376
this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2025
376 points (99.5% liked)
politics
26268 readers
4601 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If you're in military do not say you are not on their side. Let it be a surprise
Absolutely this.
As much as I admire these 2 guardsmen for speaking out, they're fucking idiots for doing so.
All they will accomplish is to be booted out of the guard.
Partisans don't speak up. They act, quietly.
Someone still needs to say it publicly. You could have half the people in the deployment feeling that what they're doing is wrong, but it's not really an environment that encourages open discussion, let alone questioning orders. The person you speak to in confidence may share your feeling. Or they could be a closet murder hobo excited at the chance to hunt people for real. Is it worth finding out when you have bills to pay? A family to feed (and protect from harassment)?
Public dissent lets people know that they're not alone. And hopefully outs the murder hobos when they go into an impotent rage.
Every act of resistance is important.
I don't disagree. But the people speaking publicly and trying to change things should be the commanding officers.
A general refusing to deploy troops, or even better, actively siding with local citizens, would have a far greater and significant impact than what these two have done.
General staff resigning achieves nothing. They are the ones who should be resisting the attack against the American people.
"I was only following orders" is not a valid legal defence
if the people at the bottom are brave enough to speak out, it puts alot of pressure on the people at the top to be brave as well.
I’m not so sure about that. They’re literally only saying that they won’t follow illegal orders. Speaking out about not following illegal orders is probably the only way they can show dissent without being retaliated against. “What, you’re going to punish me for saying i wouldn’t do something illegal? The you’re admitting that you made an illegal order”
The whole point of soldiers and basic training is to mentally break people so they do anything they are told.
Tell me you’ve never been to basic without saying it.
You aren’t taught to follow any order. You’re taught to follow lawful orders. There is a big difference.
So killing students at Kent State was lawful, and bayonetting others at UMN?
Whew..good thing they changed that law.
There was no order to fire in that incident. The guardsmen opened fire because they were"scared for their lives". That narrative has been questioned because it isn't plausible but no one ever gave an order to shoot.
Edit: I didn't see you mentioned UNM bayonetting too but after looking at that one it seems like that also didn't have an order to bayonet people. If you approach a soldier with a bayonet out who is there for riot control you might get stabbed. It's not right but it's a fact. That's just the self defense mentality of soldiers.
It's the main reason you shouldn't use soldiers in policing actions because generally we are trained to kill, not to talk nicely to people. But it's also why you train soldiers to only follow legal orders.
Bringing the discussion out into the open though could encourage others to do the same.
You'll need both.
Yeah, it’s the same reason dog whistles are so popular with Nazis. In order for a fringe group to grow and gain new members, the people inclined to follow it need to feel like there is tacit support.
Keep some as a uno reverse card and some to drum up support I like how you think
And check out that CIA field sabotage manual that's all over the Internet
Which one specifically? Please and thanks
Here's one https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/26184