650
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] mipadaitu@lemmy.world 259 points 2 months ago
[-] BenVimes@lemmy.ca 111 points 2 months ago
[-] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Now go spend 32 hours cutting the corners off every piece of paper on the ship.

[-] MethodicalSpark@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

About as many corners as were cut in the construction of the Galactica.

[-] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

She was a tough ol' bird that endured far more than what her more modern descendants could hope to. and without any dry docking/repairs/overhauls. Just field repairs.

To bad they ruined the entire show by having it end with them looking at primitive tribals, salivating at the opportunity to use them as breeding stock.

[-] ABCDE@lemmy.world 60 points 2 months ago

Small edit for you

~~serves and~~ protects ~~the people~~ property and the value associated with that property

[-] ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works 10 points 2 months ago

Wait, which is meant to be serving and protecting the people? Because it isn't the police, and I don't think it's the military.. 🤔

[-] CrabAndBroom@lemmy.ml 26 points 2 months ago

I think in theory the police are meant to. But the 'theory' part of that sentence is doing a lot of heavy lifting.

[-] ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 month ago

Only it was never the theory either, the police has always been the violent enforcer of the state towards its own population.

[-] Glytch@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

The National Guard protects and serves quite a bit after natural disasters. Maybe it's referring to that?

[-] ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

The Coast Guard protects and serves people. Granted, it's usually people who don't know how sailboats work, but it's something at least.

[-] ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago

I like your optimism, however misplaced..

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] 2pt_perversion@lemmy.world 101 points 2 months ago

They've also made it clear they want to cut military and veteran benefits. It's surprising they think the military will be absolutely loyal to them if they try to power grab and go full dictator.

[-] Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world 97 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I was a medic in the AF - it was a pretty even split of red and blue. Air Force medical is probably the bluest slice of the military there is, so overall there's definitely a strong lean red, but there's this weird notion of absolution when it comes to the military's political loyalty. Worse case scenario, Trump gets elected and attempts to 'execute order 66' ...the military will implode on itself with infighting, and my money's on one of the troops will take an opportunistic shot at him in accordance with their Oath of Enlistment's promise to defend the constitution against domestic enemies. Officers and civilian federal employees oath has the same language.

Edit - Also, Donald Trump fucking hates us. If anyone 'supports the troops' they'll vote blue.

[-] LastWish@lemmy.world 27 points 1 month ago

I'm currently in the AF. Can confirm, we're a snapshot of the country. Not some frothing red dog.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] TallonMetroid@lemmy.world 22 points 1 month ago

Edit - Also, Donald Trump fucking hates us. If anyone 'supports the troops' they'll vote blue.

Yeah, but nobody who goes out of their way to advertise that they "support the troops" actually gives a shit about them. It's always been jingoistic performative nonsense.

[-] ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

I tried Mission BBQ one time and their jingoism was just absurd. Their notion of supporting the troops is delivering barbecue in a Hummer and selling $2 plastic cups with (some of) the proceeds going to veterans in some vague way. Of course their worst crime is that their barbecue sucks.

[-] bustAsh@lemmy.world 16 points 1 month ago

If he loses and tries to claim a stolen election, project 2025 promising a bloodbath will not go well for any of them. Especially since Trump continues to disrespect military personnel at every turn.

I know there are some maga nuts in the ranks, but last I heard most generals have spoken out against the Trumpet crumpet.

[-] Xanis@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

Military leadership in the U.S. has always traditionally leaned pro-U.S. If it came down to it there would be fewer Trump allies the higher up you go. Exceptions though, always exceptions.

Trying really hard to not draw parallels with that scene in Winter Soldier where it's announced that some agents are Hydra while some are SHIELD and they turn on one another.

[-] VubDapple@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

My impression has been that the USA air force is perhaps the branch of the armed forces that is most controlled by high ranking evangelicals. Is there any reality basis to this belief?

[-] Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

No idea how it compares to the other branches. Would be an interesting question to run by one of those crazies who served in like all of them (one of the nurses I worked with in the AF then had previously been a Marine and soldier. I've had patients who claimed to have served in Marines, Army, Navy, and AF, but no way to tell of they're full of shit or insane enough to actually do that (the amount of paperwork that would translate to...).

Anyway, in AF med they'd hit us with the occasional "the lord willing" or something in official functions like change of command ceremonies or squadron "all-call"s, which was definitely crossed the line of what I'd consider acceptable (it should be 100% secular), but that's the extent of it. No down-throat-ism or pressure to convert or anything.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

I have heard anecdotal evidence to this but cannot verify.

[-] irreticent@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

Also, Donald Trump fucking hates us. If anyone 'supports the troops' they'll vote blue.

Wow! I was expecting a link to one incident but there was a list of many, many unrelated incidents. He really does hate the military.

Thanks for the link!

[-] Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

Yeah his scandal-per-day tactic seemed to work pretty well - keeping up with his bullshit is a full time job, and we literally don't have the mental realestate to keep track.

