Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Twitter)   The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is publicly laying the groundwork for a mutiny against the office of the "President". I cannot express how groundshaking this letter is in a Fark headline without bringing your mom into the discussion   (twitter.com) divider line
    More: Hero, shot  
•       •       •

6947 clicks; posted to Politics » on 04 Jun 2020 at 2:17 AM (21 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



333 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2020-06-04 12:08:02 PM  
Why do I suspect that the actual 2nd American Civil War is going to be a series of battles with the majority of the armed forces on one side and the nation's police, Barr's secret army, and civilian militia groups on the other?

When this comes to a head, it's going to be a bad day to be a cop, methinks.
 
2020-06-04 12:11:47 PM  

WilderKWight: Why do I suspect that the actual 2nd American Civil War is going to be a series of battles with the majority of the armed forces on one side and the nation's police, Barr's secret army, and civilian militia groups on the other?

When this comes to a head, it's going to be a bad day to be a cop, methinks.


Or ICE, CBP, and Prison Riot Patrol (Barr's secret reserves)

If we are lucky it will be Erik Prince too and he can be dealt with
 
2020-06-04 12:48:37 PM  
Farking Barr on the tube right now blaming, specifically Antifa, (and "other organizations") as instigating violence at the protests.  Only Antifa, what about the farking Boogaloo boys?  More defamation happening under this corrupt admin.


What's he going to do now that the generals are Antifa?
 
2020-06-04 12:50:55 PM  

Original: Original Tweet:

waltshaub: Of the three letters making news tonight, this one is the big deal. It is a big deal that he felt the need to issue it. It is a big deal that he issued it. https://t.co/ONHniXXLst


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-06-04 12:52:04 PM  

GreatGlavinsGhost: Original: Original Tweet:

waltshaub: Of the three letters making news tonight, this one is the big deal. It is a big deal that he felt the need to issue it. It is a big deal that he issued it. https://t.co/ONHniXXLst


[Fark user image image 425x279]


Oops forgot the link
We seem to have gotten to the point where a declaration of fidelity to the Constitution is an implicit repudiation of the President.
- Ned Snood (@NedSnood) June 4, 2020
 
2020-06-04 1:01:18 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: FightDirector: For anyone who does not recognize the seriousness of that letter, GEN Milley is laying the groundwork to do two things:

1) To protect his own job AND the job of anyone who Trump tries to forcibly relieve of duty.  All that letter officially says is to protect American values: that is also a direct instruction written in "command-ese" to disobey orders from any source - very definitely including POTUS - which run contrary to those values.  The way it is written, the only "reason" to relieve anyone of their position who agrees with that letter is that you plan to take actions contrary to those American values.  QED, if they are relieved of duty by Trump now, it is because he plans to take those contrary actions.

2) Equally as serious, if not more so, Milley is laying the legal and ethical groundwork for a potential mutiny.  Not a coup, necessarily (in fact almost certainly not), but definitely a mutiny against the presidential chain of command.  Particularly and especially with that handwritten addendum.  He is careful to call out and defend both the explicit chain of command and the moral authority from the state governors, and then says in multiple ways that their ultimate duty is to American values and the American people.  NOT orders from the president.  If this goes down the way it is looking, this letter will frame the action as a defense of American values and the American people, against a president who not only doesn't care about either one of those, but is actively working to the detriment of those things.

Finally, the fact that his name is attached to this and it's been released publicly is just gigantic.  Serving military officers don't do that.  They don't release overtly political statements like this, no matter what we might wish Mattis had done years ago.  There's literally hundreds of years of tradition (in an institution where tradition really matters, no matter what cynics might think) and officers have it hammered home over and over and over aga ...

You speak true.

I have to wonder how many JAG people he had working on this.  You know he didn't just write this off the cuff, it's too good. As you point out, this lays the groundwork for a UCMJ-compliant refusal to take orders.

Now let's see how many individual officers refuse.


