Der Fuhrer deploys 800 soldiers to the border to "stop the caravan".

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, SCRawl, Thanas, Edi, K. A. Pital

Post Reply
User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15674
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Der Fuhrer deploys 800 soldiers to the border to "stop the caravan".

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2018-11-02 05:59pm

Zaune wrote:
2018-11-02 06:30am
I get the feeling that this is, not unreasonably, a sensitive subject. Just because someone doesn't happen to live in the United States full-time doesn't mean that they have the luxury of shrugging this sort of thing off as somebody else's problem, and even being seen to insinuate to the contrary can go over rather badly.
Thanks for understanding, but citizenship aside...

Lets be honest: if the US goes fully down the road of fascist dictatorship or violent instability, that is going to have very serious repercussions to the whole world. Everybody has a stake in this, whether they know it or not.
"Well, Grant, we've had the devil's own day, haven't we?"

"Yes. Lick 'em tomorrow though."

-Generals William T. Sherman and Ulysses S Grant, the Battle of Shiloh.


"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"-Terry Pratchett's DEATH.


I am a dual citizen of the United States and Canada.


Fuck Civility.

User avatar
Zaune
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 6254
Joined: 2010-06-21 11:05am
Location: In Transit
Contact:

Re: Der Fuhrer deploys 800 soldiers to the border to "stop the caravan".

Post by Zaune » 2018-11-02 06:10pm

A depressingly high percentage of the population don't realise this stuff has serious repercussions until it's too late. It's why I get irritated at people who proudly declare themselves totally disinterested in politics. How nice it must be to be secure in the knowledge that none of what's going on in the newspapers is going to affect your life, or the lives of anyone you care about...
There are hardly any excesses of the most crazed psychopath that cannot easily be duplicated by a normal kindly family man who just comes in to work every day and has a job to do.
-- (Terry Pratchett, Small Gods)


Replace "ginger" with "n*gger," and suddenly it become a lot less funny, doesn't it?
-- fgalkin


Like my writing? Tip me on Patreon

I Have A Blog

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15674
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Der Fuhrer deploys 800 soldiers to the border to "stop the caravan".

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2018-11-02 07:28pm

Zaune wrote:
2018-11-02 06:10pm
A depressingly high percentage of the population don't realise this stuff has serious repercussions until it's too late. It's why I get irritated at people who proudly declare themselves totally disinterested in politics. How nice it must be to be secure in the knowledge that none of what's going on in the newspapers is going to affect your life, or the lives of anyone you care about...
It's an illusion, though. Some people, due to privilege or shear ignorance/ambivalence, may be insulated enough not to be aware that politics can have a direct bearing on whether they or their families live or die... but it does, regardless of their awareness or lack thereof.
"Well, Grant, we've had the devil's own day, haven't we?"

"Yes. Lick 'em tomorrow though."

-Generals William T. Sherman and Ulysses S Grant, the Battle of Shiloh.


"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"-Terry Pratchett's DEATH.


I am a dual citizen of the United States and Canada.


Fuck Civility.

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15674
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Der Fuhrer deploys 800 soldiers to the border to "stop the caravan".

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2018-11-02 08:40pm

It turns out that the Trump Regime did in fact initially request troops to be used for "emergency law enforcement functions", including "crowd and traffic control" (which could hardly be a more obvious euphemism for "to shut down protests"). The Pentagon refused.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/02/politics ... index.html
Washington (CNN)When the Trump administration first asked the Pentagon to send troops to the southern border, they wanted them to perform emergency law enforcement functions, CNN has learned.

