6 upvotes, 1 direct replies (showing 1)
People inside the military have talked about how there's a large emphasis on their duty to serve the Constitution above all else. Their oath itself is to protect the Constitution. Many of them also talked about how orders given to commanders to use military force on domestic soil (which would be unlawful), would generally not be followed.
At least, not traditionally.
My concern is that the right wing narrative has become so powerful that it's begun to erode these distinctions. Their endless use of the buzz phrase "National Security" is a big part of it.
The Right uses this phrase to manipulate the narrative in order to accomplish all sorts of goals.
It's Orwellian. There might be a real threat from a bad actor inside the US that the US Military might need to act on. But how do we define that? Who gets to define that?
Republicans are playing a very very dangerous game by weaponizing the usage of that phrase for their propaganda.
Comment by EJ2600 at 02/02/2025 at 20:48 UTC
2 upvotes, 1 direct replies
All he needs to do is proclaim martial law following the urban riots which will follow rounding up millions of people into concentration camps and then the constitution will be suspended. Then all bets are off.