There was significant ex-military presence at the riot. The woman shot was a 14 year Air-force vet. You can see how this could send mixed messages to US civilians and the enlisted
I mean sure. But that was true under any administration with that many enlisted and career service people [as evidenced by base shootings, for example].
Bush directly caused more damage sending troops into Iraq for example. Did the JC make a fuss after that debacle?
The other is a conspiracy that is neatly attributed to DJT as if he ordered people into the Capitol. (We're attributing intent) We don't have to presume intent on Bush's part, history informs us not with attributions or guesses, but with evidence.
I really don't think you need to bring DJT into this. There are clearly and unambiguously some active-duty people who seem to be unclear about where their duty lies, and this is an unambiguous statement to them about where the military expects them to be.
True, kooks do exist there, no doubt about it. But this statement will do nothing to change their minds (if they had any plans --which I doubt any would be that stupid, but then we have had base shootings, so...)
> But this statement will do nothing to change their minds
On this point we disagree. I think most soldiers want to be good, loyal soldiers. DJT is Commander in Chief, and I think he has given them some seriously mixed messages of what that would entail, and may give further mixed messages in the next few days. This explicit, unambiguous statement of where a soldier's duties lie is important.
Hmm, ok perhaps you’re right about soldiers being confused. But if any CiC thought that path had a possibility for positive outcome, they’d be delusional. The institutions will not permit that.
There's a number of people that believe the military is going to be used by trump to overthrow the election results and instate a trump government. Otherwise known as the made up q 'conspiracy'. Sadly people I know believe this, and there are military personnel whom also believe it. Therefore it's nice that the joint chiefs declare a position, even if they shouldnt have to.
What happened in Washington hasn't happened since the war of 1812 when the British took over the city. To me, it's reassuring to know that the people responsible for defending this country have a calm steady hand and that they will not put up with bullshit anti constitutional behavior. They won't support a tyrant and they will ensure that a transition of power happens no matter what.
According to two articles I perused, there were protestors at the Whitehouse and there were altercations with the police and security at and with the barriers, but no breach from what I read:
Many far-right organizations encourage their members to join the military whilst keeping their affiliations secret, mainly for training and spying. However, I'm sure they would love to sow disarray in the military if it meant achieving their coup. They wouldn't even need a majority of the military to be Nazis; just enough to sow confusion, draw attention and influence decisions.
Because Donald Trump is unambiguously the commander-in-chief until either Biden takes office on Jan 20 at noon or he is removed from office. Until that time, Trump can issue military orders that do not abet the peaceful transition of power.
This move matters, because it is important that members of the armed forces be able to distinguish between lawful orders, which they must obey, even if they do not like them, and unlawful orders, which they must not obey.
A president can't just say "invade Cuba!" and it gets done in Today's world (maybe it was the case in the 1800s). Advisors and the Military (and Congress) have to concur that it's within reason do do such a thing.
This is the letter of the law and regulations as they stand, but hopelessly naive as to how actual military command is handled. The military deployed a previously unused weapon on the president’s command without any consultation. This responsibility has been largely delegated from congress to the executive’s discretion (with review) for nearly two decades.
Reminding active service members that their oath is to the constitution, not the executive, at this moment is prudent.
Even if there were, a memorandum is not going to stop it. Oh, geez guys and gals, they told us to stop!
This is just PR and ingratiating themselves before the next budget.