|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
Went to a peaceful protest today and I was unimpressed. If it wasn't designed to be a time sink they should sell the plan to the police to waste more people's time and energy.
That's probably unfair, the rally part wasn't completely terrible.
|
On June 02 2020 10:12 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On June 02 2020 09:52 farvacola wrote:
Force will probably be used against peaceful demonstrators regardless, particularly if Trump is allowed to escalate things. Force above and beyond firing cans of teargas directly at demonstrators, shoving them to the ground, and running cars into them, you mean. Can't wait to see what's next. I'm also positive our resident fans of the 2nd amendment will support the peaceful protesters in their endeavors if the government suddenly comes down on them with full military might. This is precisely such a situation where its invocation makes real sense.
Pretty sure making use of the 2nd amendment in a situation like this would be an absolutely terrible idea.
|
On June 02 2020 11:14 Salazarz wrote:Show nested quote +On June 02 2020 10:12 NewSunshine wrote:On June 02 2020 09:52 farvacola wrote:
Force will probably be used against peaceful demonstrators regardless, particularly if Trump is allowed to escalate things. Force above and beyond firing cans of teargas directly at demonstrators, shoving them to the ground, and running cars into them, you mean. Can't wait to see what's next. I'm also positive our resident fans of the 2nd amendment will support the peaceful protesters in their endeavors if the government suddenly comes down on them with full military might. This is precisely such a situation where its invocation makes real sense. Pretty sure making use of the 2nd amendment in a situation like this would be an absolutely terrible idea.
It is LITERALLY what the 2nd amendment is for. This situation is WHY the 2nd amendment exists. It's the defense Americans trot out whenever people talk about taking their guns away.
I hope people do. If the American government wants real anarchy, I think the people of the US should give it to them.
|
On June 02 2020 11:14 Salazarz wrote:Show nested quote +On June 02 2020 10:12 NewSunshine wrote:On June 02 2020 09:52 farvacola wrote:
Force will probably be used against peaceful demonstrators regardless, particularly if Trump is allowed to escalate things. Force above and beyond firing cans of teargas directly at demonstrators, shoving them to the ground, and running cars into them, you mean. Can't wait to see what's next. I'm also positive our resident fans of the 2nd amendment will support the peaceful protesters in their endeavors if the government suddenly comes down on them with full military might. This is precisely such a situation where its invocation makes real sense. Pretty sure making use of the 2nd amendment in a situation like this would be an absolutely terrible idea.
The point of the second amendment isn't to avoid conflict, it is to meet it head on and end oppressive practices. It is why all the y'allqaeda folks brought it to their haircut rallies in Michigan etc
|
This is the end of Pax Americana. The normalcy had been eroding since Trump took office, it really deteriorated during the pandemic, and now this. There's no unifying leadership, there's few strong institutions that are universally uniting, and Trump is guaranteed to take a crisis and make it worse.
I'm not saying that the USA will suddenly disappear or anything, but this is a Suez Crisis moment, where a superpower suddenly realizes that its old power is gone. Back in 1956 it was the British Empire. Now it is the USA. The multi-polar world order begins now
|
They're using military helicopters flying low to disperse protestors with the downdraft.
|
On June 02 2020 10:54 GreenHorizons wrote:
Went to a peaceful protest today and I was unimpressed. If it wasn't designed to be a time sink they should sell the plan to the police to waste more people's time and energy.
That's probably unfair, the rally part wasn't completely terrible.
I have never been to a peaceful protest that wasn’t anything but self gratulatory nonsense. As you said, the rally aspect is generally OK though.
|
On June 02 2020 11:33 iamthedave wrote:Show nested quote +On June 02 2020 11:14 Salazarz wrote:On June 02 2020 10:12 NewSunshine wrote:On June 02 2020 09:52 farvacola wrote:
Force will probably be used against peaceful demonstrators regardless, particularly if Trump is allowed to escalate things. Force above and beyond firing cans of teargas directly at demonstrators, shoving them to the ground, and running cars into them, you mean. Can't wait to see what's next. I'm also positive our resident fans of the 2nd amendment will support the peaceful protesters in their endeavors if the government suddenly comes down on them with full military might. This is precisely such a situation where its invocation makes real sense. Pretty sure making use of the 2nd amendment in a situation like this would be an absolutely terrible idea. It is LITERALLY what the 2nd amendment is for. This situation is WHY the 2nd amendment exists. It's the defense Americans trot out whenever people talk about taking their guns away. I hope people do. If the American government wants real anarchy, I think the people of the US should give it to them.
