this post was submitted on 08 Jun 2025
837 points (99.3% liked)

politics

24023 readers
3727 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] HorseTesselator@midwest.social 102 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

Maybe a bit of a hot take, but I think Trump is also doing this at least partly to distract from his spat with Musk's Epstein implications. Not to mention Trump's upcoming parade. Also, keep in mind that 2,000 Nat'l guard troops is surprisingly low, especially for an area the size of L.A. In '92 they brought in almost 10,000.

I'd be lying if I said I wasn't nervous about this, too, but personally I believe people need to keep their cool, here. I'm seeing a lot of doom spiraling and panicking all over the place online and we need to be mindful of how this affects us mentally and emotionally.

We're in the long game.

[–] NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I think the lack of numbers is intentional. Trump and the Heritage Foundation want a violent response to justify an even more violent reaction. They’re looking to have the national guard be not enough to make it look like immigrants and the left are a threat to be dealt with and showing them hurting National Guard troops would elevate the narrative to a military threat at the civilian level. They want someone to brick a national guardsmen, I’d wager they want a few guardsmen to die, it would give them everything they need, they could declare martial law and stop elections, then they send in the marines.

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 3 points 1 day ago

There are good odds we'll get an iconic photo out of this, like the Kent State massacre. But I don't know if we're so post-truth that anyone would care.

Photo I'm thinking of is on https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 45 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

This is basically my take as well, Californian cities are fucking massive and 2,000 people in LA especially is barely a drop in the bucket. Also these are National guardsmen who may very well be pissed they are being sent to stand around outside in LA during the summer, the concrete and blacktop does not let go of heat easily.

Edit: Bucket not bugget, my auto correct is on bath salts.

[–] P00ptart@lemmy.world 30 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Also, a number of them will agree with protesters.

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 24 points 1 day ago (2 children)

And there's another factor, out of any militarized element in the US the national guard have the potential to be the least threatening. They were affected by the post Vietnam reforms just like the rest of the branches, especially after Kent state. Fact of the matter is the guardsmen are far more likely to take issue with ICE and the police in general, reminder that quite a few came forward after the BLM protests saying they wanted to defend the protestors from the police.

Mind you that doesn't eliminate risks involved but it does mean that there is far far more potential for this to utterly backfire in Trump's face.

[–] ShoeThrower@lemmy.zip 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

reminder that quite a few came forward after the BLM protests saying they wanted to defend the protestors from the police.

And did they? No.

They are cowards who do what they're told. After this is over, they will do the same. Disobeying or having remorse now would just be all too inconvenient... Saying "sorry, I actually didn't want to be Gestapo, but did it anyways" is not a valid defense.

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The foundation of action is started with but a single brick. The National Guard weren't rolled out till later on into the BLM protests after they had in many ways started to wind down and stabilize. The current Guardsmen are being deployed at the start, after already being fucked over by Trump via VA cuts and other more general bullshit.

Call me general wait and see but it's too early to make any calls with too many factors, this could turn into a massacre, a revolution, or the Guardsmen could get pissed off and butcher ICE. It's still too early and chaotic to make calls. Not like I'm any help beyond trying to cool nerves, too volatile to protest and I am reliant on my MAGA grandmother. Pisses me the fuck off that I have to live through this bullshit.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Not like I'm any help beyond trying to cool nerves, too volatile to protest and I am reliant on my MAGA grandmother.

I mean she's not gonna disown you... right?

[–] SabinStargem@lemmy.today 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I had an elderly parent threaten to throw me out onto the streets. They had fallen while nude, I called the fire department for help, and asked if they could send personnel the same gender as my parent. Ever since being threatened for trying to be considerate, I haven't trusted that parent ever since.

Sure, it might be dementia or something...but I still can't help but feel that was my parent's genuine feelings about me.

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Probably not but it's the difference between going under the radar and being scrutinized. She would likely push me to move to the cabin in Idaho if I did something, which frankly speaking would be a far worse position to be in.

