advertisement


Trump Part 17

Status
Not open for further replies.
jeez, man you can't accept any criticism of the nation, can you - always a whataboutism in your posts?

what kind of sick, violent nation has laws that allow armed militias?
is exactly what most sane people think

Dude, go F yourself.

First, that's not my meaning whatsoever. I'm basically answering the question of why it's a sick, violent nation that allows armed militias. I guess that makes me sane. But your reply makes you a complete (rhymes with bass pole).

Now try harder to ignore me, as I will you, and as we agreed earlier. It's really not that hard at all.
 
These armed militias are allegedly retired law enforcement, ex military, or cop wannabes. Why they're allowed to parade around in full military regalia is beyond most everyone, but it helps explain why every republican politician has buried their rhetorical head up first responders' backsides since 9-11. Democrats do, too. But then they'll copy anything that looks remotely successful.
 
my biggest problem with the militia people is their remarkable naivete. let's say trump is on the ropes and calls for action, what are they going to do with their guns? who are they going to go and attack? the american military? really? there won't be any armed leftist opposition to shoot at. will they start killing civilians or just walking around their little towns intimidating people? will they be taking over KFC and taco bell establishments?
Well, define 'on the ropes.' You mean facing a Senate vote on impeachment? A few examples could make it clear that voting for impeachment isn't exactly healthy. Likewise, key Democrats could be made to disappear, or after arrest publicly 'confess' to outrageous crimes.

Or perhaps you mean an impeachment vote, or the 2020 election, do not go Trump's way. Alleging a conspiracy against Trump's rightful government, militia units could seize opposition figures and hold them for prosecution in 'People's Courts.' Armed groups could prevent the regular inauguration of a new President. Sworn in by some district judge out-of-town, the new President would be denounced as a pretender....

Across the land, attempts to organize resistance to such acts could be violently suppressed. Anyone showing public 'disloyalty' in the national emergency might be subject to arrest or other persecution.

Such things could not happen if law enforcement and the military moved quickly and forcefully to stop them. If that does not happen, if there is confusion and no credible anti-Trump leadership emerges, pro-Trump forces could consolidate control. Then it's all over.

Or, if the opposition organized effectively, we might have a big civil war.
 
Who benefits at this point, by the way, from a 'pooh-pooh, there's no danger, scoff scoff' attitude towards the danger of right wing political violence here? Who might be pushing such a line?
 
Who benefits at this point, by the way, from a 'pooh-pooh, there's no danger, scoff scoff' attitude towards the danger of right wing political violence here? Who might be pushing such a line?

not sure if this is partially directed at me, but i just can't see the military (or parts of it) siding with the militia people. sure, i can see a few crazy acts by militias until they get stomped like ants, but it's hard to imagine a civil war. even if you look at a place as unstable as venezuela (and with a recent history of attempted coups), it's clear that no matter how much social chaos there is, if you don't win over or splinter the military, you're not going to get anywhere.
 
Civil war? With whom are the primary combatants (Trumper droids/Militias) going to clash?

The charlottesville debacle was a somewhat unique situation. You have an extremely gentrified university town with a racist history, and now home to a vast white upper-middle class majority struggling with that history and wanting to take down confederate statues in prominent places. Add a police force tasked with protecting businesses and property first and foremost, in tandem with a strategy that was apparently a watch and wait game until something happened for which they could shut down the march. Also, Virginia has the required open carry firearm laws to make the GI Joes happy. The university was lucky that the nighttime tiki-torch rally on uni grounds didn't go south and wind up with someone being killed. Take a similar march just about anywhere else without a gentrified backdrop and without a police force cowed by a city council, no uni, no students, and no Robert E. Lee being shitcanned from the town square and you may not have any traction at all.
 
yes, that's basically what i was asking a couple of posts ago.

https://pinkfishmedia.net/forum/threads/trump-part-17.228459/page-69#post-3778939
Who does the militia fight with? If with nobody, the militia just wins. Or with the army, and the milita is creamed. OR the army has no orders and stays in barracks, with a few rogue colonels maybe joining the militia. That's case one again. OR popular resistance to the Trump coup happens in the form of mass demonstrations, and there are outrages and masacres, and leftist fighting units emerge out of some cadres. In two-president scenarios, the army might splinter, and the big fight would be on.
 
Dude, go F yourself.

First, that's not my meaning whatsoever. I'm basically answering the question of why it's a sick, violent nation that allows armed militias. I guess that makes me sane. But your reply makes you a complete (rhymes with bass pole).
OK, i'll accept that I misunderstood your post - can you explain what you meant by "The progressive journalists of Finland should look into the whole derived from mad kings and priests angle." so I can get a better handle on your particular style of communication as, atm, I can only see whataboutism?

Maybe your posts fly over my head & I'm at fault? I'm perfectly willing to admit to this if you can just explain this post to me in the context of your reply to "what kind of sick, violent nation has laws that allow armed militias?"
If you can explain your post in a straightforward way, I will apologise if I have got the wrong end of the stick

Now try harder to ignore me, as I will you, and as we agreed earlier. It's really not that hard at all.
I don't ignore anybody, even those I disagree with - you can do so if you wish.
 
OK, i'll accept that I misunderstood your post - can you explain what you meant by "The progressive journalists of Finland should look into the whole derived from mad kings and priests angle." so I can get a better handle on your particular style of communication as, atm, I can only see whataboutism?

Maybe your posts fly over my head & I'm at fault? I'm perfectly willing to admit to this if you can just explain this post to me in the context of your reply to "what kind of sick, violent nation has laws that allow armed militias?"
If you can explain your post in a straightforward way, I will apologise if I have got the wrong end of the stick

I don't ignore anybody, even those I disagree with - you can do so if you wish.

Comprehension improves dramatically when you're not scanning particular posts to take a dump on them.

The headline (bold text) is in the form of a question; I'm replying in the form of an answer. In other words, the US being derived from mad kings and priests may have something to do with why these armed militias crop up, since if you believe the conventional wisdom, it's all about the inclusion of armed militias in the second amendment. Though my thinking is more with the 'collective rights theory' than the right wing's Bubbua can join with other Bubbas and go play GI Joe whenever and on whomever take on it.

No need to apologize. Just skip over my posts, either with the block function or through self-discipline, and take your dumps somewhere else.
 
Right, I didn't misunderstand your post - it is exactly what I thought you meant - so no apology from me - I call it as I see it & will continue to do so
 
No, you still don't understand it. You think I'm defending something when I'm not. I'm answering the question from the perspective of, hey, if you consider the history and constitution of the country it may help explain the how and why of the question: what kind of sick country allows crazy armed militia people to run around. It's nothing whatsoever to do with 'whataboutism' or some hyper-protective nationality. How you still think otherwise is the most daft conclusion I've ever read here.
 
Right, I didn't misunderstand your post - it is exactly what I thought you meant - so no apology from me - I call it as I see it & will continue to do so

i think what marky's trying to say is that the clown car is stuck in third gear, while the office skank reaches for more blue eyeliner and, down in south carolina, a juicy slice of possum is being smothered in aunt kamala's famous gravy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top