Pentagon officials express concern as Trump threatens to use military to 'dominate' protestors

[highplainsdem]

Source: CNN

As tear gas wafted through the air in Lafayette Park across from the White House, Trump announced from the Rose Garden that if state or city leaders refuse "to take the actions that are necessary to defend the life and property of their residents," he will invoke the Insurrection Act, an 1807 law that allows a president to deploy the US military to suppress civil disorder.

But some Pentagon officials are deeply wary, several defense officials tell CNN. They have tried to respond by making a strong case that the situation does not yet call for deploying active duty troops unless state governors make a clear argument that such forces are needed.

"There is an intense desire for local law enforcement to be in charge," a defense official said, alluding to the laws that forbid the military from performing law enforcement roles inside the United States.

There is also discomfort with the civil order mission among some National Guard troops -- more of whom are now mobilized inside the US than at any previous time in history.

-snip-

Read more: https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/01/politics/troops-deploying-washington-dc/index.html

[AlexSFCA]

1. "concern", they'll do what trump asks

[geralmar]

23. No they won't.

The officer's oath is to the Constitution, NOT the president. The military expression of "concern" is nothing to take lightly. It's the strongest public expression that can be used while still remaining nonpolitical. Susan Collins expressing"concern" is one thing. When it comes from the Pentagon it signals opposition to being used as an instrument of Trump's domestic political fantasies and should be taken seriously. if, as CIC Trump does try to invoke the military for domestic use, expect a Constitutional crisis-- not the Army automatically shooting Democrats and black folk in the streets.

I'm sick of the elitism in these threads. Instead of whining about the (largely working class) rightwingers in the military and police forces, why don't we morally pure enlist in the military or become police officers and change the cultures? Careers too beneath us? Don't want to get our hands dirty working with rednecks?

(Confession: I enlisted in the army (1971-74) before grad school. The ignorance about the military among DUers is appalling. I also worked with the local police department before retirement. I saw unfaked professionalism there, too.)

[mahina]

29. Good privilege check

Though of course there are many here who have experiences like yours, and many military, former military, many many retired military and wives of, adult children of, among us. I am one.

Pinboy3niner buddy, out in the great mystery, Miss you brother

[Thomas Hurt]

2. All kinds of people in the government are concerned and they do absolutely nothing.

[Tree-Hugger]

3. What kind of concern?

Is this Susan Collins level of concern?

[yankee87]

4. Susan Collins

You beat me to it. The trumpaneeze will do exactly what their cult leader says to do.

[SledDriver]

6. I was gonna ask the exact same question

[Polly Hennessey]

14. My feelings exactly. Just what we

need from our military - concern. If the military follows tRump, I am sure it will be the end of, “I thank you for your service.” Respect for the military will begin to blow away in the wind.

[EarthFirst]

5. What's next? A strongly worded letter with several dozen retired signatories?

JFC! This is far beyond concern. We need action against it.

[Ford_Prefect]

7. Some of them know about The Posse Comitatus Act, and some recall other times when force was proposed

Some are also wary of what happens to the military once they follow such a command from the president. How they get back to their previous role, and the respect they have worked very hard to earn from the US public?

This may sound academic to some of you but the officers I've met take this shit seriously. They are in it for a career, not for the status, the benefits, or the post-uniform opportunities in the arms market.

[Steelrolled]

8. CNN - the master of saying nothing

[AllyCat]

9. They'll comply.

[DENVERPOPS]

13. That is what the military commanders get

When they stand by idly and let lardass pardon a military member who was tried in a court and found guilty of murder, sentenced to prison. He was also accused of international war crimes, and crimes against humanity.........

I am sure the high ranking Pentagon officials will allow Trump and his Humpers to do whatever he wants, while they stand by and watch.
If they go, (the military follows Trump), we go..........

[Jedi Guy]

22. You do realize that the military had no power to stop that pardon, right?

If Trump had bothered to ask their opinions (which I sincerely doubt) they could have advised against it, but that's about it. They certainly couldn't have said, "No, you're not allowed to pardon him."

[DENVERPOPS]

24. I assume you are indeed correct.

If they couldn't stop the Pardon, They could have gathered together and objected loudly to the U.S. citizens. Maybe other things???

I can only hope, that if that Sailor leaves the United States and travels to Europe for instance, that some country might take him over to the Nederlands..

[Jedi Guy]

27. They couldn't really have done that, either.

There's a part of the UCMJ that prohibits service members from disparaging superior officers, up to and including the commander-in-chief. So if they'd loudly and publicly denounced the pardon they might have ended up getting canned.

