290

Newsmax Airs Alarming Discussion of Civil War With Federal Government (www.thedailybeast.com)

submitted 9 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

40 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt and Newsmax host Carl Higbie mused Thursday about a potential “force-on-force” conflict between Texas and the Biden Administration after the Supreme Court ruled against the state’s Republican governor by declaring that federal agents can remove razor wire laid along the border with Mexico.

Higbie began by telling Stitt that “there’s rumblings that Joe Biden should or may actually federalize the National Guard—take that power away from Greg Abbott.”

…

Stitt called the situation, which has so far seen several migrant deaths,“very weird”—while adding that clash is currently a “powder keg of tension.”

“We certainly stand with Texas on the right to defend themselves,” he said. “But Biden is going to be in a tough situation. So in other words, he’s going to try to federalize these troops—in other words, put them on federal orders. And so now, their allegiance technically goes to the president of the United States instead of the governor.”

The dispute between Texas and the federal government has been compared to the situation that led President Dwight Eisenhower to federalize the Arkansas National Guard—part of his bid to allow Black students to attend a Little Rock public high school against the wishes of the then-segregationist governor.

all 42 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 102 points 9 months ago

And so now, their allegiance technically goes to the president of the United States instead of the governor

No. Not now. Always.

“I, ________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and of the State of ______ against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to them; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the Governor of ______ and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to law and regulations. So help me God.”

32 U.S. Code § 304 - Enlistment oath

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/32/304

It's the national guard. It just works for states.

[-] aniki@lemm.ee 33 points 9 months ago

POTUS is the defacto Commander In Chief for all branches of the military. He's the highest ranking officer. That's the whole point, as he's a civilian.

[-] grue@lemmy.world 20 points 9 months ago

defacto

You mean "de jure." "De facto" is the opposite of it being literally enshrined into law.

[-] Telorand@reddthat.com 5 points 9 months ago

That's the whole point, as he's a civilian.

You know, the Framers got some things wrong, but there's something beautifully symbolic about that decision.

[-] Jaysyn@kbin.social 94 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Fuck around & find out, Texas.

The dispute between Texas and the federal government has been compared to the situation that led President Dwight Eisenhower to federalize the Arkansas National Guard—part of his bid to allow Black students to attend a Little Rock public high school against the wishes of the then-segregationist governor.

And once again, it's a racist piece of shit that is stirring up trouble.

Lincoln should have hanged every single Confederate officer & politician.

[-] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 38 points 9 months ago

Their obvious goal now is to desensitize R's to the idea of another civil war. Most R's likely wouldn't be on board with that atm but, after months/years of propaganda, they could be programmed to believe it's the only way — the same way 99% of them (including the "never" trumpers) have fallen in line, bent the knee, and supported the team no matter what.

[-] TexasDrunk@lemmy.world 17 points 9 months ago

I disagree. The people funding the party would lose too much money if there were a civil war. Well, not the military industrial complex, but they're not the only ones with their fingers in the pie. No one is buying the latest doodad if they're fighting for their life.

They need to be mad enough to keep them rage watching, but not mad enough to try shooting their neighbors all at once.

[-] GBU_28@lemm.ee 6 points 9 months ago

I think this is a good point. Stirring up the base to the idea of a civil war is very profitable to religion leaders. Actually conducting said war is not.

[-] SoylentBlake@lemm.ee 5 points 9 months ago

Hard disagree.

Arms manufacturers would be high level targets in any version of a civil war, not just by any sect of us, but foreign subversive agents would be keen to initiate as well. The MI complex has just about everything to lose.

And 6our other point, the rich have too much to lose, again HARD HARD Disagree. Fascism is rising...who do you think is paying for it?

Once you have more money than you can ever spend the only thing left to buy is power. They've captured almost every means of production. They control a disproportionate amount of our foreign policy. Apple activity threatens economic warfare whenever any talk of regulation comes up. WHY ELSE would a company hold onto a TRILLION dollars? (To threaten security of a currency, that's why). The Billionaires are a national security threat. And they almost have the final nail, total, complete information control. They're trying to regulate the internet, with their multiple "think of the children" campaigns. Their wet dream is us having to scan our license to log in, then everything we do is tracked, every question asked, every dissent in a forum met moments later with a real life knock on the door. Thought police.

Monopolies are the logical conclusion of capitalism. Once wealth is attained, all effort is spent securing that wealth. They'll sacrifice any and all of us. They chair multinational companies, it's naive to think they have any kind of national patriotism (unless it's them that's in charge). They're a tumor to our species.

Rome survived for almost 2000 years and they had 5 benevolent dictators. That's one every 400 years. We don't have time to spare like that. I don't think authoritarianism is the answer, and for those who do, I question your rational capabilities.

I'd like to remind everyone that the protagonists in 1984, fahrenheit, brave new world...they don't live thru the story. And the machines they're raging against keep on keeping on. Our job is to end the hate BEFORE it starts building bases.

[-] NewNewAccount@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

Killing people does not kill ideologies.

[-] Telorand@reddthat.com 11 points 9 months ago

True, but not every person that holds an ideology is a leader that can or is willing to take up the torch.

