Civil War-again?

[Soloist]

Well, when the argument is "this is against some law because they were deployed", then semantics do matter.

As it stands I'm a little dismayed how the History and Current Events threads are being redeployed into being Politics subforums, and ones that cater to a particular partisan bias.

What I was answering was if they were deployed. I was not answering the legal aspect of it. Most likely they took guard positions to free up others to do different work.

I'm sure you can argue the legal side with someone but I answered your question for you. Even if I did dig out the mission parameters you'd still argue on some point and I'm really not taking a side here.

[JohnH]

Well, when the argument is "this is against some law because they were deployed", then semantics do matter.

As it stands I'm a little dismayed how the History and Current Events threads are being redeployed into being Politics subforums, and ones that cater to a particular partisan bias.

What I was answering was if they were deployed. I was not answering the legal aspect of it. Most likely they took guard positions to free up others to do different work.

I'm sure you can argue the legal side with someone but I answered your question for you. Even if I did dig out the mission parameters you'd still argue on some point and I'm really not taking a side here.

Sorry, the political remark was not aimed at you.

Here is my perception: some people really want to use MennoNet as a forum to complain about Trump. For whatever reason, they don't want to confine their complaining to the Politics subforum. I can at least understand the excuses for finding ways to use Current Events to complain about Trump, but I am really not impressed with using the History forum to complain about Trump.

Overall, MennoNet isn't the right forum to complain about Trump. There are plenty of other places to do so.

[temporal1]

\Alright fine... you win. I looked into it. President Trump deployed at least 700 active duty Marines to LA. Past that I'm not going to look so that is the answer. He did.

"Deployed" on what mission?

As I understand it, some Marines were simply assigned to be present on federal property in LA, which is... not the same as being "deployed". They were just assigned to go exist there.

By the same standard, the Marines are "deployed" to San Diego since they're also on guard duty on federal property at Camp Pendleton.

This sounds correct to me.
The best+fastest way to get rid of police, military, etc., is to “not resist” (pun acknowledged), not commit crimes, stop drug running, what have you. Respect laws, “nobody gets hurt”.

In cases of police overstep, certainly, take it to courts.

Put them out of work by not committing crimes. It’s very effective.

[JimFoxvog]

The best+fastest way to get rid of police, military, etc., is to “not resist” (pun acknowledged), not commit crimes, stop drug running, what have you. Respect laws, “nobody gets hurt”.

.
You forgot the other important part of not being bothered by police. Look "White" and don't have an accent associated with unwanted groups.

[Bootstrap]

The best+fastest way to get rid of police, military, etc., is to “not resist” (pun acknowledged), not commit crimes, stop drug running, what have you. Respect laws, “nobody gets hurt”.

Ah, but that strategy only works for those who are actually guilty of the crimes.

And so far, there is no public evidence that the people on these boats are. And certainly none that all of them are. No convincing case that Venezuela is a major source of drugs at all. And certainly no convincing case that they are working for the Venezuelan government.

Traditionally, presidents provide this kind of information before going to war when we have not been attacked.

In the civil deployments, these cities are at record lows for crimes. And grand juries are saying that there is no case against many who have been arrested in these operations. Judges are saying the same. Meanwhile, people found guilty of these drug related crimes are being pardoned. 1,600 convicted criminals pardoned so far this year.

So what protects the innocent? What do they do when they are disappeared or killed without any process? Some of the guilty seem to have plenty of protection.

[ken_sylvania]

The best+fastest way to get rid of police, military, etc., is to “not resist” (pun acknowledged), not commit crimes, stop drug running, what have you. Respect laws, “nobody gets hurt”.

Ah, but that strategy only works for those who are actually guilty of the crimes.

And so far, there is no public evidence that the people on these boats are. And certainly none that all of them are. No convincing case that Venezuela is a major source of drugs at all. And certainly no convincing case that they are working for the Venezuelan government.

That's real slick. Venezuela is just a hub, not the source. Right. Gotta love semantics.

[Bootstrap]

The best+fastest way to get rid of police, military, etc., is to “not resist” (pun acknowledged), not commit crimes, stop drug running, what have you. Respect laws, “nobody gets hurt”.

Ah, but that strategy only works for those who are actually guilty of the crimes.

And so far, there is no public evidence that the people on these boats are. And certainly none that all of them are. No convincing case that Venezuela is a major source of drugs at all. And certainly no convincing case that they are working for the Venezuelan government.

That's real slick. Venezuela is just a hub, not the source. Right. Gotta love semantics.

Actually, I don't think it's even a major hub, is it?

If your goal was to fight drugs in the USA, why on earth would you start with Venezuela? While pardoning so many bigwigs who have been central figures in drug trafficking?

I think that's more than "semantics".

[ken_sylvania]

Ah, but that strategy only works for those who are actually guilty of the crimes.

And so far, there is no public evidence that the people on these boats are. And certainly none that all of them are. No convincing case that Venezuela is a major source of drugs at all. And certainly no convincing case that they are working for the Venezuelan government.

That's real slick. Venezuela is just a hub, not the source. Right. Gotta love semantics.

Actually, I don't think it's even a major hub, is it?

I don't know. WSJ seems to think so. https://www.wsj.com/world/americas/how- ... _permalink

If your goal was to fight drugs in the USA, why on earth would you start with Venezuela? While pardoning so many bigwigs who have been central figures in drug trafficking?

I had no idea that the US has just now finally started fighting drugs in the USA, which apparently is what you're suggesting is happening if you are implying that the US "started" fighting drugs by attacking the drug boats from Venezuela. Pardoning convicted drug traffickers doesn't seem like a brilliant idea to me.

I think that's more than "semantics".

Saying Venezuela is not a major "source" of drugs because most of the cocaine originates outside the country and just moves "through" Venezuela is certainly semantics.

[temporal1]

boot:
Ah, but that strategy only works for those who are actually guilty of the crimes.

News to me.
Respecting laws has worked really-really well for me and people i know and don’t know all over the world.
i will take a wild guess that includes you and everyone on this forum.

i believe “law-abiding” is the norm, not the exception.

How about stop drug running? You were warned, now stop.

[temporal1]

The best+fastest way to get rid of police, military, etc., is to “not resist” (pun acknowledged), not commit crimes, stop drug running, what have you. Respect laws, “nobody gets hurt”.

. You forgot the other important part of not being bothered by police. Look "White" and don't have an accent associated with unwanted groups.

i didn’t forget. i take mixed populations for granted. i later added:
Respecting laws has worked really-really well for me and people i know and don’t know all over the world.
i will take a wild guess that includes you and everyone on this forum.

i believe “law-abiding” is the norm, not the exception.

i’m aware of the lib PC narrative you refer to.
i disagree with it.

in my personal experience, most in police and military are people who look exactly like those you’re describing, there are plenty of civilian people (who look exactly like that) believe as i do, they have no interest in living in crime infested neighborhoods.

i get your well meaning intent. i disagree with your accusatory generalizations. i don’t see that path as constructive.
the U.S. isn’t the only country that wants the population, citizens, visitors, ALL, to respect laws. many countries have homogenous non-caucasion populations, ditto.

lots of non-caucasion countries have far stricter systems than the U.S.
i’m pretty sure you’re aware, if you think about it for a minute.