And it drives me nuts... almost all of those would be a career-ender for a normal politician, but Trump gets away with it again and again because by the time we've processed just how bad one thing is, he's commited 3 or 4 more.

[-] pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online 17 points 2 months ago

To highlight just how bad cutting VA benefits would be, only 18% of veterans get the benefits they're entitled to.

[-] threeganzi@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago

Because the country would go bankrupt if everyone got what they deserve (with the way the budget is now)

[-] threeganzi@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago

Do they just reject their requests for benefits, or how does it happen?

Yup, that's about it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

Because the US is a "fuck you, I got mine" style country.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago

There's a model for this. Basically, the reason you see dictatorships having a Republican Guard. Those guys are the loyalists that will do anything for the dictator and they get sinecure positions and help if they're hurt. The rest of the military is lucky to get rations because the dictator is worried about other people using them to end their reign.

The total transition would take awhile but Trying was already effectively using the Department of Justice and federal agents to run a Republican Guard during the BLM protests.

[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 month ago

The military is filled with the most loyal beaten dogs in America. Master can beat them as much as he wants and they'll never bite.

[-] orcrist@lemm.ee 4 points 1 month ago

We have no idea how this would play out. Internal military use is right there in the coup playbook, and top military leaders know this and surely have privately considered it. Would they tell him to fuck off? Maybe. Whatever they would do, if it gets to that point, they're betting their legacies and their lives on their choice.

[-] sp3tr4l@lemmy.zip 60 points 1 month ago

Alex Jones fixated on Posse Comitatus at the tail end of W's second term and Obama's first term, melding it with the idea that FEMA was ready to incarcerate millions of Americans in concentration camps after taking away hundreds of millions of guns, and turn cities into walled off, controlled ingress/egress zones akin to a prequel to Escape From New York.

And now here we are a decade+ after that, with him having been on the ground for and whipping people into an actual insurrection, supporting a fascist who seems to want to actually do things approaching fairly close to his fever dreams of years past, invoking what was once a huge piece of his 'plan for total enslavement' or whatever he called it.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] just_another_person@lemmy.world 56 points 2 months ago

He already did this in Portland once:https://journals.library.columbia.edu/index.php/bioethics/article/view/6765

[-] MyOpinion@lemm.ee 24 points 2 months ago

Time to turn Trump loose in the retirement home.

[-] someguy3@lemmy.world 22 points 2 months ago

As [New York Times] wrote, during his one term, the former president argued on multiple occasions to deploy military personnel to shut down protests and take control of the border. During a second term, he is not expected to have advisors pushing back.

The report notes, " ... as he has sought a return to power, he has made clear that he intends to use the military for a range of domestic law enforcement purposes," adding, "During his time out of power, allies of Mr. Trump have worked on policy papers to provide legal justifications for the former president’s intent to use the military to enforce the law domestically."

[-] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 20 points 2 months ago

I still maintain that my right to arms should include a Javelin and assortment of anti-aircraft armaments.

[-] MNByChoice@midwest.social 10 points 1 month ago

And a few grenades.

[-] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 months ago

So now that NYT has taken the gloves off for trump, I guess it's even more clear that all that soft pedaling before was just because they wanted Biden out. 🤔

[-] MediaBiasFactChecker@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

Raw Story - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Raw Story:

MBFC: Left - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.Newshttps://www.rawstory.com/trump-insurrection-act-2668981400/
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

[-] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Sure, but could any of those military guys actually get a presidential medal of freedom? Not a purple heart or anything that Trump has suggested is dumb, but a real award for winners like the presidential medal of freedom.

(opinions about these awards are from Donald Trump, on the record. /s from me.)

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago
[-] KonalaKoala@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

And then you find out the response from Kamala ends up being "Harris has 'made clear' she will turn the U.S. military loose on Trump if elected (and causes a second insurrection): NYT"

[-] just_another_person@lemmy.world 19 points 1 month ago

Ah, you must be one of those people who believes that just saying the thing in a certain light means it's wrong. One of those people who believes that whole "The uprising will be bloodless.......IF THE LEFT ALLOW IT TO BE". One of those absolutely moronic dipshits who thinks that because a Democrat is in power, it would be improper for them to use military assets to stop it.

Well, news for you and your kin: if you want a "civil war", guess which army you'll be fighting...idiots.

[-] Kimjongtooill@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago

I think he is referencing the right-wing talking point of the week: Kamala "stole Trump's idea" (big air quotes) for not taxing tips. I'd be mad too if the otherside also supported my guys only popular agreeable stance 😤

Their boy Reagan enacted the tax to begin with...

[-] IcePee@lemmy.beru.co 5 points 1 month ago

The whole no tax on tips is a bit of a head fake. You hear that and you think: "aw, that's nice. Wait staff will get more money". You're not thinking about the millions wall street gamblers get in bonuses will now be classified as tips. A better policy is for wait staff to be paid a living wage and paying staff is a cost of doing business.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2024
650 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19043 readers
3434 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS