Troops and marines deeply troubled by LA deployment: ‘Morale is not great’
Troops and marines deeply troubled by LA deployment: ‘Morale is not great’
Several service members told advocacy groups they felt like pawns in a political game and assignment was not necessary
Several service members told advocacy groups they felt like pawns in a political game and assignment was unnecessary
California national guards troops and marines deployed to Los Angeles to help restore order after days of protest against the Trump administration have told friends and family members they are deeply unhappy about the assignment and worry their only meaningful role will be as pawns in a political battle they do not want to join.
Three different advocacy organisations representing military families said they had heard from dozens of affected service members who expressed discomfort about being drawn into a domestic policing operation outside their normal field of operations. The groups said they have heard no countervailing opinions.
“The sentiment across the board right now is that deploying military force against our own communities isn’t the kind of national security we signed up for,” said Sarah Streyder of the Secure Families Initiative, which represents the interests of military spouses, children and veterans.
You're viewing a single thread.
deploying military force against our own communities isn’t the kind of national security we signed up for
Then refuse those illegal orders and stand down.
As much as i hate what Trump is doing, I don't expect any enlisted man to refuse orders to go somewhere. The legality of that order is debatable, but following it does not cause any immediate harm. It's not a good risk to take.
Refusal to follow orders will come when the order is so clearly illegal that there can be no question, and when following that order is something that can't be undone. An order to fire into the crowd, for example.
Of course, no such order will be given. I assume we have all seen Andor, yes?
I agree, I think there's clear limits. This isn't like Russia where they were being told they were being sent to a training exercise, this is an event where everyone being deployed knew exactly the reason and are able to be kept up to date by sources that don't include their superiors. Being deployed doesn't mean anything other than they're getting a bigger paycheck each, and the legality of a domestic deployment for the purpose of crowd control is debatable. The real test of these men will be whether they take the life of a civilian.
There's a lot of doomers who will base current events off of a TV show they watched, but there is no media in existence nor any historical event that mirrors these circumstances. There are non political guardrails, such as societal conventions, that will realistically play a much bigger role in the coming conflict than people think.
One thing is very clear however: The price of true change is blood.
The Great Orange Baboon's (TGOB) parade is this Saturday. Lots of protests are going to happen on Saturday specifically because of this, and many other things. TGOB has repeatedly alluded to using armed forces against protesters on Saturday.
People are going to die on Saturday.
Try watching Winter on Fire on Netflix. It documents Ukraine overthrowing their dictator. It wasn’t a clean process. But hopefully the ending will be the same, with our dictator also fleeing back to Russia.
If you haven't seen andor what are you doing with your life
Not living for TV.
What's the takeaway from Andor in this context?There was a scene involving some vey angry, but peaceful protesters surrounding a government building. A small team of police was ordered into the crowd. Not to attack, just to patrol, to open a little corridor so people could pass. But that was six guys in riot gear pushing their way through the people.
Even in the best possible circumstances, that's gonna cause a little trouble, and these were not the best possible circumstances. Fruit was thrown. Maybe a bottle or two. The police are tense. The people are tense.
And a government agent, working for the guy who ordered the cops out there, shot one of them. The cops reacted defensively, and struck at the crowd, trying to get to safety. The crowd fought back. Things quickly got out of hand.
And the stormtroopers were standing by, waiting for the word.
It was a setup. An incident was forced to happen. It might have happened even without the sniper. Just force the police into the crowd, and sooner or later, someone will do something stupid.
On the same way, the NG troops might be deliberately pressed into a position where they legitimately think they are defending themselves, but no single order will seem like "crossing the line" to them. Stand here. Hold the line. Push the crowd out of this area.
I hope it doesn't happen. But the metaphor of boiling the frog is apt.
The Empire is fascist and comes for all including its loyal servants
That's been the takeaway from Star Wars since A New Hope.
Some don't like Star Wars or any Sci-fi. Others like fascism and hate things that say fascism is bad.
Not necessarily mutually exclusive. Always room for a little overlap in that Venn diagram.
Yeah one of my family members fits both
In what ways are you able and going to support troops who do that to then face court martial? Are you a lawyer willing to go pro bono? Are you willing to house the ones who are discharged, or later released from prison, with few to no job prospects? Do you already or are you planning to donate to service member advocacy groups?
If troops could feel sufficiently supported by the rest of the community when the military's judicial hammer hangs above their head, it may help them gather the courage to do the thing you're suggesting they do.
Most troops signed up to do a job with good benefits and gud-nuff pay and hopefully learn some skills, make lifelong friends, and maybe do some interesting or adventurous things in the process. Few of them are very financially well-set and "standing down" from orders they personally deem illegal could ruin their life. Big decision for 18-25 y/o's to be making and glib comments like "just stand down" kind of gloss over the total psychology of the situation.
https://girightshotline.org/en/military-knowledge-base/conscientious-objection-discharge/
There are programs in place to provide help to troops considering Conscientious Objection. Every single law is up to personal interpretation, so I don't know why you feel the need to emphasize it here. When I was asked to join the military during Bush II, I refused and am proud of that decision. Probably would have made my father proud. Probably would have gotten a lot of respect in my community. Probably would have helped pay for a college degree I wouldn't actually get a job with. But fuck traveling half way across the planet to kill civilians to protect an oil company's profits. If that was an easy decision for me at that age, not violating the rights your own countrymen should be even easier.