The Pentagon said no.
According to two defense official familiar with the request, the Department of Homeland Security asked that the Pentagon provide a reserve force that could be called upon to provide "crowd and traffic control" and safeguard Customs and Border Protection personnel at the border to counter a group of Central American migrants walking to the US border to request asylum.
Nigerian army appears to use Trump's words to defend shooting of protesters
Nigerian army appears to use Trump's words to defend shooting of protesters
The Pentagon rejected the request on October 26, according to one of the officials, even as it signed off on providing DHS with air and logistics support, medical personnel and engineers.
The request was turned down because the Department of Defense felt that active duty troops do not have the authority to conduct that type of mission unless they are granted additional authorities by the President.
Defense officials have repeatedly emphasized the troops at the border are there to support civil authorities and that they are not expected to come into any contact with migrants.
Despite multiple defense officials characterizing those activities as relating to law enforcement actions, a DHS official disagreed that such functions constituted law enforcement.
"While DHS has discussed the need for potential assistance with force protection of CBP personnel, calling this line of support 'law enforcement activities' would be factually inaccurate," the DHS official said.
'Quickly and for a long time'
Active duty US troops are barred from domestic law enforcement unless there is an emergency, but President Donald Trump has repeatedly raised the prospect of having troops enforce the border as he campaigns hard on the dangers of immigration in the final days before the midterm elections.
At a White House speech on Thursday, the President suggested that troops should fire on migrants if they throw rocks, saying that rocks should be considered rifles and comparing the group of about 3,000 men, women and children to an "invasion."
On Friday, Trump tried to walk back those comments, telling reporters that "if our soldiers," or Border Patrol or Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers "are going to be hit in the face with rocks, we're going to arrest those people. That doesn't mean shoot them. But we're going to arrest those people quickly and for a long time."
The defense officials described the force DHS requested as something that would only be used if CPB personnel were overwhelmed by the situation on the border.
Even so, the Pentagon rejected the request for the reserve "protection" force, while it simultaneously approved all of DHS' other requests for support with Secretary of Defense James Mattis' approval. It's not clear if Mattis weighed in on the decision to reject the request for troops to perform law enforcement functions.
Despite rhetoric, illness threat from migrants is minimal, experts say
Despite rhetoric, illness threat from migrants is minimal, experts say
The first defense official said that in its response to DHS, the Defense Department said that if Homeland Security officials still want the reserve force of US troops, they should ask the White House to formally grant the Pentagon the authorities to perform those additional functions.
Customs and Border Protection declined to comment.
Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, speaking to Fox News last week, said DHS had asked for air, engineering, logistics and planning support, as well as vehicle barriers and "ways in which we can protect my officers and agents, as well as the ports of entry themselves."
The Posse Comitatus law forbids the US military from enforcing domestic laws, unless there's no other choice. Military analysts say Trump can easily use the National Guard, US Marshals or personnel from Immigration and Customs Enforcement to back up border officers if need be.
Costs of the operation
More than 8,000 active duty troops could be deployed troops to the southwest border, more than he has serving in some of the world's most contentious combat zones, but they are there solely to support Homeland Security officials as they prepare for the migrants' arrival.
The troops will join over 2,000 National Guardsmen who are already at the border, meaning upwards of 10,000 American forces will be mobilized to stop Central American migrants that are still some hundreds of miles away from the border and weeks away from arriving in the US
Senior military officers have defended the deployment on national security grounds, but the mission -- dubbed Operation Faithful Patriot -- has been met with scathing criticism from many former military officials.
Retired Gen. Martin Dempsey, who served as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 2011 to 2015, tweeted Friday that "our men and women in uniform are better trained, better equipped, and better led so they meet any threat with confidence. A wasteful deployment of over-stretched soldiers and Marines would be made much worse if they use force disproportional to the threat they face. They won't."
The Pentagon has yet to determine the cost of the operation, nor has it identified the account where the funding would come from. But the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments estimates that the cost of placing active duty troops on the border could range from $42 million 110 million.
Trump: Up to 15,000 troops going to the border
Trump: Up to 15,000 troops going to the border 01:56
CSBA says that on the high end, the deployment would cost $143 per troop per day for operating and maintenance costs and $112 per troop per day on the low end. CSBA also estimates that the use of military aircraft in this deployment would cost about $136,645 per day.
With the mission currently set for November 5 through December 15, for a total of 41 days, the cost of deploying 8,000 troops and air support ranges from approximately $42 million to $55 million, according to the CSBA estimate.
Trump has said the total number of troops could climb as high as 15,000, which CSBA calculates the price tag to be at approximately $90 million to $110 million.
On Thursday, Trump claimed the military is putting up thousands of tents to hold migrants, but officials said there are no plans as of now to build tents. The officials said that while there had been informal talks between the Department of Defense and DHS about having the military build tent facilities to house detained migrants, tents were never part of the formal request for assistance submitted by DHS and approved by Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis. One official says that DHS was informally discouraged from making the request by the defense department.
This article has been updated to include a comment from a Department of Homeland Security official.
This is both concerning and reassuring, in different ways. Concerning, because it confirms that the regime's intent is probably every bit as sinister as it appears to be, and reassuring because it shows that there is still a limit to how far the Pentagon will take "just following orders".

Also, the Nigerian army has apparently used Trump's rhetoric as justification for shooting protesters:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/02/africa/n ... index.html
Lagos, Nigeria (CNN)The Nigerian army has hinted in a tweet that comments from US President Donald Trump justify its lethal shooting of Shiite protesters over the past week.