Reading comments like this is truly frightening. A live-fire exchange between civilian protesters and the military here would not lead to anything good. There are already tons of people who believe that the protests are going way overboard, and that police action against them is mostly justified. Actually shooting at cops / military would only serve to further solidify such beliefs, while also leading to a lot of completely meaningless deaths.
The point of the second amendment isn't to avoid conflict, it is to meet it head on and end oppressive practices. It is why all the y'allqaeda folks brought it to their haircut rallies in Michigan etc
I mean, if it comes to an actual confrontation, who is stronger kind of thing rather than using whatever means to make a point -- there is absolutely no way civilian militias of any sort have any chance at all to win. And actually shooting at the cops / military isn't very likely to make a good talking point, so...
|
On June 02 2020 12:06 Salazarz wrote:Show nested quote +On June 02 2020 11:33 iamthedave wrote:On June 02 2020 11:14 Salazarz wrote:On June 02 2020 10:12 NewSunshine wrote:On June 02 2020 09:52 farvacola wrote:
Force will probably be used against peaceful demonstrators regardless, particularly if Trump is allowed to escalate things. Force above and beyond firing cans of teargas directly at demonstrators, shoving them to the ground, and running cars into them, you mean. Can't wait to see what's next. I'm also positive our resident fans of the 2nd amendment will support the peaceful protesters in their endeavors if the government suddenly comes down on them with full military might. This is precisely such a situation where its invocation makes real sense. Pretty sure making use of the 2nd amendment in a situation like this would be an absolutely terrible idea. It is LITERALLY what the 2nd amendment is for. This situation is WHY the 2nd amendment exists. It's the defense Americans trot out whenever people talk about taking their guns away. I hope people do. If the American government wants real anarchy, I think the people of the US should give it to them. Reading comments like this is truly frightening. A live-fire exchange between civilian protesters and the military here would not lead to anything good. There are already tons of people who believe that the protests are going way overboard, and that police action against them is mostly justified. Actually shooting at cops / military would only serve to further solidify such beliefs, while also leading to a lot of completely meaningless deaths. Show nested quote +The point of the second amendment isn't to avoid conflict, it is to meet it head on and end oppressive practices. It is why all the y'allqaeda folks brought it to their haircut rallies in Michigan etc I mean, if it comes to an actual confrontation, who is stronger kind of thing rather than using whatever means to make a point -- there is absolutely no way civilian militias of any sort have any chance at all to win. And actually shooting at the cops / military isn't very likely to make a good talking point, so...
The police are already shooting unarmed, peaceful protestors. We're not getting mass deaths like Tianaman square, but this is the goverment deploying thuggish violence against people protesting a crime committed by a government institution against a civilian.
