• humble peat digger@lemm.eeOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    9 days ago

    See. If he’s just wanting to fire people out of spite - I don’t care.

    But I feel he may want to stuff generals with his hires to then just invoke a martial law and execute a coup.

    • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      9 days ago

      That’s absolutely what he’s trying to do. My point is that the US military doesn’t operate like Toys-R-Us or Twitter or whatever. You can’t just fire the boss of the division, bring in a new guy who says we’re going to go shoot some protestors now, and have all the battalion commanders under them say, “Oh, okay, that’s weird but w/e.”

      At least, I hope not. I’m pretty sure though. It’s not simple like Trump is thinking, and he doesn’t have the level of understanding to pull it off and make it work.

      Remember this? Listen to them cheering:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUosuzrY8gg

      • NJSpradlin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        9 days ago

        Doing it over years, replacing leadership at different levels at different intervals, starting at day 1, then everyone 8-12 months thereafter, until You reach year four… will mean they the leaders you’ve instilled across the formation will all be prepped and on the same page when you throw the coup at year 4.

        That’s why they’re starting now, not 2027 or 2028.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          9 days ago

          You’re still assuming a lot, namely that friendly faces replace the fired ones. And that lower echelons obey orders of a captured higher echelon.

          The military is really very resistant to this kind of thing. We have leadership right down to 4 person teams.

          • NJSpradlin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            8 days ago

            I think it’s safe to assume that if you can control promotions you’ll promote those who better fit your ideology. And if you also implement a ‘red scare’ labeling and removing anyone who holds different ideologies than yours… all that will be left are those willing to obey what would have been illegal orders, and those that believe your orders aren’t illegal.

            Edit: remember, they only just removed DA photos from the SRB, because they had a problem with promotions going to people who ‘looked like military leaders’ which was very heavily favoring ‘strong white men’.

            A roll back of policies like that, reimplementing things like ‘Don’t ask, Don’t tell’, labeling progressives or democrats as socialists or commies, labeling non-religious people similarly as non-American, discriminating against minorities again and labeling them as others… also, don’t forget that 1 member of Congress held up our top promotions for how many months?.. due to his personal belief about abortion rights? The ground work is already being laid.

            ‘Woke policies are weakening our military!’ ‘Women don’t belong in combat fields!’ ‘Permitting trans and gays in the military made us the laughing stock of the world!’ ‘Roll back woke mandates in the military!’… feels like an easy path to follow, there.

            Edit 2: https://fortune.com/2024/11/13/pentagon-stunned-trump-nomination-pete-hegseth-fox-news-defense-secretary/

            “Hegseth’s choice could bring sweeping changes to the military, as he has made it clear on his show and in interviews that, like Trump, he is stridently opposed to “woke” programs that promote equity and inclusion. He’s also questioned the role of women in combat and advocated pardoning service members charged with war crimes.”

            Here we go!

            • Maggoty@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              8 days ago

              I’m not saying they can’t fuck up a lot of things. But at a certain point there’s too many promotions to control. This has always been an Authoritarian problem, and is why you see dictators with “Republican Guards”. Those units get all the good equipment, training, and are highly controlled for loyalty.

              Creating something like that takes years though. And will transparently be the end of any claim to be the better party for our military. So in 2026/28 elections will be much harder.

      • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        9 days ago

        Also I cant imagine the military higher ups are particularly fond of Trump anyways, they could very well use this action as a casus belli to trigger a civil war. Which would just be a repeat of the last one more or less. Really that one would come down to how stupid Trump and Co are.

        Edit: I just remembered 2025 calls for getting rid of Veterans Affairs, so not only do the big wigs probably hate Trump the rank and file have plenty of reasons too.

        • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          9 days ago

          It’s also relevant that 100% of the troops that are permitted to operate inside the US are under the control of the individual states. You could say that Trump can just install loyalists and deploy the real federal army inside the US, but I cannot possibly imagine that they would obey orders to fight domestically against the National Guard.

          The founders of the US did some things wrong, but they also had some pretty solid foresight about some things.

          Edit: I can’t type

          • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            9 days ago

            The national guard previously state militia system is honestly kinda brilliant, in how it allows some amount of military counter actions by the states themselves. I suspect it is based off of how some Italian city states would have local semi-professional militaries for local defense while relying on mercenaries for external actions.