89 former military leaders say the Constitution must be protected

"As former leaders in the Defense Department — civilian and military, Republican, Democrat and independent — we all took an oath upon assuming office “to support and defend the Constitution of the United States,” as did the president and all members of the military, a fact that Gen. Milley pointed out in a recent memorandum to members of the armed forces. We are alarmed at how the president is betraying this oath by threatening to order members of the U.S. military to violate the rights of their fellow Americans.

President Trump has given governors a stark choice: either end the protests that continue to demand equal justice under our laws, or expect that he will send active-duty military units into their states. While the Insurrection Act gives the president the legal authority to do so, this authority has been invoked only in the most extreme conditions when state or local authorities were overwhelmed and were unable to safeguard the rule of law. Historically, as Secretary Esper has pointed out, it has rightly been seen as a tool of last resort.

Beyond being unnecessary, using our military to quell protests across the country would also be unwise. This is not the mission our armed forces signed up for: They signed up to fight our nation’s enemies and to secure — not infringe upon — the rights and freedoms of their fellow Americans."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...-never-be-used-violate-constitutional-rights/

 

Trump hasn't deployed any federal troops anywhere in the U.S. The only place he has deployed national guard is Washington DC where there is no governor and where such a thing is the reponsibility of the president. Washington DC has no national guard so those troops come from other states provided by the governors of those states. I'll repeat for the umpteenth time, ignore what politicians say and judge what they do.

 

But he wants to, it's why the military is freaking out.

 

As they said, they have an obligation to protect this country and the President's proposed action is legal under the insurrection act...They just don't want to, what they don't realize is that this letter looks bad on them. This means that they will only act, when THEY not the commander feels its okay to act.

Basically, they're babies that want to be babied. They don't want it now, but if it gets worse then they'll want it. This is the exact same as the coronavirus. At first they wanted it, but then when Trump stepped up, they're like "nah", and now they want it both ways again.

 

We are nowhere near the level of chaos required to invoke the Insurrection Act.

The reason the military doesn't want make America a "battlespace" is because that would violate their oath, and could result in their being brought up on charges under the UCMJ...

But I did like the way your projected your emotions onto battle hardened veterans, that was precious.

 

lol What Constitution? The Red Chinese one their bosses adore and finance, or the Constitution the military **** on in 1861 and destroyed because Lincoln paid them to? They 'support' whoever signs their paychecks, same as police do.

 

I didn't project anything onto anything(Modern day Liberals really, REALLY need to go back and pick up their vocabulary). A projection would be saying something akin to: "They should feel this way because". Interpreting their statements for what they are, is not a projection.

My feeling is quite the opposite of theirs, and therefore projection is not possible. I believe that all force, including military if need be must be used to quell down the unrest in the country. And that a refusal to do so, is a betrayal of their oaths to our country.

 

Protest, and the vast majority of what's going on is protest, is a Constitutionally protected right.

The reason there are so many military guys objecting is because they understand what is at stake, and what the law requires.

You clearly do not.

 

Widespread looting, arson, violence and destruction dont rise to that level? Can you give me an example of what would?

 

Do we know the number of cities where rioting has gone on? I'm sure it's quite a number.

 

What no one takes notice of is that Anti-Americans are the only ones demanding things change.

If no one cares enough to rise up to PROTECT America's small business and Constitutional interests, then surely the squeaky wheel will get all the oil.

Let me say this one time.......

"ALL THAT IS REQUIRED FOR EVIL MEN TO PREVAIL IS FOR GOOD MEN TO DO NOTHING"

THE END

 

Constitution > Trump's insane interpretation of the insurrection act. Sorry. He's a baby that wants to be babied.

 

It's important to note the distinction between what you have said that the truth of the matter in regards to modifying behavior under threat, he isn't addressing the protests, he is addressing the rioting. Yuge difference.

Words mean things.

 

Except of course that his threat is about quelling the RIOTS...not the protests. Unless you consider them to be the same? They're not. Protesting involves speech and occasionally civil disobedience acts. They do not include burning down buildings, stealing from stores and killing or physically attacking others.

Leave it to WAPO and other leftist media to try and equate riots with protests when they think it will benefit them politically.

 

So if one is sane, treat them differently.

For Trump this is all about power. It is for his supporters, as well. They want to lump them together, violently, for power.

White rule.

Well, that's what his supporters think. Trump is all about Trump, he has no intention of sharing, if he wins.

 

Monday proved that wrong.

It didn't help that he went on to call peaceful protesters terrorists.

The reason the military is freaking out is because Trump wants to make his move, and he wants the military to start crushing those that would oppose him.

 

Here you are claiming that Trumps supporters want to lump them together while responding to a post from a Trump supporter that specifically separated them. Talk about a fail.

 

Nobody died and left the military to decide what is 'constitutional or not constitutional', for one, and for two, they've always done as they were told, whether that be under Jefferson enforcing the embargo, Hoover siccing Patton, Eisenhower, and MacArthur and troops on the Bonus army and others, or desegregating schoolhouses in Arkansas, etc. Trump isn't doing anything illegal, and they need to resign if they are going to disobey their Commander In Chief. They are lying if they said what the OP claims they said.

Arresting and shooting insurrectionists is a legal order from their CIC, and if they don't like it they can resign or face arrest and criminal charges.

 

I'm not finding the right to loot and burn in the Constitution.

Maybe you could point it out.

 

Only if it can be proven that the current rioters are being armed and financed by foreign powers. Otherwise the National Guard should be more than adequate to control domestic riots. America's military does not exist to act against her own citizens. No officer would give such an order nor follow such an order given to them.

 

Yet he has been opposed daily for three years and he's not crushed anyone. Of course you knew that already didn't you. He is not interested in stopping protests, he is adamant about stopping the riots. People are actually dying while you make excuses.

What are you, some kind of Democrat?

 

And if they're not?(George H.W. Bush invoked the act), then do we just watch the situation continue to escalate while we twiddle our thumbs?

 

If that's true then the Civil War was illegal and there are a few Amendments that have yet to pass legally and aren't enforceable and many laws and Court rulings on them no longer valid as well.

 

He may want to, he may not. He is trying to motivate the governors to clean up the riots.

 

As someone who usually supports Trump depending on the issue I'll come out in opposition to this.

The military should not be used for law enforcement except in a civil war situation. We are not there yet.

There is a very good reason the framers were opposed to standing armies and military policing - professional armies tend to target their own citizens when they get bored and wars dry up overseas.

Maybe we will get to the point where active service military is required. I'd like a civil war to be formally declared before we get there.