|
On June 02 2020 12:15 iamthedave wrote:Show nested quote +On June 02 2020 12:06 Salazarz wrote:On June 02 2020 11:33 iamthedave wrote:On June 02 2020 11:14 Salazarz wrote:On June 02 2020 10:12 NewSunshine wrote:On June 02 2020 09:52 farvacola wrote:
Force will probably be used against peaceful demonstrators regardless, particularly if Trump is allowed to escalate things. Force above and beyond firing cans of teargas directly at demonstrators, shoving them to the ground, and running cars into them, you mean. Can't wait to see what's next. I'm also positive our resident fans of the 2nd amendment will support the peaceful protesters in their endeavors if the government suddenly comes down on them with full military might. This is precisely such a situation where its invocation makes real sense. Pretty sure making use of the 2nd amendment in a situation like this would be an absolutely terrible idea. It is LITERALLY what the 2nd amendment is for. This situation is WHY the 2nd amendment exists. It's the defense Americans trot out whenever people talk about taking their guns away. I hope people do. If the American government wants real anarchy, I think the people of the US should give it to them. Reading comments like this is truly frightening. A live-fire exchange between civilian protesters and the military here would not lead to anything good. There are already tons of people who believe that the protests are going way overboard, and that police action against them is mostly justified. Actually shooting at cops / military would only serve to further solidify such beliefs, while also leading to a lot of completely meaningless deaths. The point of the second amendment isn't to avoid conflict, it is to meet it head on and end oppressive practices. It is why all the y'allqaeda folks brought it to their haircut rallies in Michigan etc I mean, if it comes to an actual confrontation, who is stronger kind of thing rather than using whatever means to make a point -- there is absolutely no way civilian militias of any sort have any chance at all to win. And actually shooting at the cops / military isn't very likely to make a good talking point, so... The police are already shooting unarmed, peaceful protestors. We're not getting mass deaths like Tianaman square, but this is the goverment deploying thuggish violence against people protesting a crime committed by a government institution against a civilian.
And how would shooting back at them be in any way helpful?
|
On June 02 2020 09:17 puppykiller wrote:Show nested quote +On June 02 2020 07:02 Gahlo wrote:On June 02 2020 06:15 puppykiller wrote:
Demonstrators: "the system is evil"
Response from politicians: speeches about how the system is evil
Demonstrators: "we demand change"
Response from politicians: speeches where they claim to demand change
Demonstrators: "Here are specific changes we demand, lets create a timeline and goals for each one of these, we demand a response addressing these exact demands, the implementation, nuances, etc... the balls in your court"
Response from politicians:
A: "Ok we will address these demands you have rallied around and create a timeline, goals and address nuances"
B: "We will address these... eventually, but we wont get into any details about how and probably wont actually do them"
Our goal is A. Now lets do a little less yelling "the system of evil" (even though it feels good) and a little more rallying around goals. We need to give politicians demands now for quick goals they can do (like arresting the other cops), hear their explanation for why they haven't yet, and negotiate to make sure we are getting towards A and not B. Demands have been made before and been ignored or, when changes are put in place, our glorious leader decided to scrap them. This is no longer a good faith argument. This doesn't address my post. My post is about aiming for goal A. Your response is about B. and the above. Your only contribution is being angry, and telling other people to be angry. Anger is an ingredient, it isn't the end goal.
You can't get to A with any "acceptable" means.
|
Police are responding to white supremacist threats who claim a second civil war is going to break out. These white supremacist are the same ones that peddle black people are the violent ones. And people wonder why those black stats have racist connotations...
|
On June 02 2020 12:22 ShoCkeyy wrote:Police are responding to white supremacist threats who claim a second civil war is going to break out. These white supremacist are the same ones that peddle black people are the violent ones. And people wonder why those black stats have racist connotations... https://twitter.com/KyleClark/status/1267605285608345603
This is scary, because you know they won't be able to catch everyone who has this insane, race war fantasies. These fucking psychos are armed to the teeth - what happens if they pull a Las Vegas-type shooting on a protest? Or on the police?