I never knew about this. I actually hope all our troops know about this also.
The ACLU seems like it should also cover this sort of thing.
It is I believe
I just checked their website. They need to add a Conscientious Objection section to make that more explicit.
Any military member who is court marshaled has a JAG representing them, just like there is a JAG prosecuting them. A system that gives you someone with far more time to deal with your case than a public defender, and even some private attorneys.
Like the movie A Few Good Men, Tom Cruise is a JAG
Do we need to have our commitment to them in writing in the presence of a lawyer in order for them to do the right thing and not follow illegal orders and threaten fellow Americans?
They took an oath.
That has nothing to do with our support.
That being said, the support of the public tends to be more consistent than the support of the leadership we find ourselves with in recent history. That's made obvious by all the people getting help from others via GoFundMe type donations to cover their medical bills or simply for doing the right thing and being punished for it.
Do we need to have our commitment to them in writing in the presence of a lawyer in order for them to do the right thing and not follow illegal orders and threaten fellow Americans?
No idea how to get the point across effectively, but some general assurance of a soft landing on/from the side for which they're putting their personal future at risk would probably be pretty helpful. The more ostracized and hated they feel in these early stages would probably just push them toward the other side, based on a rough risk-reward analysis.
If anyone is actually depending on those sworn/affirmed oaths to keep the troops on their side, then they're living in a naive fantasy world. Those oaths are beautiful in their intent, but crumble pretty quickly in the harsh reality of viable livelihood and expected future compensation. Sorry, but I'm cynical and in my view loyalty is most easily purchased via material guarantees than ideology. Within limits, of course, and there's different thresholds of tolerance toward unpalatable orders vs living conditions for everyone.
Yeah, a lot of people are all talk but actually chickens out when you tell them to practice what they preach or help in some way to the cause. I was arguing in an anarchist community why it is a bad idea to fire the first shot and kill soldiers and police, because it makes it look bad on the protestors and it will finally provide reason for the government to invoke the insurrection act. Unsurprisingly, anarchists know little of the practical reality and are too trigger happy baying for blood. When I dared one to go to California and shoot the authorities if they believe that Trump and co. broke the social contract, unsurprisingly he/she made up excuses and chickened out. Said going about on social media and targeting far right leaders is just as effective. Right, as if bullying Trump on social media will make him quit the White House lol.
It reminds me why i am not fully on board with anarchism despite having inherent and deep disdain on authority and hierarchy. Sorry my anarchist friends, but you are just as fantasists as any ideologues. I don't completely condemn violence when it comes to it, but you don't get the final sympathy when you break the promise of peaceful demonstrations and kill the authorities first. I mean, the world has sympathy on Syrian rebels, because Assad's forces fired on peaceful demonstrators first. Many people actually soured on the French Revolution at the time, when The Terror started with indiscriminate executions of many individuals deemed enemies of the revolution. Conflicts are won on public relations as well.
A lot of people may or may not be the protesters in the streets, but don't feel like incriminating themselves on a public forum for internet clout if they are. This isn't the War Thunder forums.
One of leftist, especially for anarchists, core beliefs is praxis or putting into practice what you preach. I can see where you are coming from, but the interlocutor was literally calling for violence and for himself to raise an army. But when I told him why won't he do what he says, he basically backed out. That's not praxis lol.
Well said
Or deploy on orders, then stand with the protestors against ICE
Right?
This isn't complicated. You either choose to obey an illegal order and threaten/attack other American citizens, or you don't.
Clearly they have generally chosen, so far, to break the law and betray their fellow Americans.
This isn’t complicated. You either choose to obey an illegal order and threaten/attack other American citizens, or you don’t.
Would you be willing to risk ten years in prison that a military judge will agree that an order to go stand somewhere is illegal?
Or to put it another way, do you expect our enlisted men and women to uphold the high moral virtues of honor, self sacrifice, and protection of innocents?
After seeing what horrors American soldiers are capable of, I'm not holding my breath.
Again, it's one thing to expect them to reject orders they know are illegal, such as firing on civilians. It's another thing entirely to expect them to reject orders the legality of which may be a supreme court case next week.
It seems we are in agreement then, the troops are self-interested rational actors; all of the supposed virtues are propaganda.
But I think there is a moral imperative that says "do not obey immoral orders", and that imperative does not come with a clause that says "unless there is a pending court case".
But I think there is a moral imperative that says “do not obey immoral orders”
Is it immoral to get on a plane, and go sleep on the floor somewhere?
No, plane rides and sleepy time are not immoral in my opinion :)
There's probably a good argument about plane emissions and climate change tho
Curious to know what horrors you've seen?
There was the whole thing in Guantanamo Bay. And the awful treatment of civilians in Afghanistan. And in Iraq. And we can't forget the Vietnam war.
I think the guy you're talking to is a duck, but he's not all wrong.
Yeah, those are good examples. I wasn't trying to challenge him, but was genuinely curious to know if he'd personally seen shit.
There's far too many to name, but the first things that come to mind are Collateral Murder, Haditha Massacre, and literally anytime the US military has been involved in the Gazan genocide of the past year.
In theory, the next administration would pardon them. In theory.
It's a nice idea but the military makes it really hard to do that.
Think for themselves? That's not what they signed up for!