I bet he's been working on it since at least October 16, 2019.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-06-04 1:06:00 PM  

foo monkey: ReaverZ: scottydoesntknow: Holy shiat. Has this EVER happened? Have military commanders ever felt the need to send a letter like this basically saying "do not listen to this goddamn moron we have for a president"?

MacArthur pretty much did.

He was relieved of his command and rightly so.  This time, I dunno.  Say what you want about Truman, but he wasn't raving lunatic.


MacArthur was in many ways a military Trump - an arrogant egotist who thought he deserved to be Kinged 'God'.

MacArthur, unlike Trump, actually had intelligence and competency.  But he still seemed to want to subvert civilian control of military power.
 
2020-06-04 1:06:39 PM  

TWX: For all the threads that postulate what would happen if Trump loses and refuses to acknowledge that he lost in November through Inaguration in January, this is all the proof that you need that Trump's Presidency would be over.  The military has just been told to adhere to their oath to the Constitution, to the people of the United States.


I just hope their understanding of the Constitution is to the *actual* Constitution and not some warped right-wing, Sovereign Citizen version.
 
2020-06-04 1:15:35 PM  
Trump is going to make the Joint Chiefs choose between a Baathist purge amongst their ranks or a coup de etat?
 
2020-06-04 1:47:44 PM  

ansius: [image.newsvoice.com image 640x380]

I bet Milley didn't like being ambushed into being an extra in trump's ridiculous photo op.

But yes, the way I'm reading this is that this is instructions to his officers to remember to refuse orders that are illegal, unconstitutional, and unethical.


Is it true that Milley changed into this uniform?

I'm not versed in military symbolism, but if it's true that he was wearing something else and decided to change into this, does that have any significance?

I know the queen often takes jabs at people by wearing jewelry with some snarky meaning behind them. Could Milley's uniform change be something similar?
 
2020-06-04 1:54:25 PM  

JohnnyApocalypse: TwowheelinTim: FightDirector: For anyone who does not recognize the seriousness of that letter, GEN Milley is laying the groundwork to do two things:

1) To protect his own job AND the job of anyone who Trump tries to forcibly relieve of duty.  All that letter officially says is to protect American values: that is also a direct instruction written in "command-ese" to disobey orders from any source - very definitely including POTUS - which run contrary to those values.  The way it is written, the only "reason" to relieve anyone of their position who agrees with that letter is that you plan to take actions contrary to those American values.  QED, if they are relieved of duty by Trump now, it is because he plans to take those contrary actions.

2) Equally as serious, if not more so, Milley is laying the legal and ethical groundwork for a potential mutiny.  Not a coup, necessarily (in fact almost certainly not), but definitely a mutiny against the presidential chain of command.  Particularly and especially with that handwritten addendum.  He is careful to call out and defend both the explicit chain of command and the moral authority from the state governors, and then says in multiple ways that their ultimate duty is to American values and the American people.  NOT orders from the president.  If this goes down the way it is looking, this letter will frame the action as a defense of American values and the American people, against a president who not only doesn't care about either one of those, but is actively working to the detriment of those things.

Finally, the fact that his name is attached to this and it's been released publicly is just gigantic.  Serving military officers don't do that.  They don't release overtly political statements like this, no matter what we might wish Mattis had done years ago.  There's literally hundreds of years of tradition (in an institution where tradition really matters, no matter what cynics might think) and officers have it hammered home over and ov ...

I take it, though, that not all those officials were on the same page as Trump. They were there to lend authority to Trump's call to arms against the protest. Milley may have disagreed with Trump's invocation of the military, but as Trump layed it out in his speech, he was within his authority to make the declaration.

(paraphrase) "Governors will use all means including national guard to quell the riots. If I deem the governors unable to stop the violence, I will be forced to use the US military to do it." Because that is exactly what the Insurrection Act allows, the military has to go along with it.

So there they all are, and some people know what's about to go down next, mainly Ivanka and Barr. Barr starts scoping out the protester lines. This was a big thing that people noted. He was taking active interest in it. Then someone (probably Barr, directly or indirectly) ordered state police to push the protesters back before curfew. Those officials NOT in the know would hear the protesters being cleared, but they wouldn't necessarily understand the circumstances, nor who was reacting to whom.