|
On June 02 2020 12:15 iamthedave wrote:Show nested quote +On June 02 2020 12:06 Salazarz wrote:On June 02 2020 11:33 iamthedave wrote:On June 02 2020 11:14 Salazarz wrote:On June 02 2020 10:12 NewSunshine wrote:On June 02 2020 09:52 farvacola wrote:
Force will probably be used against peaceful demonstrators regardless, particularly if Trump is allowed to escalate things. Force above and beyond firing cans of teargas directly at demonstrators, shoving them to the ground, and running cars into them, you mean. Can't wait to see what's next. I'm also positive our resident fans of the 2nd amendment will support the peaceful protesters in their endeavors if the government suddenly comes down on them with full military might. This is precisely such a situation where its invocation makes real sense. Pretty sure making use of the 2nd amendment in a situation like this would be an absolutely terrible idea. It is LITERALLY what the 2nd amendment is for. This situation is WHY the 2nd amendment exists. It's the defense Americans trot out whenever people talk about taking their guns away. I hope people do. If the American government wants real anarchy, I think the people of the US should give it to them. Reading comments like this is truly frightening. A live-fire exchange between civilian protesters and the military here would not lead to anything good. There are already tons of people who believe that the protests are going way overboard, and that police action against them is mostly justified. Actually shooting at cops / military would only serve to further solidify such beliefs, while also leading to a lot of completely meaningless deaths. The point of the second amendment isn't to avoid conflict, it is to meet it head on and end oppressive practices. It is why all the y'allqaeda folks brought it to their haircut rallies in Michigan etc I mean, if it comes to an actual confrontation, who is stronger kind of thing rather than using whatever means to make a point -- there is absolutely no way civilian militias of any sort have any chance at all to win. And actually shooting at the cops / military isn't very likely to make a good talking point, so... The police are already shooting unarmed, peaceful protestors. We're not getting mass deaths like Tianaman square, but this is the goverment deploying thuggish violence against people protesting a crime committed by a government institution against a civilian.
It will be telling if the army stands with the citizens it is supposed to protect or if it actively harms them.
|
So hk government's response to the riots/protests were slammed by US government and now they're doing pretty much similar things. Ain't this all a joke lol
|
On June 02 2020 12:22 ShoCkeyy wrote:Police are responding to white supremacist threats who claim a second civil war is going to break out. These white supremacist are the same ones that peddle black people are the violent ones. And people wonder why those black stats have racist connotations... https://twitter.com/KyleClark/status/1267605285608345603
And this is the issue I was literally just explaining to my childhood best friend. This outcome. You'll have armed persons inside protests waiting to instigate a race war and then the military has no choice but to answer back. The progression of this is not good and really needs to stop peacefully before it gets out of control.
On June 02 2020 12:26 DucK- wrote:
So hk government's response to the riots/protests were slammed by US government and now they're doing pretty much similar things. Ain't this all a joke lol
It's trump's secret fantasy to have the power Xi has in China and other dictators. This is a pure power grab by him. If he declares the Insurrection Act or Martial Law, welp...
|
On June 02 2020 12:30 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:And this is the issue I was literally just explaining to my childhood best friend. This outcome. You'll have armed persons inside protests waiting to instigate a race war and then the military has no choice but to answer back. The progression of this is not good and really needs to stop peacefully before it gets out of control. Show nested quote +On June 02 2020 12:26 DucK- wrote:
So hk government's response to the riots/protests were slammed by US government and now they're doing pretty much similar things. Ain't this all a joke lol It's trump's secret fantasy to have the power Xi has in China and other dictators. This is a pure power grab by him. If he declares the Insurrection Act or Martial Law, welp...
There is a battalion of Military Police from Bragg already on the way to DC. Loophole that he has power to send the army there.
|
On June 02 2020 12:34 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 02 2020 12:30 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On June 02 2020 12:22 ShoCkeyy wrote:Police are responding to white supremacist threats who claim a second civil war is going to break out. These white supremacist are the same ones that peddle black people are the violent ones. And people wonder why those black stats have racist connotations... https://twitter.com/KyleClark/status/1267605285608345603 And this is the issue I was literally just explaining to my childhood best friend. This outcome. You'll have armed persons inside protests waiting to instigate a race war and then the military has no choice but to answer back. The progression of this is not good and really needs to stop peacefully before it gets out of control. On June 02 2020 12:26 DucK- wrote:
So hk government's response to the riots/protests were slammed by US government and now they're doing pretty much similar things. Ain't this all a joke lol It's trump's secret fantasy to have the power Xi has in China and other dictators. This is a pure power grab by him. If he declares the Insurrection Act or Martial Law, welp... There is a battalion of Military Police from Bragg already on the way to DC. Loophole that he has power to send the army there.