On Friday the Nigerian army posted a video of Trump's Thursday speech on its official Twitter feed, with the comment: "Please Watch and Make your Deductions."
CNN has made several requests for comment on the tweet to the Nigerian army, which has faced strong criticism from human rights groups and Nigerians over its actions against the protesters. The tweet has since been removed.

In a speech at the White House Thursday on immigration and asylum policy, Trump suggested US troops could open fire on members of migrant groups headed to the US-Mexico border.
"They want to throw rocks at our military, our military fights back," Trump said. "When they throw rocks like they did at the Mexico military and police, I say consider it a rifle," he said, alleging the migrant group headed to the US clashed with the Mexican police this week.
On Friday, the President reversed his claim that the US would shoot at any rock-throwing migrants crossing into the US.
"They do that with us, they're going to be arrested. There's going to be a problem. I didn't say shoot," he said.
In the Nigerian capital, Abuja, Monday, soldiers shot at members of the Islamic Movement of Nigeria (IMN) who were taking part in a religious procession and demanding the release of their leader, who has been in detention since 2015.
According to Amnesty International, at least 45 people were killed and 122 people were wounded in the clashes Saturday and Monday. The army, however, said six members of the group died in the clashes and six soldiers were seriously injured.
The army said members of the IMN threw stones at its troops and attacked its convoy carrying ammunition Saturday, adding that the soldiers opened fire in self-defense. Citing evidence collected from videos of the protest and eyewitnesses, Amnesty described the actions of the army and police as a "horrific use of excessive force."
The Nigerian army fires live rounds to disperse Shiite protesters.
The Nigerian army fires live rounds to disperse Shiite protesters.
"Those injured were shot in different parts of the body -- head, neck, back, chest, shoulder, legs, arms -- and some of them had multiple gunshot wounds," said Osai Ojigho, Amnesty's country director for Nigeria.
"This pattern clearly shows soldiers and police approached IMN processions not to restore public order, but to kill."
The Nigerian Defence Headquarters Thursday denied Amnesty's allegations, saying the group's account was not a "true reflection" of the incident. The protesters were the "aggressors" and the military acted in self-defense, it said.
The US Embassy in Nigeria said in a statement Thursday that it was concerned about the incident and called for an investigation into the shootings. Those responsible must be held accountable, the embassy said.

Presidential spokesman Garba Shehu told CNN Thursday that he could not comment on what steps the presidency was taking in response to the incident.
Shiite members have often marched and protested the arrest nearly three years ago of their leader, Ibrahim Zakzaky, and his continuing detention.
Amnesty International has accused the Nigerian security forces of leading a crackdown on members of the sect.
In 2015, the military accused Zakzaky's followers of the attempted assassination of a military chief in Zaria city in Kaduna State, an allegation the group denied.
Amnesty said that more than 350 Shiites were killed by soldiers who launched an attack on the sect members.
There are an estimated three million Shiite Muslims in Nigeria, a country of more than 190 million people.
"Well, Grant, we've had the devil's own day, haven't we?"

"Yes. Lick 'em tomorrow though."

-Generals William T. Sherman and Ulysses S Grant, the Battle of Shiloh.


"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"-Terry Pratchett's DEATH.


I am a dual citizen of the United States and Canada.


Fuck Civility.

User avatar
Lord Insanity
Padawan Learner
Posts: 388
Joined: 2006-02-28 10:00pm

Re: Der Fuhrer deploys 800 soldiers to the border to "stop the caravan".

Post by Lord Insanity » 2018-11-02 10:21pm

If and I emphasize if someone is stupid enough to throw rocks at law enforcement and/or military personnel they deserve a Darwin Award. Throwing rocks can and has been most definitely considered assault with a deadly weapon. If you disagree please demonstrate by volunteering to have a baseball size rock thrown at your face. :roll:

That said, I think it is extremely unlikely that a group of refugees would attack the people they intend to seek asylum with. Trump baited: Ultra-Liberals fell for it hook, line, and sinker. So when the refugees get here and most are granted asylum because we "scared off all the bad people with our show of force", Trumps wins the propaganda battle twice. :banghead:
-Lord Insanity

"A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men" -The Real Willy Wonka

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15674
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Der Fuhrer deploys 800 soldiers to the border to "stop the caravan".

