Trump Says He’s Sending Troops To ‘War Ravaged’ America City — Authorizes ‘Full Force’
Trump Says He’s Sending Troops To ‘War Ravaged’ America City — Authorizes ‘Full Force’
I said this is the other thread, but what is the appropriate response? He’s clearly setting the board, and he definitely wants to shoot protesters. He very likely wants sufficient violence to do something dramatic. They even may try to instigate, but have thus far been unable to get the desired response to enable martial law or whatever they plan.
So you have three options:
Which of these three do you propose?
See, there’s a fourth option: The people with the power need to take action and I don’t mean a “strongly worded letter.” I’m talking about the leaders with the knowledge and the levers to move this along.
If they don’t the inevitability is that No Kings becomes more than the nice picnic it currently is for citizens.
Me? I’m a citizen just like you. I have no power unless you and I become a team.
Update: I watched the full video of what he said and now I really do believe he’s just genuinely that stupid and thinks he’s actually trying to put down a riot. Fox News really plays him like a fiddle.
Portlanders are pretty sarcastic and many people have posted videos of “life in hell” (his audio) set against a beautiful Pacific Northwest summer with boats and farmer’s markets.
I dunno, I’m inclined to think mockery in this case might be the best response for the time being. We’ll see how next month’s protest goes, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it were entirely peaceful.
Just another distraction from the Epstein files.
/s
It does start to look like another step on the journey to the land of “you won’t need to vote”
Weed out politic nay-sayers directly… we’re already seeing some of that going on.
Then make being a member of the armed-forces ideologically untenable for those who aren’t worshipping orange. Trumps actions must be impacting the national-pride aspect of serving for some (and changing the political disposition at the recruiting office).
If this is effective, in three years, maybe you’ll have a military significantly dominated by active supporters (or at least fence-sitters)… Now that opens up some options.
make being a member of the armed-forces ideologically untenable for those who aren’t worshipping orange
Hegseth was talking about using Kirk’s murder for recruitment.
Except you will actually lose a significant number of your military force to do that. Who is going to replace the ones who leave? The majority of MAGA die-hards aren’t actually physically fit enough or able to stop using meth long enough to actually cut it in the military. To keep troop levels what they’re at (which is definitely not enough to wrangle the whole nation) they’d have to drastically reduce physical fitness and drug abuse standards.
Germany took Europe with about 18 million soldiers throughout the entire war, and Europe had about 540 million citizens overall before World War 2. US has around just over 2 million soldiers (with only 10% in “boots on the ground” combat roles) with about 350 million citizens, all of which are far more spread out over the US than they were in Europe.
The ability for the US military to occupy and hold it’s own nation is absurdly low, honestly, imho.
Evidence to support my assertion: military.com/…/new-pentagon-study-shows-77-of-you…
Pentagon study from 2020: “A new study from the Pentagon shows that 77% of young Americans would not qualify for military service without a waiver due to being overweight, using drugs or having mental and physical health problems.”
The Nazis didn’t have anything like the arsenal available to the U.S. military, and they were fighting a fully equipped and trained, modern (for the time) fighting force - arguably the world’s supper power at the time.
In your scenario, the U.S. military would fight guys with semi-automatic weapons. They would have laser guided bombs, tanks, tear gas, the full works. Im sorry, but the armed militia won’t stand a chance.
All the major cities are majority Democrat. All the major industries run business out of the major cities.
As much as the wealthy are short term thinkers, do you really think they’d be okay with tanks and guided bombs absolutely wrecking their cities and making it impossible for their laborers to get to their dayjobs?
Tanks in the streets don’t usually make people feel safe enough to leave their homes. Indiscriminate bombing doesn’t either. Having your city bombed to smithereens ain’t good for business.
You’re forgetting that they would be occupying the US itself, and in throwing down like that would absolutely terminally wreck what is left of the real economy. If bombing your own major economic centers to hell and back is “holding your country militarily” then you’ve made a huge tactical error.
That is an unrealistic assertion.
1: Soldiers are not machines. They have opinions and loyalties. Many US troops won’t want to kill Americans, especially ones from their own neck of the woods. California has a major share of these people, and Trump isn’t likely to convince enough of them to get California’s assets.
2: All the fancy gear has complicated supply chains, and would be quickly exhausted in a civil war. This is particular bad for the Conservatives, since Trump has tried his best to alienate potential trading partners.
3: The low standards of ICE makes it easy to infiltrate. This means that saboteurs, foreign and domestic, can easily access Conservative territories and engage in operations without being caught.
4: The United States are huge. There is simply too much territory for any military to cover. It would be a long and grinding war.
5: Canada, Mexico, and other nations would likely send soldiers and material to aid in conquering the Trump Regime. The reasons will vary, from annexing American territory, earning favors, revenge, or simply to obtain a reliable partner on the world stage. Trump has burned many bridges, and is known to be an untrustworthy character who won’t uphold agreements.
6: The Trump Regime does not value experts, and will suffer in nearly every aspect. The only thing they got going for them, is raw aggression and the inability to understand consequences. This makes them similar to a rhino, minus the power to back the unthinking rage.
They won’t be cancelled, that would be unconstitutional.
Instead, ICE will be posted at polling places and intimidate people not to vote.
Any excuse to declare martial law.
Anyone want to bet he says Martian law?
Why would they want to change anything about elections when they are already rigged as fuck and a binary option between 2 parties that circle in power every few years?
To me it looks like they are doing what every authoritarian government does when people start protesting
What war?
“Don’t worry, we brought it with us in our luggage.”
I’d see certain commenters repeating that last sentence as just something that was an assumed truth.
Every single time I saw them doing it, I’d ask the usual suspects to show me exactly which cities “burned to the ground”. These same people would basically scamper off, providing no evidence, only to make the same claims again in a few hours/days.
To be war ravaged, it must be at war. Trump is literally declaring war on US citizens. And also instructing the armed forces to kill US citizens, unless you think “full force” could possibly mean anything else in military context.
It’s amazing how people can look at stuff like this and say “gee this guy sure does use some hyperbolic language, I wonder what he can mean by that”. It’s pretty fucking clear.