[–] OCATMBBL@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

If she starts threatening you, you've got just as much ammo. Just remind her how much say her family has in her end-of-life care. She might not want to end up in a 1 Nurse-aide/80 resident nursing home with no visitors.

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 2 points 21 hours ago

I'm not too worried, I'm the last of her descendants still speaking to her. Not her fault my mother is a psychotic bipolar and my uncle is dead. All my cousins are effectively strangers because my uncle sure could pick them.

If shit goes to war I'll be there but as of right now I'm better off waiting in the wings, I would just cause fights if I went to a protest anyways. Point is I'm in a perfectly fine position I just need to make sure I don't fuck it up.

[–] ShoeThrower@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yeah, that's why they're pointing guns at them. They're really sorry though, so it's okay.

[–] P00ptart@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Fuck you. I was one of those soldiers and I'd like to think that some of the hundreds of raped and murdered university of Baghdad students would like a word with you. The amount of young women's bodies we dredged out of Z lake...

I get it. They/we whatever, aren't the good guys as long as they're taking orders from bad guys, but there are people who would be teetering on the edge, who want to do the right thing. Maybe not enough to cancel itself out, but certainly enough to hinder itself enough to get a jump on things to make things truly equal.

[–] ShoeThrower@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ok?

The US Military didn't decide to invade Iraq because they wanted to do good deeds, but that doesn't mean you didn't also aid some people along the way. The US Forces invaded over lies and caused mass death and destruction in exchange for political power and money. It wasn't a war for a good cause, and lead to increased extremism in the Middle East.

Back to the original topic: I generally agree, but am only pessimistic about their numbers and ability to actually resist.

[–] P00ptart@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

You're not wrong. I'm not saying it was a justifiable conflict by any means. But many of us were given orders to go to a place in support of something we didn't agree with. The difference between that and firing on us civilians is huge. From my personal experience, I say you have far more to worry about from police/troopers than any military force.

[–] LeninOnAPrayer@lemm.ee 2 points 1 day ago

The difference between killing and oppressing innocent people in a foreign country and innocent people in America is only "huge" if you don't see the former group of people as human beings.

[–] ShoeThrower@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

OK, but put simply, police forces exist to enforce laws, military forces exist to kill enemies. This is why there are laws to prevent military forces from being deployed domestically. Their jobs are very different, and neither is truly qualified to do the job of the other.

[–] P00ptart@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

People who join the military do so for far more altruistic (even if unfounded) reasons than cops do. You should be far more afraid of cops than the military.

Edit: also in my experience talking with cops while I was in uniform, a lot of them became cops because they couldn't join the military for one reason or another.

Its always important to differentiate between the individual policeman and the institution of the police, when criticising. It is absolutely necessary that people step up for the safety of everyone and protect them (which is what the police is supposed to do/does). The problem is, that since the police has the monopoly to excerpt violence and this monopoly is controlled by the state it is a tool for those in power to preserve their power and demolish resistance.

This is alsobwhy I dont really like slogans like ACAB, since it sets the policeman who probably has very good intentions and does great work on the same level of "ceiticising" something" than the flaws that police sadly has.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The amount of young women's bodies we dredged out of Z lake...

K. Literally just, k. That doesn't justify anything and you know that, so why bring it up?

[–] P00ptart@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

Well the guys that were doing it aren't exactly doing it anymore. The point was that although the reasons for going there were bullshit, some good was done. I personally delivered dozens of loads of school supplies to schools built by the army. These weren't replacements for bombed schools, they were new ones in rural areas where schools didn't exist.

I know. I know. That's no excuse for any of what happened, obviously. I'm just saying not everyone that raises their arm for the oath is a monster, and many join with good intent. Cops on the other hand...

[–] Catma@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago

No its not to distract from Musk. He is lowballing deployment so if/when it doesnt work and he deploys the actual Army or Marines it will seem "reasonable". He is 100% looking for a reason to fuck California hard and will get it.