this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2025
376 points (99.5% liked)

politics

26268 readers
4818 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. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Two Illinois National Guard members told CBS News they would refuse to obey federal orders to deploy in Chicago as part of President Trump's controversial immigration enforcement mission — a rare act of open defiance from within the military ranks.

"It's disheartening to be forced to go against your community members and your neighbors," said Staff Sgt. Demi Palecek, a Latina guardswoman and state legislative candidate from Illinois's 13th District. "It feels illegal. This is not what we signed up to do."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] akilou@sh.itjust.works 81 points 1 week ago (3 children)

That's exactly why they're sending guard from other states

[–] GlitchyDigiBun@lemmy.world 36 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Holy shit... This was Putin's suggestion wasn't it? Get Texans to shoot people in Chicago to kickstart the 2nd civil war...

[–] frunch@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago

Yikes. That's kinda what I've been fearing this would really turn into: a chance to "legally" weaponize the chuds against their perceived enemies after years and years of propaganda. I can't imagine the seething hatred they've managed to stoke in some of their most ardent supporters, and now they're just finding ways to put guns in their hands and ship em off to 'clean up the city/country/whatever the fuck' or some such self-aggrandizing bullshit

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 1 week ago

I don't know, I don't think we should be taking credit away from Stephen Miller and Russ Vought

[–] NeilBru@lemmy.world 28 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Kind of like Tiananmen Square.

Everyone (at least in the West) seems to know about tank man, but there's another story that's not as widely known and I never understood why. It shines a whole new light on this and explains why the Chinese government is so heavy handed when it comes to this subject. It was more than just another autocratic crackdown on protestors, which, while terrible, are par for the course.

A good chunk of military units sent in to squash the protestors refused to carry out their orders, refused to brutalize and kill their countrymen. Some actively joined in on the protests, then units sent in to put a stop it joined in as well. This terrified the Chinese leadership so they sent in the 27th army group, largely comprised of illiterate peasant farmers with no connection to Beijing or its people,  headed by a politically reliable officer. The 27th army group then proceeded to massacre everyone, not 'just' students and protestors, but their own comrades in arms, other PLA soldiers.

Read the British embassy report and tell me it doesn't completely change your perspective. The CCP wants everyone to think this was just another protest, no big deal. It wasn't, it was the time they almost lost control, and they know it. It's why they're so fearful.

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/UK_cable_on_Tiananmen_Square_Massacre

[–] agent_nycto@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

Dang it, a lot of our military is illiterate peasant farmers already...

[–] brewery@feddit.uk 16 points 1 week ago

The East India company did this exact thing. Most of their troops were local seppoys. When the local ones didn't want to harm their brothers and sisters, send in troops from further away + different tribes + different castes etc and they have no issues. See also: British army in northern Ireland, British army in Kenya, Chinese army in Tianamin Square, Soviet army in Hungary and plenty of other examples