Milley would thus accompany the Clown-in-Chief across the street, and then see the pictures taken with a bible. On the way, he would see the effects of the state police, but again, not necessarily know the full details of what just transpired.

But once he saw the photo op... if you look at the pictures of the officials standing by, there are A LOT of sour and dour faces. It doesn't take long for officials to put 2 and 2 together, and then news reports and video would confirm it later for them. Milley DID get roasted by pundits for making that walk, and most likely that burned in his belly. He was set up along with a number of others to imbue Trump with some sort of presidential authority that he had just abused, staining all those officials who wouldn't have agreed with the actions.

So you might want to hold your fire on Milley before calling him out. Sure, some of this might be to save face; but it's not written as an excuse, it's written as a directive.

Also, for those saying that Trump is surrounded by amoral nincompoops, that is about 90% correct, but you're forgetting about Barr, who has probably kept Trump from being convicted during impeachment, stalled out nearly every court proceeding against Trump, and helped remove many executive branch safeguards in the form of IGs and other career personnel who could rat out malfeasance. Barr might use the most demented of rationales for justifying whatever DOJ command he orders, but it's worked thus far, and he knows the margins of rules and laws that both Trump and his department continue to skirt.


You'd think anyone that has been around President Tweety that long knows better than to take his word on anything.
 
2020-06-04 2:19:24 PM  

quiotu: make me some tea: The Mattis op-ed in The Atlantic was a shot across Trump's bow.

The Milley letter to the heads of all military branch is a declaration of independence.

Wow. I'm at the same time floored, impressed, and terrified.

I'm not terribly surprised. This is the General that every time I saw him at a Trump presser or meeting, looked like he wanted to be anywhere else with every fiber of his being.

His sworn duty to the country kept him there, but I have a feeling this guy hopes he's one of the people that gets to forcibly remove the pasty old coward from the Oval Office when it happens.


Back when Trump did a press conference on the White House steps in early January ( I think it was about the assassination of the Iranian general in Iraq), Milley was the guy in uniform standing behind Trump, his eyes kept looking left and right as if he's thinking, "Somebody get me out of here!"

He's also the guy in uniform immediately to Trump's right in this iconic photo:
pbs.twimg.comView Full Size
 
2020-06-04 2:26:33 PM  

Target Builder: I'm wondering what sort of pressure the WH has being trying to put on the military behind closed doors that generated this.

The stuff in the media is bad. Extremely bad. But I'm not sure it alone is enough to prompt the public release of a letter like that.

There must be an absolute shiat show going on between the WH and Pentagon.


Whatever it was knowing President Tweety it was illegal and racist, like he ordered the military to plant strange fruit using protesters as seeds.
 
2020-06-04 2:29:36 PM  

Cornelis de Gyselaer: TelemonianAjax: FightDirector: So...quick question.  Can anyone track down a digitized copy of this?  I think I'd like to read it:

https://catalog.princeton.edu/catalog/​dsp01cc08hh28h

[Fark user image image 843x470]

For the record, I'm coming up with nothing on TPB. I would also like a digitized copy if someone can find one.

lemme look

/Librarian


Librarians are wonderful people. I wish I had gone to get my MLS instead of MA in political studies in a world before Facebook. Suddenly, everything I was taught no longer mattered because money is speech and algorithms serve ads. It's like getting a degree in chemistry just before the atomic bomb revolutionized the field - happened to my grandpa.

Anyway, thank you for your service in the war against ignorance.
 
2020-06-04 2:51:05 PM  

mysha: quiotu: make me some tea: The Mattis op-ed in The Atlantic was a shot across Trump's bow.

The Milley letter to the heads of all military branch is a declaration of independence.

Wow. I'm at the same time floored, impressed, and terrified.

I'm not terribly surprised. This is the General that every time I saw him at a Trump presser or meeting, looked like he wanted to be anywhere else with every fiber of his being.

