1190
Troops and marines deeply troubled by LA deployment: ‘Morale is not great’
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2025
1190 points (99.5% liked)
News
30225 readers
3481 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
In what ways are you able and going to support troops who do that to then face court martial? Are you a lawyer willing to go pro bono? Are you willing to house the ones who are discharged, or later released from prison, with few to no job prospects? Do you already or are you planning to donate to service member advocacy groups?
If troops could feel sufficiently supported by the rest of the community when the military's judicial hammer hangs above their head, it may help them gather the courage to do the thing you're suggesting they do.
Most troops signed up to do a job with good benefits and gud-nuff pay and hopefully learn some skills, make lifelong friends, and maybe do some interesting or adventurous things in the process. Few of them are very financially well-set and "standing down" from orders they personally deem illegal could ruin their life. Big decision for 18-25 y/o's to be making and glib comments like "just stand down" kind of gloss over the total psychology of the situation.
https://girightshotline.org/en/military-knowledge-base/conscientious-objection-discharge/
There are programs in place to provide help to troops considering Conscientious Objection. Every single law is up to personal interpretation, so I don't know why you feel the need to emphasize it here. When I was asked to join the military during Bush II, I refused and am proud of that decision. Probably would have made my father proud. Probably would have gotten a lot of respect in my community. Probably would have helped pay for a college degree I wouldn't actually get a job with. But fuck traveling half way across the planet to kill civilians to protect an oil company's profits. If that was an easy decision for me at that age, not violating the rights your own countrymen should be even easier.
I never knew about this. I actually hope all our troops know about this also.
The ACLU seems like it should also cover this sort of thing.
It is I believe
I just checked their website. They need to add a Conscientious Objection section to make that more explicit.
Any military member who is court marshaled has a JAG representing them, just like there is a JAG prosecuting them. A system that gives you someone with far more time to deal with your case than a public defender, and even some private attorneys.
Like the movie A Few Good Men, Tom Cruise is a JAG
Do we need to have our commitment to them in writing in the presence of a lawyer in order for them to do the right thing and not follow illegal orders and threaten fellow Americans?
They took an oath.
That has nothing to do with our support.
That being said, the support of the public tends to be more consistent than the support of the leadership we find ourselves with in recent history. That's made obvious by all the people getting help from others via GoFundMe type donations to cover their medical bills or simply for doing the right thing and being punished for it.
No idea how to get the point across effectively, but some general assurance of a soft landing on/from the side for which they're putting their personal future at risk would probably be pretty helpful. The more ostracized and hated they feel in these early stages would probably just push them toward the other side, based on a rough risk-reward analysis.
If anyone is actually depending on those sworn/affirmed oaths to keep the troops on their side, then they're living in a naive fantasy world. Those oaths are beautiful in their intent, but crumble pretty quickly in the harsh reality of viable livelihood and expected future compensation. Sorry, but I'm cynical and in my view loyalty is most easily purchased via material guarantees than ideology. Within limits, of course, and there's different thresholds of tolerance toward unpalatable orders vs living conditions for everyone.
Yeah, a lot of people are all talk but actually chickens out when you tell them to practice what they preach or help in some way to the cause. I was arguing in an anarchist community why it is a bad idea to fire the first shot and kill soldiers and police, because it makes it look bad on the protestors and it will finally provide reason for the government to invoke the insurrection act. Unsurprisingly, anarchists know little of the practical reality and are too trigger happy baying for blood. When I dared one to go to California and shoot the authorities if they believe that Trump and co. broke the social contract, unsurprisingly he/she made up excuses and chickened out. Said going about on social media and targeting far right leaders is just as effective. Right, as if bullying Trump on social media will make him quit the White House lol.
It reminds me why i am not fully on board with anarchism despite having inherent and deep disdain on authority and hierarchy. Sorry my anarchist friends, but you are just as fantasists as any ideologues. I don't completely condemn violence when it comes to it, but you don't get the final sympathy when you break the promise of peaceful demonstrations and kill the authorities first. I mean, the world has sympathy on Syrian rebels, because Assad's forces fired on peaceful demonstrators first. Many people actually soured on the French Revolution at the time, when The Terror started with indiscriminate executions of many individuals deemed enemies of the revolution. Conflicts are won on public relations as well.
A lot of people may or may not be the protesters in the streets, but don't feel like incriminating themselves on a public forum for internet clout if they are. This isn't the War Thunder forums.
One of leftist, especially for anarchists, core beliefs is praxis or putting into practice what you preach. I can see where you are coming from, but the interlocutor was literally calling for violence and for himself to raise an army. But when I told him why won't he do what he says, he basically backed out. That's not praxis lol.
Well said