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2018-11-02 10:35pm

Lord Insanity wrote:
2018-11-02 10:21pm
If and I emphasize if someone is stupid enough to throw rocks at law enforcement and/or military personnel they deserve a Darwin Award. Throwing rocks can and has been most definitely considered assault with a deadly weapon. If you disagree please demonstrate by volunteering to have a baseball size rock thrown at your face. :roll:
Apparently the actual armed forces disagrees. They interviewed a guy on CNN today, I think he was ex-military, who said that they would not respond to thrown rocks with lethal force. But by all means, explain why you feel throwing rocks should be met with automatic weapons fire, and how that is a proportional response. Or actually, don't. I'm sick of hearing excuses for fascism and atrocities.
That said, I think it is extremely unlikely that a group of refugees would attack the people they intend to seek asylum with. Trump baited: Ultra-Liberals fell for it hook, line, and sinker. So when the refugees get here and most are granted asylum because we "scared off all the bad people with our show of force", Trumps wins the propaganda battle twice. :banghead:
Yeah, right. Its the dirty liberals fault for not keeping their mouths shut and just accepting everything Trump says quietly. :wanker: Did you agree with Trump when he used the same argument to blame the victims of his supporter's terrorism?
"Well, Grant, we've had the devil's own day, haven't we?"

"Yes. Lick 'em tomorrow though."

-Generals William T. Sherman and Ulysses S Grant, the Battle of Shiloh.


"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"-Terry Pratchett's DEATH.


I am a dual citizen of the United States and Canada.


Fuck Civility.

User avatar
Galvatron
Decepticon Leader
Posts: 6065
Joined: 2002-07-12 12:27am
Location: Kill! Smash! Destroy! Rend! Mangle! Distort!

Re: Der Fuhrer deploys 800 soldiers to the border to "stop the caravan".

Post by Galvatron » 2018-11-02 10:37pm

The Romulan Republic wrote:
2018-11-02 05:57pm
To reiterate: I am absolutely not urging people to revolt now, or to initiate violence. I will always view violence as legitimate only as a last resort for defensive purposes. But I do think that people need to start seriously considering the possibility that they might have to defend themselves, or they're going to get blindsided if it happens. I think a lot of people still don't really grasp that that could happen in the US, and I'm worried that if Trump does go there, people will be so blindsided that they'll just accept whatever rationalizations or excuses are made and go on as though its business as usual. And that CANNOT happen.
I'm not opposed to buying a revolver and/or a shotgun on general principle, but I can't help but wonder just how effective I would be against the military (or even just the typical right-wing gun enthusiast) if Trump goes full tyrant on us.

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15674
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Der Fuhrer deploys 800 soldiers to the border to "stop the caravan".

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2018-11-02 10:41pm

Galvatron wrote:
2018-11-02 10:37pm
I'm not opposed to buying a revolver and/or a shotgun on general principle, but I can't help but wonder just how effective I would be against the military (or even just the typical right-wing gun enthusiast) if Trump goes full tyrant on us.
That is a fair point, certainly, and one of the common arguments against the Second Amendment. Ultimately, such a conflict would likely be determined by the extent to which the military and law enforcement and intelligence community came down on one side or the other (or possibly National Guard forces in blue states vs Federal military- I can imagine that happening if Trump declared martial law in California, for example). Still, I do think there is an argument for being able to defend oneself if attacked, especially if one is a minority in a heavily-Republican area, and I don't think I could have said that a few years ago.

Edit: But ultimately, it's less about trying to form a militia than it is about making people realize that this is a real danger now. Otherwise, I worry that people will just be too shellshocked to act if something really horrible does happen, and just accept whatever excuses Trump makes for the sake of an illusion of normalcy.
"Well, Grant, we've had the devil's own day, haven't we?"

"Yes. Lick 'em tomorrow though."

-Generals William T. Sherman and Ulysses S Grant, the Battle of Shiloh.


"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"-Terry Pratchett's DEATH.


I am a dual citizen of the United States and Canada.


Fuck Civility.

User avatar
Lord Insanity
Padawan Learner
Posts: 388
Joined: 2006-02-28 10:00pm

Re: Der Fuhrer deploys 800 soldiers to the border to "stop the caravan".