His sworn duty to the country kept him there, but I have a feeling this guy hopes he's one of the people that gets to forcibly remove the pasty old coward from the Oval Office when it happens.

Back when Trump did a press conference on the White House steps in early January ( I think it was about the assassination of the Iranian general in Iraq), Milley was the guy in uniform standing behind Trump, his eyes kept looking left and right as if he's thinking, "Somebody get me out of here!"

He's also the guy in uniform immediately to Trump's right in this iconic photo:
[pbs.twimg.com image 680x383]


Interesting. I'd forgotten he was in that photo. Wow.
 
2020-06-04 3:04:57 PM  

foo monkey: ReaverZ: scottydoesntknow: Holy shiat. Has this EVER happened? Have military commanders ever felt the need to send a letter like this basically saying "do not listen to this goddamn moron we have for a president"?

MacArthur pretty much did.

He was relieved of his command and rightly so.  This time, I dunno.  Say what you want about Truman, but he wasn't raving lunatic.


Truman had also been a Captain in combat  back when units elected their officers. He knew the score. In his biography he said "I didn't fire MacArthur for being a stupid son of a biatch, which he was. If that were a crime half the generals and congressmen would be in jail. I fired him for disobeying his commanding officer."

If Truman or Eisenhower or Kennedy or Teddy Roosevelt were alive today and could see what the occupant of !600 Pennsylvania Avenue was doing....
 
2020-06-04 3:35:51 PM  

anuran: foo monkey: ReaverZ: scottydoesntknow: Holy shiat. Has this EVER happened? Have military commanders ever felt the need to send a letter like this basically saying "do not listen to this goddamn moron we have for a president"?

MacArthur pretty much did.

He was relieved of his command and rightly so.  This time, I dunno.  Say what you want about Truman, but he wasn't raving lunatic.

Truman had also been a Captain in combat  back when units elected their officers. He knew the score. In his biography he said "I didn't fire MacArthur for being a stupid son of a biatch, which he was. If that were a crime half the generals and congressmen would be in jail. I fired him for disobeying his commanding officer."

If Truman or Eisenhower or Kennedy or Teddy Roosevelt were alive today and could see what the occupant of !600 Pennsylvania Avenue was doing....


At the very least we would be learning some new language
 
2020-06-04 3:42:39 PM  

DO NOT WANT Poster Girl: Rent Party: No it isn't a predicate for mutiny.  It is an effort to maintain good order and discipline in the ranks when you have a POTUS that is clearly out of control and unstable by reminding any troops that might be out there where the loyalty of their oath lies.

It is still a big damn deal, but lets not get all excited about a military coup or some stupid shiat like that.  It ain't happening, nor should it.

While you're making things up that people are getting excited about a "military coup"  how about imagining me a steak or something...I'm hungry and lazy at the same time.


The word "Mutiny" is used in the farkin' headline, Sugartits.

Tell me what you imagine that word means.
 
2020-06-04 3:47:13 PM  

TedCruz'sCrazyDad: chawco: yukichigai: Rent Party: No it isn't a predicate for mutiny.  It is an effort to maintain good order and discipline in the ranks when you have a POTUS that is clearly out of control and unstable by reminding any troops that might be out there where the loyalty of their oath lies.

It is still a big damn deal, but lets not get all excited about a military coup or some stupid shiat like that.  It ain't happening, nor should it.

Clarification: the military isn't going to stage a coup, but they've now made it clear they're going to uphold the law of the land above all else. that could be where it ends, but if anyone in the administration decides to demand the military perform some blatantly illegal action and, for example, stakes their legitimacy on their orders being followed, the military is clearly not going to take the action that upholds their legitimacy.

In other words, not a coup per se, but they're given a choice by Trump to either follow his orders or remove him from the White House there is now zero ambiguity as to which of those options they'll go for.

they don't have the legal authority to remove him from the White House. They can decline to follow his orders if they think they've is illegal, but that's all they can do.

Anything else is in fact a military coup. Only Congress can remove the president.

