So about these riots...

[Cain]

Not having local government on their side is going to severely hamper the police. I can definitely see them making arrangements with local or even out-of-town Neo-Nazis, but if the violence continues isn't there a very real possibility of the governor calling up the National Guard?

This may not actually be the worst solution, given that the army is a whole lot more strict on the situations where you can fire back and kill civilians (I'm not going to claim the US military has anywhere near a perfect record in this regard, but between the two, I'd rather be taken by your military than your police any day of the week, in most jurisdictions). The guard's going to be more racially mixed as well, especially on the front-line units, and hasn't recently been killing black Americans, all factors that may actually work in their favour.

On the other hand, sending in the army worked out really, really poorly in Northern Ireland. It's an escalation, a provocation and it will depend how the Guard would interface with the local police and what the response from the militia movements would be as to how that plays out. If the local police are "equal partners" with them, then you can bet the police will try and turn that to their advantage, which will pit the rioters and protestors against them. And if not, the police may try and spin up the militia crazies with the usual NWO/military takeover crap, especially with a Dem governor.

[altered]

The NG is already activated, apparently. Statement says they’re focused primarily on getting fire crews to fires. They actually didn’t even mention the police at all in their statement.

[Faust]

Not having local government on their side is going to severely hamper the police. I can definitely see them making arrangements with local or even out-of-town Neo-Nazis, but if the violence continues isn't there a very real possibility of the governor calling up the National Guard?

This may not actually be the worst solution, given that the army is a whole lot more strict on the situations where you can fire back and kill civilians (I'm not going to claim the US military has anywhere near a perfect record in this regard, but between the two, I'd rather be taken by your military than your police any day of the week, in most jurisdictions). The guard's going to be more racially mixed as well, especially on the front-line units, and hasn't recently been killing black Americans, all factors that may actually work in their favour.

On the other hand, sending in the army worked out really, really poorly in Northern Ireland. It's an escalation, a provocation and it will depend how the Guard would interface with the local police and what the response from the militia movements would be as to how that plays out. If the local police are "equal partners" with them, then you can bet the police will try and turn that to their advantage, which will pit the rioters and protestors against them. And if not, the police may try and spin up the militia crazies with the usual NWO/military takeover crap, especially with a Dem governor.

To be fair after the black and tans, and the sacking of cork, the army deployed to Ireland were there to and demoralise the population, through intimidation and in many cases torture, I mean they did kill a man and use his skull as an ashtray.

Agreed, if I was to be picked up I'd prefer the US army seem to at least have a rule set where the US police force seems to be anything goes and different rules town to town, state to state

[altered]

Doing some research, the NatGuard is apparently civilian, not military. (The military equivalent is the Reserve.) But they also don’t get deployed often, and usually in nonviolent contexts, so I doubt they’re as aggressively racist and stupid as cops.

[The Johnny]

Didnt Trump already tweet something along the lines of "When the looting starts, so does the shooting"?


Edit:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-s-warning-minneapolis-burns-over-george-floyd-s-death-n1217571

[Cain]

Not having local government on their side is going to severely hamper the police. I can definitely see them making arrangements with local or even out-of-town Neo-Nazis, but if the violence continues isn't there a very real possibility of the governor calling up the National Guard?

This may not actually be the worst solution, given that the army is a whole lot more strict on the situations where you can fire back and kill civilians (I'm not going to claim the US military has anywhere near a perfect record in this regard, but between the two, I'd rather be taken by your military than your police any day of the week, in most jurisdictions). The guard's going to be more racially mixed as well, especially on the front-line units, and hasn't recently been killing black Americans, all factors that may actually work in their favour.

On the other hand, sending in the army worked out really, really poorly in Northern Ireland. It's an escalation, a provocation and it will depend how the Guard would interface with the local police and what the response from the militia movements would be as to how that plays out. If the local police are "equal partners" with them, then you can bet the police will try and turn that to their advantage, which will pit the rioters and protestors against them. And if not, the police may try and spin up the militia crazies with the usual NWO/military takeover crap, especially with a Dem governor.

To be fair after the black and tans, and the sacking of cork, the army deployed to Ireland were there to and demoralise the population, through intimidation and in many cases torture, I mean they did kill a man and use his skull as an ashtray.

Agreed, if I was to be picked up I'd prefer the US army seem to at least have a rule set where the US police force seems to be anything goes and different rules town to town, state to state

Oh yeah, it was fucking terrible what they did. I can see the kind of detatched logic that suggests using the Army as a neutral law enforcement body on the theory that they don't have the local roots and rivalries that, for example, the RUC was entirely enveloped by. But at the same time, you send a bunch of trained killers like Para 1 into something they're being told is a warzone...they're going to committ atrocities and that is just blatantly obvious. Not to mention I suspect while "officially neutral" there was more concern about suppressing republican sentiment then there was about unrest in Northern Ireland per se and so they were, of course, actively colluding with Unionist groups rather than trying to calm the situation down by keeping both the violent Republicans and Unionists contained.

