily basis.

 

[Gun Nut]

I am extrapolating.

Crazy militias have been taken out by the govt before. The tech used by govt is far more efficient and effective.

Police and military oth are big supporters of Trump. And there is an incredibly strong propaganda. So, why would a Trump-supportive military stand aside for a bunch of people with weak weapons labeled terrorists, pedophiles, and whackadoos?

I wouldn't be so sure about the military. I don't meet many enlisted in my job, but the officers mostly think bonespurs is a fuckin' idjit.

The most recent poll gives about half military having an unfavorable opinion. Unfavorable is not as extreme as hatred or radicalization though it's a distribution. For the same time period, Obama actually was less popular. Also, this is approximately in line with the general population. Things would have to change drastically for the military to step aside. To flip them it would seem to take a draft or a serious murderous conspiracy by the administration...

I heard that Trump earned the least favorable job rating from the military of all Presidents ever... yes, it is slightly over 50%, but historically, presidents enjoyed well over 70%.
Just imagine how bad a Commander and Chief has to be for the response to a Drill Sergeant screaming in your face, "DO YOU RESPECT YOUR COMMANDER YOU PIECE OF SHIT PRIVATE!?!?!!" to be "SIR, NO SIR!!!!"

 

[Gun Nut]

I ... have absolutely no response to that.

Other than ... what? That’s really deranged.

Yeah, not even Tom Clancy would believe such naive crap. A well armed militia is generally the first thing a rogue leader creates so as to consolidate their power. Can't think of a precedent where a militia was needed to either create or restore democracy.

and I suppose you can think of several precedents where we had a Twitler? What are you comparing this to?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Yeah, not even Tom Clancy would believe such naive crap. A well armed militia is generally the first thing a rogue leader creates so as to consolidate their power. Can't think of a precedent where a militia was needed to either create or restore democracy.

To create, yes (South Africa, US colonies). To restore, no. It likely isn't possible, as when you have the military backing you, militias are powerless. Dictatorships consolidate the power structure so there are fewer puppets to control. Kind of like how Trump's Exec Branch has so many vacancies!

Venezuela has a small military, but that dictatorship is doing just fine these days, despite an attempt to overthrow Maduro. America? If troops are willing to arrest or attack US Civilians, it won't matter if they are armed or not.

 

[crazyfingers]

Why would you think there's some line the military wouldn't cross? Is there something in their recent history which suggests they have this kind of line? These are the guys who were photobombing themselves torturing people at Abu Ghraib.

There might be a small subset of soldiers who would be a bit mopey about it, but these are American soldiers. They'll do what they're told and pass of the moral implications of that to someone else while not particularly caring.

There was a report on the radio that at least a few generals have chimed in saying they would NOT obey an illegal order. In this case, they were specifically talking about cheetolini's threat to take out cultural sites.

It will be interesting to see what happens (at least what we, the public hear about) if something like this does occur. You may have noticed, though, that quite a few high ranking Pentagon officials resigned in the week prior to the assassination. So maybe the 'good ones' are leaving. :/

OK, but having the order carried out 20 minutes later because someone resigns in protest and another guy gets promoted to his position isn't really "stopping" something.

That's the thing. If some top general is given an illegal order the choice is to follow it or not follow it. If the choice is not to follow it the only two outcomes are to resign or be fired. And the order goes down the chain of command until someone will follow the illegal order.

Nixon's Saturday night massacre comes to mind. Nixon finally got Robert Bork to fire Archibald Cox after the attorney general and deputy attorney general refused and resigned.

 

[Gun Nut]

OK, but having the order carried out 20 minutes later because someone resigns in protest and another guy gets promoted to his position isn't really "stopping" something.

That's the thing. If some top general is given an illegal order the choice is to follow it or not follow it. If the choice is not to follow it the only two outcomes are to resign or be fired. And the order goes down the chain of command until someone will follow the illegal order.

Nixon's Saturday night massacre comes to mind. Nixon finally got Robert Bork to fire Archibald Cox after the attorney general and deputy attorney general refused and resigned.

or.. the generals neither resign nor get "fired". The order is simply not executed and ignored as invalid like it was never issued. A test that was passed.. and who is going to know or be in a position to do anything about it?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

OK, but having the order carried out 20 minutes later because someone resigns in protest and another guy gets promoted to his position isn't really "stopping" something.

That's the thing. If some top general is given an illegal order the choice is to follow it or not follow it. If the choice is not to follow it the only two outcomes are to resign or be fired. And the order goes down the chain of command until someone will follow the illegal order.

Nixon's Saturday night massacre comes to mind. Nixon finally got Robert Bork to fire Archibald Cox after the attorney general and deputy attorney general refused and resigned.

or.. the generals neither resign nor get "fired". The order is simply not executed and ignored as invalid like it was never issued. A test that was passed.. and who is going to know or be in a position to do anything about it?

The President who has the authority to fire said General for not following an order, regardless of legality or not.

 

[fromderinside]

or.. the generals neither resign nor get "fired". The order is simply not executed and ignored as invalid like it was never issued. A test that was passed.. and who is going to know or be in a position to do anything about it?

The President who has the authority to fire said General for not following an order, regardless of legality or not.

As much as I don't want to I have to 'gree with Gun Nut here. Just because Trump tweets or spouts or rants does not lead those who are near by respond to him in any way. Fear is only useful when one shows she's capable of inducing it. Trumps now arrived at Laughing Stock.