Author Topic: ‘I Think Things Are Going to Be Bad, Really Bad’: The US Military Debates Possible Deployment on US  (Read 881 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline libertybele

  • Cat Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 64,998
  • Gender: Female
‘I Think Things Are Going to Be Bad, Really Bad’: The US Military Debates Possible Deployment on US Soil Under Trump


The last time an American president deployed the U.S. military domestically under the Insurrection Act — during the deadly Los Angeles riots in 1992 — Douglas Ollivant was there. Ollivant, then a young Army first lieutenant, says things went fairly smoothly because it was somebody else — the cops — doing the head-cracking to restore order, not his 7th Infantry Division. He and his troops didn’t have to detain or shoot at anyone.

“There was real sensitivity about keeping federal troops away from the front lines,” said Ollivant, who was ordered in by President George H.W. Bush as rioters in central-south LA set fire to buildings, assaulted police and bystanders, pelted cars with rocks and smashed store windows in the aftermath of the videotaped police beating of Rodney King, a Black motorist. “They tried to keep us in support roles, backing up the police.”

By the end of six days of rioting, 63 people were dead and 2,383 injured — though reportedly none at the hands of the military.

But some in the U.S. military fear next time could be different. According to nearly a dozen retired officers and current military lawyers, as well as scholars who teach at West Point and Annapolis, an intense if quiet debate is underway inside the U.S. military community about what orders it would be obliged to obey if President-elect Donald Trump decides to follow through on his previous warnings that he might deploy troops against what he deems domestic threats, including political enemies, dissenters and immigrants.

On Nov. 18, two weeks after the election, Trump confirmed he plans to declare a national emergency and use the military for the mass deportations of illegal immigrants.

One fear is that domestic deployment of active-duty troops could lead to bloodshed given that the regular military is mainly trained to shoot at and kill foreign enemies. The only way to prevent that is establishing clear “rules of engagement” for domestic deployments that outline how much force troops can use — especially considering constitutional restraints protecting U.S. citizens and residents — against what kinds of people in what kinds of situations. And establishing those new rules would require a lot more training, in the view of many in the military community.

“Everything I hear is that our training is in the shitter,” says retired Army Lt. Gen. Marvin Covault, who commanded the 7th Infantry Division in 1992 in what was called “Joint Task Force LA.” “I’m not sure we have the kind of discipline now, and at every leader level, that we had 32 years ago. That concerns me about the people you’re going to put on the ground.”...............

https://www.yahoo.com/news/inside-military-quiet-debate-over-200000589.html

Online Wingnut

  • The problem with everything is they try and make it better without realizing the old way is fine.
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21,308
  • Gender: Male
Yawn.  Hirsh.  A 68 y/o liberal who doesn't live in the real world.  Guys like this asshat talk shit but never really did anything in life. 
You don’t become cooler with age but you do care progressively less about being cool, which is the only true way to actually be cool.

Online mountaineer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 62,077
The abnormal is not the normal just because it is prevalent.
Roger Kimball, in a talk at Hillsdale College, 1/29/25

Offline AL

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 184
  • Gender: Male
If they do deploy it might be good for all of us to see what a DEI driven military is worth ?