floppybutton

joined 2 weeks ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

Oh I think it's a great idea, and I love CA. Unfortunately, I don't live there so I wouldn't be able to reap the rewards. Though if it were really going to happen, I know there'd be a lot of chuds selling cheap and running for the midwest so I'd definitely make the move. Right now my job has me anchored on the other coast so I only get to be in CA for a couple of weeks a year (incidentally, for work).

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I guess it's just another type of... Draft dodging.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

Ooh that's a tough one. I mean, CA, NY, and MA are all pretty good choices. But I think CA would be the best pick if you could only get one. Though MA would be a surer bet on the referendum outcome, I think. Lots of people in northern CA are redneck AF.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Dammit, now I'm gonna have "da da de dah dah dah da dee dee dah" looping in my head all day.

Doesn't change the fact that I'd be happier than a pig in shit if my (already blue) state was annexed by Canada.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

They're already saying that, and the right-wing constituents are eating up that fat turd like breakfast

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I respect your opinion and agree on many points, and in many cases. I will contend with your argument that the military acts monolithically and wordlessly executes illegal orders, however, particularly because in its wording you apply a blanket onto 3 million people while failing to acknowledge the counter.

The military in the US is beholden to not only the Constitution and the laws of the country, but also the UCMJ, under which we are explicitly and implicitly prohibited from taking part in any partisanism or taking any action which would even imply that the military and Executive are at odds. We can argue the necessity and limits of that policy but that's not the point here. The news will readily report on the sensational--"Navy Sailor arrested at protest," "Soldier participated in attempted coup on January 6th," but they can't get clicks from "NJP article 134," "Sentenced to Leavenworth 6 years following trial and holding in brig."

Neither one of us knows what orders those pilots received. If they were directed to, and chose to, execute an order they knew to be unlawful, they absolutely deserve to be investigated, tried, and sentenced. Is that more than the victims of this atrocious act were allowed? Yes, but two fascist acts don't cancel each other out. I can't stress the point enough that this should never have happened, and we should be doing what we can to rectify it, but retribution is not justice.

But if they were lied to, told to fly from one airport to another per today's schedule, and their listed cargo was just "personnel, materiel," it's not reasonable to lay blame on them like that. Likewise, it's illegal for them to talk about what happened to anyone outside need-to-know unless it's released in court, so we'll probably never hear what actually went down.

Have people executed unlawful orders? Yes. Have they been absolved of responsibility? Sometimes, yes. Should they be held accountable to their level of responsibility, and are they? Typically, yes. That's the biggest difference between police forces and the military, and my other point of contention with your argument.

I agree that when a Nazi sits at a table with nine people who don't tell him to leave, you just have ten Nazis. But whereas the police will band around the Nazi to protect him because he wears the same color clothes, the military will eventually jail the Nazis when they're found guilty of crimes. It's just past the sensationalized news cycle so you have to look for it rather than being presented.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Not all of us are fascists, and not all joined because we wanted to blow up brown people. I wanted to be an engineer but couldn't afford college when I was 17, and was offered a pretty good salary with benefits out the gate, plus the opportunity to have my degree paid for. Even during the Iraq invasion when i joined, I had no interest in actually doing anything related to warfare.

But a lot of the guys I work with, whether they've always been like that from the start, because they think it's funny, or because they're willfully ignorant, don't think the same way. There's also huge disparities between thoughts in the branches as a whole, as well as intellectual stratification in the branches. For example, it's a lot more likely that you'll find fascist ideals in the Army and Marines than the Air Force and Navy, but you'll still find free thinkers in the more educated parts of the "fighting" branches and idiots in the ones focused on tech. The smart ones are worried, the dumbasses think it's lulz.

I do find it funny (in a sad, sad way), though, that a lot of the people who have been openly supportive of the Fascists' policies in the past now say things like "I don't really pay attention to politics lol" or claim/admit that they don't vote. Now that it's clear that their ineptitude has led us to a place where the country's soft power is nil, the benefits every servicemember enjoys are at risk, and they're probably going to go up against China within the next couple of years, they're suddenly not as vocal about their position. I can't wait to retire and put this all behind me so I can focus on more important things. One more year and I'm done.

All that said, politicians really like to prop the military up as a huge, monolithic entity that always thinks, acts, and votes identically (and conservative to boot), and this simply isn't true. Anyone smart enough to think past "brown people bad/MURICA FUCK YEAH" realizes that the military benefits program is the most successful socialist movement America has ever had.

I have to go to work so I need to cut it off here, but that's the start of my rant. Thank you for attending my TedTalk.

Legal disclaimer: I do not speak for the military, the government, or anyone working in either. There's your disclaimer, Whiskey Pete. I'm compliant with the words on your DODI now.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

The only one I can't get onboard with is Leavitt's. That's no way to talk about whores, comparing them to her. Have a little decency!

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 days ago

Man this statement, while already sour, aged like fucking milk.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 days ago

This is Ohio, for anyone else that didn't get that from anything on the article or anywhere you'd expect to see it on the website.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago

Short answer: no. Long answer: Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck no.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 3 days ago

Idk man, that sounds an awful lot like ~~socialism~~ waste, fraud, and abuse.

Just in case: /s

view more: next ›