Declining to follow Trumps orders can be the same as a coup depending on who they do decide to follow.


Declining Trump's orders will get you relieved of your command, and replaced with someone who will not decline Trump's orders.  It will also get you a court martial where the presumption is the order was legal.

The only legal option for officers is to resign.  The "Illegal order" card isn't a get out of jail free thing.  It is a "there are serious farking consequences for failure to obey" thing.
 
2020-06-04 4:29:01 PM  

Rent Party: The word "Mutiny" is used in the farkin' headline, Sugartits.

Tell me what you imagine that word means.


Here, since I wrote it, I'll tell you.

A "mutiny" is different than a "coup".  A mutiny is a widespread failure to follow the orders of a superior in the chain of command.  A coup is the forcible removal of an existing power structure.  A mutiny need not include a coup, but a coup will almost always involve a mutiny.  Hell, you can even google the difference between "mutiny" and "coup", if you were so inclined.

If you'd read the Boobies in the thread, it specifically differentiated between the two.  Of the short English words at my disposal when writing the headline, "mutiny" was the closest word to "a UCMJ-compliant method of disobeying a direct order", because "a UCMJ-compliant method of disobeying a direct order" didn't fit in the headline field.  Moreover, everyone else who read the thread seems to have understood that.  Except you.

And regardless of the strict definitions of words, if there ARE failures to obey orders, it is a 100% lock that the Trump Administration will CALL it a "mutiny".  Unless the military is actively trying to remove him, in which case he'll call it a "coup".

It is a "there are serious farking consequences for failure to obey" thing.

Yes.  There are.  And leadership is indicating that they're willing to take those consequences, rather than follow expected potential orders.
 
2020-06-04 5:05:52 PM  

erik-k: TwowheelinTim: ansius: [image.newsvoice.com image 640x380]

I bet Milley didn't like being ambushed into being an extra in trump's ridiculous photo op.

But yes, the way I'm reading this is that this is instructions to his officers to remember to refuse orders that are illegal, unconstitutional, and unethical.

So yeah, a sh*tbag hypocrite: do as I say, not as I do. Again, f*ck this asshole with a rusty horseshoe.

Do you think that an active duty military officer gets a choice when the CinC says "follow me for a walk?"

Officers of the United States military are required to refuse unlawful orders, but the moral degradation of being a prop for one of the Traitor's PR stunts does not rise to the level of an unlawful order.


Does it not occur to you that what donnie and his team did was unlawful?
 
2020-06-04 5:23:10 PM  

JohnnyApocalypse: TwowheelinTim: FightDirector: For anyone who does not recognize the seriousness of that letter, GEN Milley is laying the groundwork to do two things:

1) To protect his own job AND the job of anyone who Trump tries to forcibly relieve of duty.  All that letter officially says is to protect American values: that is also a direct instruction written in "command-ese" to disobey orders from any source - very definitely including POTUS - which run contrary to those values.  The way it is written, the only "reason" to relieve anyone of their position who agrees with that letter is that you plan to take actions contrary to those American values.  QED, if they are relieved of duty by Trump now, it is because he plans to take those contrary actions.

2) Equally as serious, if not more so, Milley is laying the legal and ethical groundwork for a potential mutiny.  Not a coup, necessarily (in fact almost certainly not), but definitely a mutiny against the presidential chain of command.  Particularly and especially with that handwritten addendum.  He is careful to call out and defend both the explicit chain of command and the moral authority from the state governors, and then says in multiple ways that their ultimate duty is to American values and the American people.  NOT orders from the president.  If this goes down the way it is looking, this letter will frame the action as a defense of American values and the American people, against a president who not only doesn't care about either one of those, but is actively working to the detriment of those things.

Finally, the fact that his name is attached to this and it's been released publicly is just gigantic.  Serving military officers don't do that.  They don't release overtly political statements like this, no matter what we might wish Mattis had done years ago.  There's literally hundreds of years of tradition (in an institution where tradition really matters, no matter what cynics might think) and officers have it hammered h ...