Keep us posted on the outcome.
|
On June 02 2020 12:06 Salazarz wrote:Show nested quote +On June 02 2020 11:33 iamthedave wrote:On June 02 2020 11:14 Salazarz wrote:On June 02 2020 10:12 NewSunshine wrote:On June 02 2020 09:52 farvacola wrote:
Force will probably be used against peaceful demonstrators regardless, particularly if Trump is allowed to escalate things. Force above and beyond firing cans of teargas directly at demonstrators, shoving them to the ground, and running cars into them, you mean. Can't wait to see what's next. I'm also positive our resident fans of the 2nd amendment will support the peaceful protesters in their endeavors if the government suddenly comes down on them with full military might. This is precisely such a situation where its invocation makes real sense. Pretty sure making use of the 2nd amendment in a situation like this would be an absolutely terrible idea. It is LITERALLY what the 2nd amendment is for. This situation is WHY the 2nd amendment exists. It's the defense Americans trot out whenever people talk about taking their guns away. I hope people do. If the American government wants real anarchy, I think the people of the US should give it to them. Reading comments like this is truly frightening. A live-fire exchange between civilian protesters and the military here would not lead to anything good. There are already tons of people who believe that the protests are going way overboard, and that police action against them is mostly justified. Actually shooting at cops / military would only serve to further solidify such beliefs, while also leading to a lot of completely meaningless deaths. Show nested quote +The point of the second amendment isn't to avoid conflict, it is to meet it head on and end oppressive practices. It is why all the y'allqaeda folks brought it to their haircut rallies in Michigan etc I mean, if it comes to an actual confrontation, who is stronger kind of thing rather than using whatever means to make a point -- there is absolutely no way civilian militias of any sort have any chance at all to win. And actually shooting at the cops / military isn't very likely to make a good talking point, so...
I agree with you for the time being but I have to ask, do you think it's ever justified for the citizens to take up arms against the state? Just a month ago I found those scenarios by gun owners ridiculous, but now that the state is actively murdering and terrorizing citizens, and the president is mobilizing the military to "dominate" citizens, I'm not so sure anymore.
|
On June 02 2020 13:00 Starlightsun wrote:Show nested quote +On June 02 2020 12:06 Salazarz wrote:On June 02 2020 11:33 iamthedave wrote:On June 02 2020 11:14 Salazarz wrote:On June 02 2020 10:12 NewSunshine wrote:On June 02 2020 09:52 farvacola wrote:
Force will probably be used against peaceful demonstrators regardless, particularly if Trump is allowed to escalate things. Force above and beyond firing cans of teargas directly at demonstrators, shoving them to the ground, and running cars into them, you mean. Can't wait to see what's next. I'm also positive our resident fans of the 2nd amendment will support the peaceful protesters in their endeavors if the government suddenly comes down on them with full military might. This is precisely such a situation where its invocation makes real sense. Pretty sure making use of the 2nd amendment in a situation like this would be an absolutely terrible idea. It is LITERALLY what the 2nd amendment is for. This situation is WHY the 2nd amendment exists. It's the defense Americans trot out whenever people talk about taking their guns away. I hope people do. If the American government wants real anarchy, I think the people of the US should give it to them. Reading comments like this is truly frightening. A live-fire exchange between civilian protesters and the military here would not lead to anything good. There are already tons of people who believe that the protests are going way overboard, and that police action against them is mostly justified. Actually shooting at cops / military would only serve to further solidify such beliefs, while also leading to a lot of completely meaningless deaths. The point of the second amendment isn't to avoid conflict, it is to meet it head on and end oppressive practices. It is why all the y'allqaeda folks brought it to their haircut rallies in Michigan etc I mean, if it comes to an actual confrontation, who is stronger kind of thing rather than using whatever means to make a point -- there is absolutely no way civilian militias of any sort have any chance at all to win. And actually shooting at the cops / military isn't very likely to make a good talking point, so... I agree with you for the time being but I have to ask, do you think it's ever justified for the citizens to take up arms against the state? Just a month ago I found those scenarios by gun owners ridiculous, but now that the state is actively murdering and terrorizing citizens, and the president is mobilizing the military to "dominate" citizens, I'm not so sure anymore.
When there is a legitimate unlawful occupation of the government on private, tribal, or protected land. That's the only reason I can think of where it would be assumed that the government is overstepping and taking arms is "justified".
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