Post by Lord Insanity » 2018-11-03 12:06am

The Romulan Republic wrote:
2018-11-02 10:35pm
Lord Insanity wrote:
2018-11-02 10:21pm
If and I emphasize if someone is stupid enough to throw rocks at law enforcement and/or military personnel they deserve a Darwin Award. Throwing rocks can and has been most definitely considered assault with a deadly weapon. If you disagree please demonstrate by volunteering to have a baseball size rock thrown at your face. :roll:
Apparently the actual armed forces disagrees. They interviewed a guy on CNN today, I think he was ex-military, who said that they would not respond to thrown rocks with lethal force. But by all means, explain why you feel throwing rocks should be met with automatic weapons fire, and how that is a proportional response. Or actually, don't. I'm sick of hearing excuses for fascism and atrocities.
Right because no one has ever been convicted of murder for throwing rocks, oh wait... If someone is stupid enough to commit felony assault with a deadly weapon against law enforcement and/or military they deserve to be taken down. This right here is a perfect example of how Democrats lose a large portion of the population that otherwise mostly agrees with them on most other issues.
That said, I think it is extremely unlikely that a group of refugees would attack the people they intend to seek asylum with. Trump baited: Ultra-Liberals fell for it hook, line, and sinker. So when the refugees get here and most are granted asylum because we "scared off all the bad people with our show of force", Trumps wins the propaganda battle twice. :banghead:
Yeah, right. Its the dirty liberals fault for not keeping their mouths shut and just accepting everything Trump says quietly. :wanker: Did you agree with Trump when he used the same argument to blame the victims of his supporter's terrorism?
Wow did you ever completely misinterpret what I wrote. Democrats need to just ignore Trumps stupidity act like adults. Instead they keep trying to argue with an moron and keep getting defeated with experience.

Trump says throwing rocks should be treated as a lethal threat. What liberals should have said was: "Trump is an idiot if he thinks refugees intend to attack the very people they seek asylum from." Instead they go: "Trump wants to kill brown people, all conservatives are racist murders, derp!" They took what should have been an easy propaganda win and turned it into a loss because they just can't accept that self-defense is a right.
-Lord Insanity

"A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men" -The Real Willy Wonka

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15674
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Der Fuhrer deploys 800 soldiers to the border to "stop the caravan".

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2018-11-03 12:26am

I know exactly what you said. I disagree. We cannot just "ignore" fascism, because then it becomes normalized, and by our silence we become complicit in it. Perhaps you, like many on the Left, believe that you are helping by urging people to be calm and not call out Trump so strongly. You are wrong. Being conciliatory to fascists has gotten us nowhere. Fascists do not compromise, and any attempt to compromise with them will quickly become total capitulation, because they will accept nothing else. Trump will not stop pinning every violent act in America on Democrats just because we are cowed into muzzling ourselves, but criticizing our own side for not being nice enough to the Nazis will embolden them and seem to validate their victim-blaming, and reward them for their violence and their lies.

I do find your defence of excessive force against civilians repulsive, in any case.
"Well, Grant, we've had the devil's own day, haven't we?"

"Yes. Lick 'em tomorrow though."

-Generals William T. Sherman and Ulysses S Grant, the Battle of Shiloh.


"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"-Terry Pratchett's DEATH.


I am a dual citizen of the United States and Canada.


Fuck Civility.

Ralin
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2414
Joined: 2008-08-28 04:23am

Re: Der Fuhrer deploys 800 soldiers to the border to "stop the caravan".

Post by Ralin » 2018-11-03 12:42am

Galvatron wrote:
2018-11-02 10:37pm
I'm not opposed to buying a revolver and/or a shotgun on general principle, but I can't help but wonder just how effective I would be against the military (or even just the typical right-wing gun enthusiast) if Trump goes full tyrant on us.
A lot of ways, including intimidation and discouraging violence in the first place. There's a whole range of shit you can get away with before you're at the point where they're calling drone bombers in to nuke you from orbit. Just look at those Bundy hicks. Also right-wing gun enthusiasts tend to posture a lot and advertise that they're packing.

That said, most people seriously considering forming left-wing militias or something similar would be better off learning emergency medicine, making friends with smugglers and other criminals, stockpiling medicines, setting up safe houses, making arrangements with their Hispanic or Muslim-looking neighbors to take care of their kids if they can't, etc than getting a gun.

Not that I'm condemning violence as an option, especially if no one who matters will get hurt. But for most people there are more productive things to do, and realistically even the ones who do have reason and opportunity to use violence are only going to be doing it a very small part of the time.

User avatar
aerius
Charismatic Cult Leader
Posts: 14279
Joined: 2002-08-18 07:27pm
Location: YHM

Re: Der Fuhrer deploys 800 soldiers to the border to "stop the caravan".

Post by aerius » 2018-11-03 12:56am

Lord Insanity wrote:
2018-11-03 12:06am
Wow did you ever completely misinterpret what I wrote. Democrats need to just ignore Trumps stupidity act like adults. Instead they keep trying to argue with an moron and keep getting defeated with experience.

Trump says throwing rocks should be treated as a lethal threat. What liberals should have said was: "Trump is an idiot if he thinks refugees intend to attack the very people they seek asylum from." Instead they go: "Trump wants to kill brown people, all conservatives are racist murders, derp!" They took what should have been an easy propaganda win and turned it into a loss because they just can't accept that self-defense is a right.
Bingo. Almost every time Trump says some outrageous dumb shit, liberals spaz the fuck out and react like a bunch of morons, which then gives Trump an easy point & laugh at the snowflakes soundbite for his supporters. It's like when the fuck will you learn to play the game and stop punching yourself in the balls?