Thanks for that. I needed a rational rebuttal to my irrational rant. This sh*t gets my dander up.
 
2020-06-04 5:48:32 PM  

Nicholas D. Wolfwood: foo monkey: ReaverZ: scottydoesntknow: Holy shiat. Has this EVER happened? Have military commanders ever felt the need to send a letter like this basically saying "do not listen to this goddamn moron we have for a president"?

MacArthur pretty much did.

He was relieved of his command and rightly so.  This time, I dunno.  Say what you want about Truman, but he wasn't raving lunatic.

MacArthur was in many ways a military Trump - an arrogant egotist who thought he deserved to be Kinged 'God'.

MacArthur, unlike Trump, actually had intelligence and competency.  But he still seemed to want to subvert civilian control of military power.


This is actually a pretty great analogy. If you don't mind, I'll even expand. Like trump, Dugout Doug, as he was known, was so enamored with himself that his staff was composed of toadies and sycophants. When Intelligence came pouring in about the Chinese being in Northern Korea in late 1950 his staff ignored it, and never even bothered to send it to MacArthur, who had no phone in his office. They derided the Chinese as "laundrymen" and thought they would never stand a chance. Some half million Chinese where in country at this point and nobody could convince Mac and his HQ of the fact. Even after the Chinese started attacks, and kicking American ass, MacArthur did nothing and his subordinates acted upon the faulty lies that they had previously swallowed.

The irony is not done. The one thing that saved American forces on the east coast of the peninsula was, no shiat, the First Marine Division under the command of a guy named OP Smith, who I liken to Mattis in many ways. The Marines laid down firepower that got everybody else out.

Read "The Coldest Winter" by David Halberstram. He goes into detail about it.
 
2020-06-04 6:23:15 PM  

PunGent: Do you know the way to Mordor: Benevolent Misanthrope: FightDirector: For anyone who does not recognize the seriousness of that letter, GEN Milley is laying the groundwork to do two things:

I have to wonder how many JAG people he had working on this.

Perhaps as many as the number of JAGoffs working on Trump's Tinyman Square speech!

Hadn't heard that one; I shall be stealing it :)


You can credit Stephen Colbert with that witty comment about Trump's speech, not me!

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/stephe​n​-colbert-trump-tiny-man-square_n_5ed88​517c5b6dfbd777f5c77
 
2020-06-04 6:54:14 PM  

Kazan: Klyukva: / We also saw it when party-before-principles Democrats said people should rally behind Bloomberg if he won the primary.

I didn't see a single democrat saying that.


Then you weren't reading the FARK politics tab.
 
2020-06-04 7:11:04 PM  

TwowheelinTim: JohnnyApocalypse: TwowheelinTim: FightDirector: For anyone who does not recognize the seriousness of that letter, GEN Milley is laying the groundwork to do two things:

1) To protect his own job AND the job of anyone who Trump tries to forcibly relieve of duty.  All that letter officially says is to protect American values: that is also a direct instruction written in "command-ese" to disobey orders from any source - very definitely including POTUS - which run contrary to those values.  The way it is written, the only "reason" to relieve anyone of their position who agrees with that letter is that you plan to take actions contrary to those American values.  QED, if they are relieved of duty by Trump now, it is because he plans to take those contrary actions.

2) Equally as serious, if not more so, Milley is laying the legal and ethical groundwork for a potential mutiny.  Not a coup, necessarily (in fact almost certainly not), but definitely a mutiny against the presidential chain of command.  Particularly and especially with that handwritten addendum.  He is careful to call out and defend both the explicit chain of command and the moral authority from the state governors, and then says in multiple ways that their ultimate duty is to American values and the American people.  NOT orders from the president.  If this goes down the way it is looking, this letter will frame the action as a defense of American values and the American people, against a president who not only doesn't care about either one of those, but is actively working to the detriment of those things.