And while some might say they should have done so and allowed themselves to get canned, I disagree. Had they done so, 45 would have replaced them with sycophantic true believers.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

30. Article 88 covers officials; article 89 covers superior officers.

Depending on how it's done and what might be said, a article 133 violation may be included. (Conduct unbecoming...)

Re: "And while some might say they should have done so and allowed themselves to get canned, I disagree. Had they done so, 45 would have replaced them with sycophantic true believers."

On the mark. I couldn't have said it better.

[Dios Mio]

10. "Concern"???? You assholes.

[keithbvadu2]

11. Time for Trump to replace more Pentagon folks who place their loyalty to America above Trump.

Time for Trump to replace more Pentagon folks who place their loyalty to America above Trump.

[DENVERPOPS]

26. Exactly Kb

He has done that with everyone in the Fed Gov't for three years.

Reminds me of that poem by a German during WWll

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.

[LizBeth]

12. My Oregon Gov just out out she will be calling up National Guard and was sure to clarify their use.

I want to ensure that the public can safely raise their voices in this much-needed call for reform. In response to a request from Mayor Wheeler, I'm calling in 50 Oregon National Guard - Oregon Military Department members to provide a support function only.

They will not be on the front lines, making arrests, or doing crowd control. They will act as support personnel – care for the injured, processing arrests, directing traffic – much as they do when they are asked to respond to wildfires. I’m incredibly grateful for their service.

I do like our Gov

[Warpy]

15. I often wondered what it would take to get people angry enough

to break up pavement in order to throw it.

It's getting there.

If saner people don't get that maniac under some sort of control, it will happen. They allow him to wage open warfare against ctitizens using the military, no one can stop it.

[Steelrolled]

18. Aren't we already there?

But I have to say I don't really know what is driving the people who are busting in windows and lighting fires.

[Warpy]

19. That's because you're not a stupid jerk who loves the Bundy family

and thinks the government is overstepping its bounds by trying to ensure a level playing field for people who weren't born white males and you're really pissed off that we're not all forced to be Christians since that's the only true religion and you're a no hoper with a shitty education that's mostly your fault and you know your job prospects are going to stay at the bottom of the heap and you freak out whenever you see a POC family whose kids are dressed better than yours are.

That's why.

I understand why they're angry, I really do, I just want to see the folks feeding their rage and organizing them into terrorist groups shut down. Now.

[Gore1FL]

16. If we are going to start using the military for domestic affairs, maybe we can retry reconstruction.

This time we'll get it right.

[LTG]

17. There are precedents to such an order.

The Insurrection Act of 1807 has been used a number of times since the ‘50s. Often in support of desegregation.

It permits the President to order in federal troops to put down civil disturbance and insurrection not being controlled by local authorities. It requires no local permission and has been against the expressed desires of the governors. It has also been believed to overcome issues with Posse Comitatus.

The first step is often to federalize the National Guard, placing them under federal control and out of any control by the governors. In the past it has removed the very real possibility of conflict between state and federal troops. Then armed federal troops are sent in to restore order.

This was done by Eisenhower and Kennedy to enforce local compliance of federal court orders regarding desegregation and quell demonstrations, threats, intimidation and credible threats of violence. I believe it was used also by Johnson in 1968 to put down rioting, possibly in Chicago. (All IIRC)

Unfortunately use for good cause can sometimes be used for bad ones.

ETA: Sorry for not reading the article first. I see that much of the above is covered within it.

[Evolve Dammit]

20. "They" need to do better than that. This is illegal and will destroy US. Vlad must be elated.

[lark]

21. We cannot count on the military to protect us - they absolutely will not do that.

They follow orders from CIC, period. the. end. They are probably not happy about it, but they will do it anyway with maybe just a few backing off, maybe. However, they will risk their careers if they do that and not many are that brave and committed to doing the right thing. Military attracts follow orders kind of people, not make your own decisions types. SCOTUS will not protect us either, they are part of the plot to turn us into a fascist oligarchy.

Only thing we have is ourselves and the weight of history of who America is. We have to turn out massively in Nov. We have to far exceed expectations or we loae because repugs will hack, suppress and use violence to stop us from excercising our legal right (not a fuckig honor - a right) to vote. We have to walk through broken glass on our knees if necessary because if there's no early voting or widely available mail in voting, we can pretty much count on bad rw violence at the polls. If we persevere and everyone votes, we win.
We can end this nightmare, but it won't be easy.

[captain jack]

25. If a few bad apples in a protest equals military force then a few bad police means Fuck The Police.

Besides, most of those bad apples in the protests are police planted to create a situation(s) that can justify military force. Fucking textbook.

[mahina]

28. Noted.

Please resist. Thank you.

Dissent without resistance is consent
-Thoreau