Liberals need to understand the concept of reframing. Ok, so Trump has threatened to have troops gun down a bunch of rock throwing illegals. If you scream "he's a racist murderer who wants to kill brown migrants!", you've lost, no matter how true it is. You need to reframe it. Something like "poor refugees escaping oppression who want freedom and a better future in America, and Trump wants to deny them freedom, why do you hate freedom?"
Image
aerius: I'll vote for you if you sleep with me. :)
Lusankya: Deal!
Say, do you want it to be a threesome with your wife? Or a foursome with your wife and sister-in-law? I'm up for either. :P

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15674
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Der Fuhrer deploys 800 soldiers to the border to "stop the caravan".

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2018-11-03 01:03am

Ralin wrote:
2018-11-03 12:42am
Galvatron wrote:
2018-11-02 10:37pm
I'm not opposed to buying a revolver and/or a shotgun on general principle, but I can't help but wonder just how effective I would be against the military (or even just the typical right-wing gun enthusiast) if Trump goes full tyrant on us.
A lot of ways, including intimidation and discouraging violence in the first place. There's a whole range of shit you can get away with before you're at the point where they're calling drone bombers in to nuke you from orbit. Just look at those Bundy hicks. Also right-wing gun enthusiasts tend to posture a lot and advertise that they're packing.

That said, most people seriously considering forming left-wing militias or something similar would be better off learning emergency medicine, making friends with smugglers and other criminals, stockpiling medicines, setting up safe houses, making arrangements with their Hispanic or Muslim-looking neighbors to take care of their kids if they can't, etc than getting a gun.

Not that I'm condemning violence as an option, especially if no one who matters will get hurt. But for most people there are more productive things to do, and realistically even the ones who do have reason and opportunity to use violence are only going to be doing it a very small part of the time.
First, let me be very clear again that I am not urging that anyone initiate or provoke violence, or engage in violence for the purposes of retaliation, or intimidation, or advancing a political agenda. That's called terrorism, and I will never condone it. There is ONE legitimate use of violence, and that is as a means of defending oneself or others from a lethal threat when the alternatives have been exhausted. Sometimes that may mean defending oneself against an attacker. Sometimes, if there is a systematic effort by those in power to destroy their opponents by force of arms, it may require waging war to remove them from power in order to permanently end the threat. But the reason must always be founded in defensive necessity. I also believe that it is vital not to do anything that might lead to being seen as the aggressors, if we are to have the support of the country as a whole. I advocate preparation, not giving Trump the excuse he needs to declare martial law. But at the same time, circumstances have compelled me to concede the merits in being prepared in advance to respond to a crisis.

I also will never justify violence against someone on the basis that "no one who matters will get hurt." Both because it is a bad habit to get into to start thinking of human beings, even awful ones, as things that don't matter, and because it is, in a twisted way, incredibly naive. Innocents in conflicts always get hurt first, and more often than those in power. Make no mistake- civil unrest would lead to a lot of innocent people getting hurt before the guilty were held to account.

That said, I absolutely agree with you that there are other ways to assist besides arming oneself. All of your suggestions are valid, all of them are necessary steps that we would have to take to form an effective resistance to a hypothetical Trumpian dictatorship anyway, and all of them are worth doing regardless because they are the decent thing to do, and will make you better prepared to assist others in any crisis, whether its civil unrest or a natural disaster.
"Well, Grant, we've had the devil's own day, haven't we?"

"Yes. Lick 'em tomorrow though."

-Generals William T. Sherman and Ulysses S Grant, the Battle of Shiloh.


"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"-Terry Pratchett's DEATH.


I am a dual citizen of the United States and Canada.


Fuck Civility.

User avatar
Knife
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15440
Joined: 2002-08-30 02:40pm
Location: Behind the Zion Curtain
Contact:

Re: Der Fuhrer deploys 800 soldiers to the border to "stop the caravan".

Post by Knife » 2018-11-03 01:06pm

Lord Insanity wrote:
Right because no one has ever been convicted of murder for throwing rocks, oh wait... If someone is stupid enough to commit felony assault with a deadly weapon against law enforcement and/or military they deserve to be taken down. This right here is a perfect example of how Democrats lose a large portion of the population that otherwise mostly agrees with them on most other issues.
Not a law enforcement issue, it's a ROE issue and the military (while it has it's problems) is more professional about it than most cops. There is a clear escalation of force in ROE's.