For example, if Trump died tomorrow from a stroke, the maga ideology would survive, but there are few in the cult who can be the new Donald Trump; they simply don't have the charisma needed (not that they wouldn't try, of course).

Fundigelicalism and white supremacy would still exist, as they have for a long time, but the glue that's held them together is their deification of Trump. Without him, they lose that cohesion.

[-] GBU_28@lemm.ee 8 points 9 months ago

Yes but those officers and leaders went on to positions of power that shaped the resultant decades, leading to many inequalities and issues we see today. (not all).

Leading an insurrection and civil war should at minimum bar you from any public or political action from then on.

[-] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 0 points 9 months ago

Leading an insurrection and civil war should at minimum bar you from any public or political action from then on.

It would if the 14th amendment was taken as more than a polite suggestion.

[-] winterayars@sh.itjust.works 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

He would've but they shot him first and his replacement decided to let them keep power while preventing the former slaves from getting it.

[-] rayyy@lemmy.world 42 points 9 months ago

Maybe if the House Republicans approved the Senate bi-partisan border bill that they have been all for until now - but it's plainly NOT about border security, is it?

[-] DrDeadCrash@programming.dev 31 points 9 months ago

It's about everything being awful and making sure it stays that way to make Biden look bad.

[-] Someonelol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 34 points 9 months ago

This is what happens when the Union wasn't firm enough with the seditionist South post Civil War. The Restoration Era was too kind and short lived to the traitorous bastards that allowed their shit ideology of racism and secession to stick around the South.This allowed their ideas to fester and metastasize over the decades into Jim Crow laws, Confederate romanticism, and the idea of rebellion being something that is punished by a slap on the wrist.

The fact the Jan 6 traitors were prosecuted with extreme leniency is only giving these bastards all the more encouragement to ramp up their calls for another civil war. The next time we win I say apply the penalty for treason on all combatants and bar anyone associated with their movement from ever holding office again.

[-] Facebones@reddthat.com 6 points 9 months ago

Full stop. Combatants, financiers, anyone whose been egging on and supporting their side. You wanted to throw down against America so hard face the fuckin consequences.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 28 points 9 months ago

I dunno, this article is like "I wonder what stormfront thinks about this" and I'm all like uhhhh

[-] MataVatnik@lemmy.world 23 points 9 months ago

Can these people just not for like two fucking seconds?

[-] SinningStromgald@lemmy.world 34 points 9 months ago

The GOP's relevance is entirely based on constant fear and hate. Those fires must be tended constantly otherwise they might cool to something like apathy or worse...socialism. So, no the can't not.

[-] frunch@lemmy.world 13 points 9 months ago

This is exactly why they don't want a solution to immigration -- they profit wildly off the outrage they stoke from it

[-] SinningStromgald@lemmy.world 14 points 9 months ago

Otherwise they would have passed a border bill during Trump's first term and not shut down the government.

[-] winterayars@sh.itjust.works 1 points 9 months ago

Yeah, not just fear and hate but the constant presence of a threat, of panic. Always on the brink of disaster, always some horror being uncovered, always a new thrill to be shocked by.

[-] Son_of_dad@lemmy.world 21 points 9 months ago

It would be more worrying if Texans hadn't proved that they're a bunch of pussies with guns, who hide at the first sign of trouble, even when their kids are dying.

[-] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 13 points 9 months ago

You don't even need to point a gun... just threaten to strip their Gaurd pay and benefits, they will all fall in line.

[-] jafo@lemmy.world 12 points 9 months ago

I'm torn. Do not support building a wall with Mexico. Would support building a wall with Texas.

[-] Binthinkin@kbin.social 4 points 9 months ago

Watch out the gravy seals are having heart attacks! Oh wait no, now it’s an aneurysm. K byeeeeeee!

[-] normanwall@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Who would win?

1 million shooty Texas bois OR

2854 glowy bois

[-] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 8 points 9 months ago

Why not King Kong? It's just as likely the military releases King Kong on US soil than a nuke.

[-] remus989@sh.itjust.works 5 points 9 months ago

And Kong is FAR less destructive!

[-] GrundlButter@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 9 months ago

I mean, I'm sure they would start with non nuclear bombs like when we bombed a Pennsylvania neighborhood, but could you not see a certain presidential candidate gleefully give the order to nuke the libs? I'm honestly surprised he's not campaigning on it.

[-] NOPper@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

This is a pretty silly take if you're not just trying to make a throwaway joke.

[-] normanwall@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

It's just a dumb joke, America would never nuke itself (on purpose) unless there was a doomsday scenario like aliens or maybe disease X.

[-] BeMoreCareful@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

I think you should go.

[-] reagansrottencorpse@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

Put these rabid dogs down already

[-] daltotron@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

okay no but seriously why do people think this is gonna happen? is the media like, trying to make this a thing? fetch isn't going to be a thing, stop trying to make it a thing.

but for real like I'm pretty sure 90% of the national guard and reserve are just in the military for free college tuition at this point, so like what's the big idea here? those guys are not fighting a war, I'm telling you straight up.

this post was submitted on 26 Jan 2024

290 points (97.7% liked)

politics

19097 readers

1159 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News