Off with their heads! Dem. vid to Military

[flogger]

Nothing like a little political melodrama. I personally think the Democrats that made this PSA for our active military should be out on their asses tomorrow. What the hell are they thinking? There are already Democratic Veterans that are raising hell over it. I don't they thought this out much, I hope it backfires bigtime!

I'm sure I am preaching to the choir, any vets out there know what the penalties are for a service member flat disobeying a directive? I'm guessing it's a little harsh. We will see how well they "got your back" on the way to Leavenworth.

Trump needs to put an end to this crap somehow, short of Death of course.

[FoxtArt]

Nothing like a little political melodrama. I personally think the Democrats that made this PSA for our active military should be out on their asses tomorrow. What the hell are they thinking? There are already Democratic Veterans that are raising hell over it. I don't they thought this out much, I hope it backfires bigtime!

I'm sure I am preaching to the choir, any vets out there know what the penalties are for a service member flat disobeying a directive? I'm guessing it's a little harsh. We will see how well they "got your back" on the way to Leavenworth.

Trump needs to put an end to this crap somehow, short of Death of course.

This is the video:
https://x.com/SenatorSlotkin/status/...356902948?s=20

Can you please explain what Trump should put an end to "short of death" (he's been threatening death, by the way).

Is it free speech?
Is it telling service members they don't have to follow illegal or unconstitutional orders?

I'm really confused... Perhaps the video is in ill taste, but seriously?? Strictly speaking it isn't wrong... Tell me why you think these people should be drawn and quartered?

[FoxtArt]

Is it because a Democrat said it?

Is the MAGA perspective that hypothetical orders of Trump can intentionally violate the constitution and must be followed?
https://www.army.mil/values/oath.html

E.g. do you think a hypothetical conflict in the oath means that the constitution is subordinate to the executive, e.g. we are not a Republic?

I'm surprised by the MAGA outrage on something they would have agreed with just four years ago if spoken by Bush.

[TEAMRICO]

What are those illegal orders President Trump supposedly gave?
We just making stuff up and getting our panties in bunch?

[kidicarus13]

So funny how both sides say the same thing, "They/he/she swore an oath to the Constitution." ...and each side believes they are on the right side of the Consitution.

[Oscar77]

Fox:
TBH, I'm sorrta stunned I'm sortta on your side with this......... in a way.
In the sense that Pres Trump should've just let this go. He doesn't have to S$$T talk EVERY stupid nonsense the Dems throw out.

And it is stupid nonsense: some melodramatic comments on their part as if there are actually Soldiers following illegal orders and as if their post would ease their minds.
Because they aren't and it doesn't.
In fact, in this era of retribution once in power, I take it as a threat on their part.
As if when the Dems regain power, however long that takes, they will drag some poor sod out and make him an example for following "illegal orders" given by the evil, corrupt "King Trump."
Because they've been beating that drum with the DHS, ICE etc etc and now they've turned on the Military.
(Oh and the Supreme Court as well.)
Thats why it's just retarded and insulting they "went there."

Now it's your turn:
You explain why they felt the need to post this.
No seriously.
It's just more fearmongering and gaslighting on their part.
But please what valid reason was there to post it?

In all the years of "interventions" by Dems and Repub Presidents, why now?
Why would they commit to this now?

[FoxtArt]

Fox:
TBH, I'm sorrta stunned I'm sortta on your side with this......... in a way.
In the sense that Pres Trump should've just let this go. He doesn't have to S$$T talk EVERY stupid nonsense the Dems throw out.

And it is stupid nonsense: some melodramatic comments on their part as if there are actually Soldiers following illegal orders and as if their post would ease their minds.
Because they aren't and it doesn't.
In fact, in this era of retribution once in power, I take it as a threat on their part.
As if when the Dems regain power, however long that takes, they will drag some poor sod out and make him an example for following "illegal orders" given by the evil, corrupt "King Trump."
Because they've been beating that drum with the DHS, ICE etc etc and now they've turned on the Military.
(Oh and the Supreme Court as well.)
Thats why it's just retarded and insulting they "went there."

Now it's your turn:
You explain why they felt the need to post this.
No seriously.
It's just more fearmongering and gaslighting on their part.
But please what valid reason was there to post it?

In all the years of "interventions" by Dems and Repub Presidents, why now?
Why would they commit to this now?

We have a similar perspective. It is insulting etc., and much of what you have said is true.

But FFS Maga, it's not technically wrong and calling for the execution of disagreeing opinions add real justification to THEIR arguments that the current admin is becoming a tyrant.

I view it as ironic... They say "If Trump goes there, you don't have to" and his response is "we should execute these dissenting politicians!!!" All but going there. (Paraphrasing both, so sue me). Their position is insulting and obviously intended to court dissent in the Mil. It's BS but free speech. Trumps position is despotic and the antithesis of a Republic. Who is the better person? They both should sit on a cactus.

[HoneyBadger]

I see nothing wrong with the theme of what the democrats said in the video posted above. Members of the military have the duty and obligation to refuse unlawful orders.

The part where they act like we're suddenly in a constitutional crisis is kind of humorous.

[Aloha_Shooter]

I saw the video in question. I think it was very carefully scripted with lawyers because the Democrats in question are undoubtedly trying to incite "resistance" within the military but in actual words, they simply recite Law of Armed Conflict training. Trump's post was classic Trump overreaction. I think he should have just ignored their video or said it seemed to have seditious intent and left it at that. Intent is not the same as action.

Trump's post just made their video go even more viral and is being used to garner sympathy for the Dems because of his mention of the death penalty.

[FoxtArt]

Sounds like everyone's roughly on the same page.

If executive orders hypothetically come down and a service member said "no" because they are clearly unconstitutional, they are (probably) going to be f'ed regardless of whether the order is unconstitutional or illegal, regardless of what anyone says in a video.
Whether they are in Leavenworth depends almost entirely on whether their respective COC protects them (doesn't report it), or not.

VERY akin to resisting a clearly unconstitutional arrest. (If you live, you may be released from prison in five years on appeal.)

It's all BS lip service in any event, and I don't really think it changes the goal posts. Thinking about it, I think the purpose of this video was to enrage the predictable narcissist, and he danced better than they predicted.

I'm also surprised at what some people will rubber-stamp from this admin. MAGA seems to want to justify *everything*. Trump would be a lot better behaved if his own people would occasionally ...



Even people's heros make mistakes. Its OK to call a spade, a spade.