Wow did you ever completely misinterpret what I wrote. Democrats need to just ignore Trumps stupidity act like adults. Instead they keep trying to argue with an moron and keep getting defeated with experience.
No. His stupidity needs to be paraded and shown for the stupidity it is.
Trump says throwing rocks should be treated as a lethal threat. What liberals should have said was: "Trump is an idiot if he thinks refugees intend to attack the very people they seek asylum from." Instead they go: "Trump wants to kill brown people, all conservatives are racist murders, derp!" They took what should have been an easy propaganda win and turned it into a loss because they just can't accept that self-defense is a right.
No, the message being given is Trump is ok with using military force against refugees.
They say, "the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots." I suppose it never occurred to them that they are the tyrants, not the patriots. Those weapons are not being used to fight some kind of tyranny; they are bringing them to an event where people are getting together to talk. -Mike Wong

But as far as board culture in general, I do think that young male overaggression is a contributing factor to the general atmosphere of hostility. It's not SOS and the Mess throwing hand grenades all over the forum- Red

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15674
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Der Fuhrer deploys 800 soldiers to the border to "stop the caravan".

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2018-11-03 04:03pm

Right on all three points.
"Well, Grant, we've had the devil's own day, haven't we?"

"Yes. Lick 'em tomorrow though."

-Generals William T. Sherman and Ulysses S Grant, the Battle of Shiloh.


"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"-Terry Pratchett's DEATH.


I am a dual citizen of the United States and Canada.


Fuck Civility.

User avatar
Solauren
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7797
Joined: 2003-05-11 09:41pm

Re: Der Fuhrer deploys 800 soldiers to the border to "stop the caravan".

Post by Solauren » 2018-11-03 04:11pm

Now, something to consider....

Mexico has left the refugees in to it's country (they didn't try to stop them)
Doesn't that put them under Mexican legal authority?

And, if a member of the US armed forces fires on them, while the refugee is still legally in Mexican territory, is that an act of war on the part of the US?
\

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15674
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Der Fuhrer deploys 800 soldiers to the border to "stop the caravan".

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2018-11-03 04:14pm

Maybe, but the Trumpers would just say that if the caravan is under Mexican authority, that proves that this is an invasion from Mexico, that the refugees are enemy combatants, and that Trump needs to send troops to shoot them and/or declare war on Mexico to "defend America".
"Well, Grant, we've had the devil's own day, haven't we?"

"Yes. Lick 'em tomorrow though."

-Generals William T. Sherman and Ulysses S Grant, the Battle of Shiloh.


"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"-Terry Pratchett's DEATH.


I am a dual citizen of the United States and Canada.


Fuck Civility.

User avatar
Elheru Aran
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 12475
Joined: 2004-03-04 01:15am
Location: Georgia

Re: Der Fuhrer deploys 800 soldiers to the border to "stop the caravan".

Post by Elheru Aran » 2018-11-03 04:21pm

Solauren wrote:
2018-11-03 04:11pm
Now, something to consider....

Mexico has left the refugees in to it's country (they didn't try to stop them)
Doesn't that put them under Mexican legal authority?

And, if a member of the US armed forces fires on them, while the refugee is still legally in Mexican territory, is that an act of war on the part of the US?
Yes and no. Ish. I am no expert in international law, this is my off the cuff understanding of the situation:

The Mexicans can take the tack that the refugees are illegally in their country too, they are merely choosing to not enforce their immigration laws due to not having the manpower to handle that many people. Thus, they basically give notice to the refugees that they're on their own. And if US troops fire on the refugees, the Mexicans can take the position that 'they did that all on their own, all we did was stand aside because we couldn't do anything, as long as the US didn't cross the border'.

Now if Mexico does grant the refugee convoy asylum en masse, then they -are- responsible for the refugees under international law IIRC, and I think an attack by US troops on the refugees would constitute an act of war. But again, don't quote me on that.
It's a strange world. Let's keep it that way.

User avatar
Solauren
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7797
Joined: 2003-05-11 09:41pm

Re: Der Fuhrer deploys 800 soldiers to the border to "stop the caravan".

Post by Solauren » 2018-11-03 04:37pm

So really, it's get down to 'What's the status of the refugees, and does mexico give a damn?'
\

User avatar
Tribble
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2427
Joined: 2008-11-18 11:28am
Location: stardestroyer.net

Re: Der Fuhrer deploys 800 soldiers to the border to "stop the caravan".