And that's what worries me about the US, if for example the protests spread south. It'll be Republican governors, and they won't be looking to restore order.

Doing some research, the NatGuard is apparently civilian, not military. (The military equivalent is the Reserve.) But they also don’t get deployed often, and usually in nonviolent contexts, so I doubt they’re as aggressively racist and stupid as cops.

They're in a bit of a weird spot, generally. They're also considered part of the military reserve, and they come under the dual command of both the state governor and the US President. Which does raise the alarming prospect of conflicting orders, given Trump being Trump.

[Cain]

Didnt Trump already tweet something along the lines of "When the looting starts, so does the shooting"?


Edit:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-s-warning-minneapolis-burns-over-george-floyd-s-death-n1217571

Yes he did. I suspect Trump is dying for a chance to give a "shoot looters on sight" order.

[Cain]

Well, scratch that idea.



Can't let the manchild have an excuse to preside over a massacre. Keep the National Guard away at all costs.

[Faust]

And that's what worries me about the US, if for example the protests spread south. It'll be Republican governors, and they won't be looking to restore order.

Shit, I see why a full on civil war / race war could ignite out of this

[altered]

And that's what worries me about the US, if for example the protests spread south. It'll be Republican governors, and they won't be looking to restore order.

Shit, I see why a full on civil war / race war could ignite out of this

That’s why I’m concerned and watching closely. That was a risk from the start, now it’s becoming one of two options, the other being genocide.

[Cain]

I mean, it could end up there.

At this stage, I'd be more worried about 1960s style widespread civil disorder. Endemic riots, beating, carefully targeted murders and bombings, with everything swept under the rug. The potential to go worse is definitely there, but there are some steps inbetween I would expect to see first.

[altered]

I mean, it could end up there.

At this stage, I'd be more worried about 1960s style widespread civil disorder. Endemic riots, beating, carefully targeted murders and bombings, with everything swept under the rug. The potential to go worse is definitely there, but there are some steps inbetween I would expect to see first.

I already expect that. The problem I see with that is covering it up now. The internet and smartphones have really fucked their ability to effectively push the state sponsored abuse out of sight.

They can make it harder, but they can’t eliminate it without cutting the internet out entirely in these places and destroying every electronic storage device inside of them. It’s very much on the level of Transmetropolitan: there will be photos and video and someone will get it out.

When their abuses get exposed, riots will spread and it will very likely radicalize rather than demoralizing. I’m already watching neoliberal types getting converted to leftists in real-time.

The thing that will lock it in will be if white nationalists show up and murder people and get away with the blessing of the cops and it gets caught on video.

And at that stage, genocide or civil war are the options. Coming back from that peacefully is impossible in the current state of affairs.

[Bruno]

So at this point, what could Trump do to turn this to his advantage? Because whatever that is, that's what he's going to do.

And given his previous tactics of sowing chaos and then using it for his own benefit, I'm thinking he's probably going to do every thing he can to escalate the situation.

[altered]

So at this point, what could Trump do to turn this to his advantage? Because whatever that is, that's what he's going to do.

And given his previous tactics of sowing chaos and then using it for his own benefit, I'm thinking he's probably going to do every thing he can to escalate the situation.

This. Especially because Twitter is putting warnings on his tweets again: that’s going to make him want to make a big move to try and scare people into giving him what he wants. He’s stupid, petty, and reacts to any push back aggressively. He’ll take it out on the protesters if he can.

[Bruno]

So at this point, what could Trump do to turn this to his advantage? Because whatever that is, that's what he's going to do.

And given his previous tactics of sowing chaos and then using it for his own benefit, I'm thinking he's probably going to do every thing he can to escalate the situation.

This. Especially because Twitter is putting warnings on his tweets again: that’s going to make him want to make a big move to try and scare people into giving him what he wants. He’s stupid, petty, and reacts to any push back aggressively. He’ll take it out on the protesters if he can.

His supporters want a big big man with a big big dick who isn't afraid to swing it around. Nothing would make them happier than watching rioters cut in half with some good ol' USA 50BMG fire, some napalm dropped on poor neighborhoods, and if a drone strike takes out the local DNC office, well that's just fine too. Set it all to the tune of some John Philip Sousa, or Lee Greenwood... Hell, maybe combine the two, and you've got a number one hit on your hands! It'll have the highest ratings of any police riot ever!

Honestly, I don't think anything would grant that fucker more peace and serenity while laying on his deathbed than having an American civil war named after him.