Finally, the fact that his name is attached to this and it's been released publicly is just gigantic.  Serving military officers don't do that.  They don't release overtly political statements like this, no matter what we might wish Mattis had done years ago.  There's literally hundreds of years of tradition (in an institution where tradition really matters, no matter what cynics might think) and officers have it hammered h ...

Thanks for that. I needed a rational rebuttal to my irrational rant. This sh*t gets my dander up.


Np, dude. Milley and the rest still have a level of complicity to be angry about, and that is a whole 'nother debate.

1) at what point could they no longer ignore that Trump lacked the brains, temperament, and loyalty to be an adequate leader of the nation?

2) which is the responsible action once they've figured it out? Resign? Guide from within? Go out in a blaze of glory?  Maybe the answer is more complex, or maybe people are overthinking it. My gut says "resign with full candor", but maybe without enough leadership remaining, we might fall prey to something like a sudden concerted attack.

There's no denying the stench of bullshiat excuses still lingers in the air; though for me, even with the bullshiat, I would give Republican senators and WH staff some slack were they just to help us clean up Trump's mess. After, they can abjectly mea culpa and plead for a second chance or a mitigating paragraph in the history books. It's too important to keep people in place to clean up. You can be sure few Republicans will in fact break with Trump anyway, so no need to consider even short term mercy and grace. They rolled the dice on Trumpism, and we all came up snake eyes.
 
2020-06-04 9:06:30 PM  
Nicholas D. Wolfwood:

MacArthur, unlike Trump, actually had intelligence and competency.  But he still seemed to want to subvert civilian control of military power.

Which is actually understandable. Like Patton, MacArthur was from a different era pretty much his entire military upbringing and education was based on warfare from the time of the Civil War when Generals had a hell of a lot more leeway while out in the field. Yes, there was a certain level of civilian control but not even Lincoln ever stepped in to stop Sherman as he tore through Georgia. And if there had been a situation where Union troops had to shell a bridge that connected the U.S. and Mexico (or Canada) the President would not have interfered and told him to only shelled half of the bridge. The General would have shelled the bridge and the politicians would have deal with the aftermath later. So yeah, give the time in which he was raised and went to military school and West Point, it is completely understandable why Mac felt that way. I am not saying I agree with him, only that I can understand him in this regard.
 
2020-06-04 11:23:16 PM  

trotsky: Nicholas D. Wolfwood: foo monkey: ReaverZ: scottydoesntknow: Holy shiat. Has this EVER happened? Have military commanders ever felt the need to send a letter like this basically saying "do not listen to this goddamn moron we have for a president"?

MacArthur pretty much did.

He was relieved of his command and rightly so.  This time, I dunno.  Say what you want about Truman, but he wasn't raving lunatic.

MacArthur was in many ways a military Trump - an arrogant egotist who thought he deserved to be Kinged 'God'.

MacArthur, unlike Trump, actually had intelligence and competency.  But he still seemed to want to subvert civilian control of military power.

This is actually a pretty great analogy. If you don't mind, I'll even expand. Like trump, Dugout Doug, as he was known, was so enamored with himself that his staff was composed of toadies and sycophants. When Intelligence came pouring in about the Chinese being in Northern Korea in late 1950 his staff ignored it, and never even bothered to send it to MacArthur, who had no phone in his office. They derided the Chinese as "laundrymen" and thought they would never stand a chance. Some half million Chinese where in country at this point and nobody could convince Mac and his HQ of the fact. Even after the Chinese started attacks, and kicking American ass, MacArthur did nothing and his subordinates acted upon the faulty lies that they had previously swallowed.

The irony is not done. The one thing that saved American forces on the east coast of the peninsula was, no shiat, the First Marine Division under the command of a guy named OP Smith, who I liken to Mattis in many ways. The Marines laid down firepower that got everybody else out.

Mock26: military



Come to think of it (please correct me if I'm wrong), wasn't MacArthur the guy who opened fire on the Bonus Army?

A group of American military veterans who marched on Washington, D.C., as a protest, asking only that the government make good on its obligations, commitments, and promises to them.  And what did they get, for having the temerity to ask that the ruling powers simply pay their bill?

