U.S. Politics

SDcomics said:
I believe I'm the only one here who's actually served in the US military, so let me point something out. As a service member you do NOT have to obey a direct order if you consider it unlawful. Let me repeat that: You do NOT have to obey an order if you consider it unlawful. In fact you have a duty and an obligation to NOT obey it. That's according to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and the constitution. Look it up if you don't want to believe me.
Click to expand...
I think we're all aware of this. The problem is that it doesn't matter and it would be insanely idealistic to assume it will matter. I know guys that are in -right now-. I know guys that just recently got out, and I know guys that served in the early days of the 9/11 patriotic pro-military fervor.

These are friends of mine. I like to think they are all good people. They are, for the record, a bit of a political mixed bad from full on Lefties to one centrist leaning toward conservative. Every one of them is likely to fire into a crowd if ordered to do so. We've had lengthy conversations about this -- particularly back during Trump's first term. As I described in my 'construction in Alberta' comparison - there's a wide gulf, seemingly, between what should happen and what will happen.

Even former marine captain Timothy Kudo said there is no real mechanism for disobeying an order in the way they're supposed to:

It's not realistic to expect them to not do it. It goes against all of their training. We can hope the officers won't give the order, but if they do - those soldiers are going to kill American civilians. They may be really conflicted about what's happening. They might hate themselves for doing it. They might hate themselves after doing it. But good money says they will do it. Timothy Kudo seems to very gently be agreeing with that sentiment, and everyone I know that's served has essentially told me the same thing, if somewhat apologetically or with a lot of 'you have to understand how it would play out...' explanations that, ultimately, always end up with a bunch of dead civilians.


Not saying that with any excitement. I don't want to see it happen. But we are dangerously close to it happening and we should be honest and realistic about that. If for no other reason than to be prepared and to know what we need to do to avoid it.
 
Asked and answered.
[mod edit: troll content removed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
He’s been warned, guys.

He keeps it up, he’ll get warned again.

Please don’t engage with this troll.
 
Repeat offense.
[mod edit: troll content removed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I missed all the removed comments but certainly looks like y'all silencing someone because they disagree with you. And that's after many were calling this person out for not writing actual comments but just responding via emoji, this is how that person is treated when they do?

I hope the parallel to the bigger picture of this situation isn't lost on anyone. Seems pretty gross behavior on both sides.
 
More threats from on high from a person who openly advocates for the death of others.

Other moderators, you really should heavily consider removing Ace from his role as moderator if you want this place to stay the nice/safe place you say you want.
 
Damien said:
I think we're all aware of this. The problem is that it doesn't matter and it would be insanely idealistic to assume it will matter. I know guys that are in -right now-. I know guys that just recently got out, and I know guys that served in the early days of the 9/11 patriotic pro-military fervor.

These are friends of mine. I like to think they are all good people. They are, for the record, a bit of a political mixed bad from full on Lefties to one centrist leaning toward conservative. Every one of them is likely to fire into a crowd if ordered to do so. We've had lengthy conversations about this -- particularly back during Trump's first term. As I described in my 'construction in Alberta' comparison - there's a wide gulf, seemingly, between what should happen and what will happen.

Even former marine captain Timothy Kudo said there is no real mechanism for disobeying an order in the way they're supposed to:

It's not realistic to expect them to not do it. It goes against all of their training. We can hope the officers won't give the order, but if they do - those soldiers are going to kill American civilians. They may be really conflicted about what's happening. They might hate themselves for doing it. They might hate themselves after doing it. But good money says they will do it. Timothy Kudo seems to very gently be agreeing with that sentiment, and everyone I know that's served has essentially told me the same thing, if somewhat apologetically or with a lot of 'you have to understand how it would play out...' explanations that, ultimately, always end up with a bunch of dead civilians.


Not saying that with any excitement. I don't want to see it happen. But we are dangerously close to it happening and we should be honest and realistic about that. If for no other reason than to be prepared and to know what we need to do to avoid it.
Click to expand...
That's exactly the point I've been trying to make to my friends who live out there and have debated going down to join the protests. We can sit here and argue all day about what should be done, or whether or not a soldier has to follow orders. At the end of the day, they're humans too. They get swept up in the emotion of the moment and often act on instinct. It's a wonder that more people weren't killed during January 6th. When it really comes down to it, if the individual soldier feels like it's an "us or them" situation in the moment, of course they're going to act accordingly. That's why "self defense" is such a controversial argument- every case is so different, and there really is no such thing as "beyond a shadow of a doubt". Too many small, intricate details, and someone will always be there to argue the other side, or that two things can be true at once. It's the Trolley Problem- they'll argue that the one dead person was acting erratically and would've led to the deaths of dozens. Hell, that one soldier fired on the news reporter, who we saw on camera was doing nothing wrong. To act like they wouldn't fire on someone who was actively a threat (even if said threat is a measly little rock).

Do I want them to kill anyone? Absolutely not. Should they? Absolutely not. But if, god forbid, they do, there's too much gray area and finger pointing to ensure that any justice would be served. And even on the off chance it was, you know they'd just be pardoned for it anyway. And that's why I worry- because in the back of their minds, you know a lot of these power-hungry military guys know that there will be very little, if any, repercussions. Not only that, but a large swath of people will hail them as a hero.
 
Schizm said:
I missed all the removed comments but certainly looks like y'all silencing someone because they disagree with you. And that's after many were calling this person out for not writing actual comments but just responding via emoji, this is how that person is treated when they do?

I hope the parallel to the bigger picture of this situation isn't lost on anyone. Seems pretty gross behavior on both sides.
Click to expand...

Nah. Ace is just covering his ass because he's abusing his powers and trying to bully me in DM's.

It's fine. I'm taking screenshots of it all, including replies from Ru and others, that have been deleted and I'll be sure to hang him with it all when I please.

Read it fast because Ace is gonna delete it and then send me another DM threat soon after.
 
Look, I don't have any personal beef with anyone here. I wasn't involved in any of what's been going on, so I'm about as objective as can be here. And I -can- see all the deleted material, Schizm.

KvHulk is just being a hyper-aggressive asshole and saying shitty things. If people want to argue that someone is being 'silenced for not agreeing with the mods?' I mean.. I don't agree with lots of people here whose posts are still visible. So that's a silly argument. Kv is just trolling a moderator because he's decided they have some enmity that he has to carry around forever. Passive-aggressively laugh-reacting to people talking about serious issues they have is juvenile and stupid, and incredibly transparent.
Not sure how many forums there are out there where you can harass the staff or try to debate about the merits of any particular bit of moderating. Anyone that wants to is free to go to one of those such places, though.


Also, for the record: "More threats from on high from a person who openly advocates for the death of others." Come on. Be serious. Saying 'perhaps leave this alone' cannot really, in any reasonable way, be interpreted as a threat. Let's not go down the road of assuming the worst intentions at all times.
 
Damien said:
KvHulk is just being a hyper-aggressive asshole and saying shitty things.
Click to expand...

How so? Explain that to me in great detail. Do you even have the slightest clue why this started?

ya know what? nevermind. I can't even be bothered. I've already explained some and asked others to DM me if they want to know whats going on, and it just gets deleted by an aggressive moderator. Do, and say, as you will.

You guys have access to the logs? Go read them. Unless of course theyve also been deleted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top