Post by Tribble » 2018-11-03 04:39pm

Solauren wrote:
2018-11-03 04:37pm
So really, it's get down to 'What's the status of the refugees, and does mexico give a damn?'
My understanding is that Mexico offered asylum to the caravan, and some took it. The rest are the ones who are intent on going to the US.
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!" - The official Troll motto, as stated by Adam Savage

User avatar
Elheru Aran
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 12475
Joined: 2004-03-04 01:15am
Location: Georgia

Re: Der Fuhrer deploys 800 soldiers to the border to "stop the caravan".

Post by Elheru Aran » 2018-11-03 04:51pm

Tribble wrote:
2018-11-03 04:39pm
Solauren wrote:
2018-11-03 04:37pm
So really, it's get down to 'What's the status of the refugees, and does mexico give a damn?'
My understanding is that Mexico offered asylum to the caravan, and some took it. The rest are the ones who are intent on going to the US.
Yeah, in this case I don't see the Mexican government/military wanting to get more involved than necessary outside of protecting Mexican security/assets. They don't have the manpower to handle that many migrants, and they aren't going to want to get into a shooting fight with the US over a bunch of people not even from their own country, so it'll be largely just escorting them to the border and watching while the chips fall.

Now if US troops do cross the border, then there's likely to be some tense moments...
It's a strange world. Let's keep it that way.

User avatar
Solauren
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7797
Joined: 2003-05-11 09:41pm

Re: Der Fuhrer deploys 800 soldiers to the border to "stop the caravan".

Post by Solauren » 2018-11-04 11:22am

Now the sneaky asshole conspiracy minded part of me is wondering if that is what Trump is hoping for....

Renegotiate NAFTA, so he looks diplomatic...
"Oh look, Caravan"...
Rattle sabers...
Confrontation with Mexico about it at the border (possibly forced)...
Use that to justify completely scrapping it, as the USA no longer has diplomatic relations with Mexico...
Further grounds to round up all illegals from south of the US Border as possible hostile combatants within US territory...
\

User avatar
Zaune
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 6254
Joined: 2010-06-21 11:05am
Location: In Transit
Contact:

Re: Der Fuhrer deploys 800 soldiers to the border to "stop the caravan".

Post by Zaune » 2018-11-04 01:03pm

Solauren wrote:
2018-11-04 11:22am
Now the sneaky asshole conspiracy minded part of me is wondering if that is what Trump is hoping for....

Renegotiate NAFTA, so he looks diplomatic...
"Oh look, Caravan"...
Rattle sabers...
Confrontation with Mexico about it at the border (possibly forced)...
Use that to justify completely scrapping it, as the USA no longer has diplomatic relations with Mexico...
Further grounds to round up all illegals from south of the US Border as possible hostile combatants within US territory...
I don't think Trump has the imagination or the attention-span to come up with that himself, but that certainly sounds like the kind of thing some of his prominent campaign contributors would try to prod him into if they thought they could get away with it.
There are hardly any excesses of the most crazed psychopath that cannot easily be duplicated by a normal kindly family man who just comes in to work every day and has a job to do.
-- (Terry Pratchett, Small Gods)


Replace "ginger" with "n*gger," and suddenly it become a lot less funny, doesn't it?
-- fgalkin


Like my writing? Tip me on Patreon

I Have A Blog

User avatar
EnterpriseSovereign
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2267
Joined: 2006-05-12 12:19pm
Location: High orbit

Re: Der Fuhrer deploys 800 soldiers to the border to "stop the caravan".

Post by EnterpriseSovereign » 2018-11-04 09:14pm

If as it appears the caravan is walking all the way through Mexico, how long will it take for the first of them to reach the US border? If they're taking the shortest route possible they'll be trying to cross into Texas.
It's no use debating a moron; they drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.

Just because you have the attention span of a fruit fly doesn't mean the rest of us are so encumbered.

"As you know science is not fact"- HuskerJay
"The Delta Fyler [sic] isn't even a shuttle craft" -HuskerJay69
"The Dominion War wasn't really all that bad"- Admiral Mercury

User avatar
Mr Bean
Lord of Irony
Posts: 22064
Joined: 2002-07-04 08:36am

Re: Der Fuhrer deploys 800 soldiers to the border to "stop the caravan".

Post by Mr Bean » 2018-11-04 09:41pm

EnterpriseSovereign wrote:
2018-11-04 09:14pm
If as it appears the caravan is walking all the way through Mexico, how long will it take for the first of them to reach the US border? If they're taking the shortest route possible they'll be trying to cross into Texas.
This was covered earlier in the thread and done today by Slate, caravan is averaging 20-30 miles per day since 5000+ people walking is a slow affair. They are 700+ miles away from the border at best speed they are 23 days away. If they take the longer route to Cali instead of Texas double that and add 10 days.

"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe
Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton

Post Reply