These WWI vererans, some of whom were accompanied by wives and children, were met by Douglas MacArthur, with infantry, cavalry, and SIX FRICKIN' TANKS!

These protestors were fired upon, driven away, and their shelters and belongings were burned.
 
2020-06-05 12:02:32 AM  

anuran: foo monkey: ReaverZ: scottydoesntknow: Holy shiat. Has this EVER happened? Have military commanders ever felt the need to send a letter like this basically saying "do not listen to this goddamn moron we have for a president"?

MacArthur pretty much did.

He was relieved of his command and rightly so.  This time, I dunno.  Say what you want about Truman, but he wasn't raving lunatic.

Truman had also been a Captain in combat  back when units elected their officers. He knew the score. In his biography he said "I didn't fire MacArthur for being a stupid son of a biatch, which he was. If that were a crime half the generals and congressmen would be in jail. I fired him for disobeying his commanding officer."

If Truman or Eisenhower or Kennedy or Teddy Roosevelt were alive today and could see what the occupant of !600 Pennsylvania Avenue was doing....


Truman; "This administration is a stain on America. Everyone connected with it should be investigated and prosecuted for treason."

Eisenhower: "At the very least."

Kennedy; "One hundred percent, absolutely agree."

Roosevelt: "Screw that. I say we just shoot the bastards."

Eisenhower: "Yeah, I'm for that, too."
 
2020-06-05 12:02:57 AM  

Klyukva: Kazan: Klyukva: / We also saw it when party-before-principles Democrats said people should rally behind Bloomberg if he won the primary.

I didn't see a single democrat saying that.

Then you weren't reading the FARK politics tab.


I was, Vlad.
 
2020-06-05 12:47:54 AM  

Nicholas D. Wolfwood: Come to think of it (please correct me if I'm wrong), wasn't MacArthur the guy who opened fire on the Bonus Army?


You are correct.  The Attorney General ordered that the Bonus Army be removed from all federal property, MacArthur ordered the 12th Infantry and 3rd Cavalry to disperse the veterans (who were already in the process of leaving).  The two units were supported by 6 light tanks under the direct tactical command of Major George Patton (yes, that one).

Incidentally, Major Dwight Eisenhower was MacArthur's aide during the action, and he never approved of or forgot both the incident and the extremely enthusiastic way MacArthur demanded military action against the veterans, or the way MacArthur put himself out in front of the cameras during the action.

/it's also worthwhile to remember that there was a second Bonus Army a few years later.  Instead of the tank and bayonet as Hoover did, FDR met them with soup kitchens and negotiation, and instead of dispersing them with military power enlisted something like 100,00 of them in the Civilian Conservation Corps, forming the backbone of that organization.
 
2020-06-05 7:47:59 AM  

Klyukva: Kazan: Klyukva: / We also saw it when party-before-principles Democrats said people should rally behind Bloomberg if he won the primary.

I didn't see a single democrat saying that.

Then you weren't reading the FARK politics tab.


It's possible you weren't reading it critically.  There were a few people promoting Bloomberg (hilariously) and a couple people who used Bloomberg as a test case to see if people would be willing to pledge to vote for Bloomberg if he won.

I'm not sure I'd characterize that as saying "people should rally behind Bloomberg if he won the primary." and certain not as being said verifiably by democrats.  I know at least one of them vanished as soon as Bloomberg did, and another is still around fash-ing it up in protest threads.

I wouldn't call either of those two democrats, would you?
 
2020-06-05 9:49:36 AM  

BeesNuts: AdrienVeidt: BeesNuts: AdrienVeidt: Gosh, such a rebuke!  It sure is nice to see the military do jack shiat except wipe their asses with their oaths.

This is an official public statement from one of the highest ranking military officials in our country explicitly instructing every member of every branch of the armed service to ... not do that.

And having jack shiat for effect because their oaths mean shiat.

I guess we'll find out.  Hopefully you're wrong.


Fark hope.  All I have any more is rage.
 
Displayed 33 of 333 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.