this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2024
326 points (97.7% liked)

politics

19170 readers
5938 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I didn't use to be able to decode narcissism at a glance, but basically he's mad that Mad Dog Mattis and his colleagues didn't bend the knee.

Honestly I have never been so accepting of the armed forces as when Mattis openly shunned Trump.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Not just Mattis. He tried to order the active duty military to go after protestors in D.C. They reminded him of their oath and the Posse Comitatus Act. At volume. In the Oval Office. Then they released a force wide memo reminding everyone their oath was to the Constitution, not the President.

He's never forgiven the military for that.

[–] theterrasque@infosec.pub 3 points 1 month ago

Like when under Arab spring the Egyptian politicians tried to get the military involved to stop the protests, and got back (paraphrased)

"Our primary job is to protect the Egyptian people from violence. You really don't want us involved in this"

[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yes. Despite all my deep resentments about our war-like ways, they earned a measure of respect for that.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The military has a lot of bad things. But they are loyal to their own moral code. For an organization mostly made of people who wandered in from the street desperate for money or glory, I think that's pretty neat.

[–] InverseParallax@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Most of the bad shit they've done, has been because idiots outside of uniform thought it was politically helpful to them.

We need to stop ordering them to do bad shit and actually try to think before we send them places.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That's probably like 60 percent of it. They've definitely got internal problems like their sexual assault, suicide, and burn out rates. Also it can be a pretty toxic environment if you aren't a lean runner body type or don't conform to their culture. There's also a gang problem on some bases. So yeah, they have bad things going on even without politicians giving them screwed up orders.

[–] InverseParallax@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Fair, it's basically somewhere between school and prison so those kind of environments breed that behavior, hard to keep that many young men together doing physical effort without the hormones getting unpleasant.

Still, other countries often handle it better so it's clearly possible, we also should raise our recruitment standards but the war on terror put paid to that.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

We actually tried to raise our standards. Or rather, we stopped scraping the barrel under Obama. Biden then tried to digitalize the medical in processing. That had the effect of not allowing people to hide their previous medical adventures anymore. That's why recruiting fell off a cliff for a couple years and all those scare mongering headlines got printed. Thankfully most of the issues were stuff they wanted to waiver in anyway, like childhood asthma that's no longer bothering the recruit. The problem was people had to wait months for those waivers and by then they had already moved on. So now the waivers are fast and we're filling the ranks again, with a digital system preventing real medical issues from making it through.

But yeah, they stopped the "anything breathing" policy around 2010.

[–] InverseParallax@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

I knew it got better after ’THE SURGE!!!', but thought the recovering economy didn't help as there were other jobs.