Trump’s Military Plans: No More Waiting
Trump Has Big Plans for Military Within the US: ‘Next Time, I’m Not Waiting’
Campaigning in Iowa this year, Donald Trump made a bold statement about his intentions for the military if he were to win a second term as president. He expressed frustration over being prevented from using the military to address violence in primarily Democratic cities and states, referring to New York City and Chicago as “crime dens.” Trump vowed, “The next time, I’m not waiting. We’re going to show how bad a job they do.” He hinted at an aggressive agenda that included mass deportations, travel bans, and using the military against foreign drug cartels.
While Trump has not provided specific details on how he would use the military, experts believe he would have significant power to do so. The Insurrection Act, a law dating back to the nation’s early years, grants the president almost unfettered authority to call up military units to respond to unrest within the country. This authority is not subject to review by the courts, with the only requirement being a request for participants to disperse.
Although deploying the military within the country’s borders would be a departure from tradition, Trump has shown a willingness to break norms. He has openly discussed using the military at the border, in cities dealing with violent crime, and against foreign drug cartels. His plans have garnered support from military veterans, with a majority voting for him in the 2020 presidential election.
However, invoking the Insurrection Act and using the military for domestic policing could face pushback from the Pentagon. The new chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Charles Q. Brown, was one of the signatories of a memo denouncing the events of the January 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol as “sedition and insurrection.” Military leaders could face consequences for their actions, even if carried out under the president’s direction.
While there are institutional checks and balances in place, Trump’s ability to develop a semi-logical train of thought that leads to mayhem and violence could create a situation where the military is called in. Military personnel are legally obliged to obey orders, but they are also obligated to disobey unlawful orders. The stakes for them are high, as disobeying a lawful order could result in the end of their careers and potential jail time.
Overall, Trump’s plans for the military within the US raise questions about presidential power, military oaths, and the role of the military in domestic affairs. The potential invocation of the Insurrection Act and the use of the military for law enforcement purposes would test the boundaries of the law and the military’s commitment to upholding the Constitution.
The Western Journal has reviewed this Associated Press story and may have altered it prior to publication to ensure that it meets our editorial standards.
The post Trump Has Big Plans for Military Within the US: ‘Next Time, I’m Not Waiting’ appeared first on The Western Journal.
What concerns arise from the blurring of lines between the military and law enforcement in the context of using the military against domestic unrest?
Rime, and against protesters. His 2020 campaign rhetoric indicates that he would take it a step further in his second term.
The notion of using the military against domestic unrest raises several concerns and questions. One is the blurring of lines between the military and law enforcement, a distinction that has been carefully maintained in the United States. The military’s primary purpose is to defend the country against external threats, while law enforcement agencies handle domestic issues. By deploying the military on American soil, Trump would be crossing this divide and potentially undermining the integrity and effectiveness of both institutions.
Another concern is the potential for abuse of power. Granting the president unchecked authority to use the military within the country could lead to authoritarian practices, eroding the principles of democracy and individual freedom. Without proper checks and balances, there is a risk of targeting political opponents, suppressing dissent, and infringing upon civil liberties.
Furthermore, the idea of mass deportations and travel bans indicates a discriminatory approach towards certain communities or individuals. Implementing such policies would not only violate human rights but also damage the country’s image and international standing. The United States prides itself on being a nation of immigrants, built on the values of diversity and inclusivity. Restrictive measures, particularly when enforced through military power, contradict these fundamental principles.
Additionally, using the military against foreign drug cartels poses its own challenges. While it is crucial to address drug trafficking and organized crime, relying solely on the military may not be the most effective strategy. Dealing with complex issues of this nature requires a comprehensive approach involving law enforcement agencies, intelligence gathering, international collaboration, and addressing the root causes of drug production and consumption. A militaristic approach risks exacerbating violence and unintended consequences, rather than achieving a sustainable solution.
In times of unrest or crisis, it is essential for leaders to prioritize dialogue, diplomacy, and peaceful means of conflict resolution. Resorting to the military should be a last resort, employed only when all other options have been exhausted. It is crucial to uphold democratic values, respect human rights, and consider the long-term consequences of our actions.
As the election approaches and voters evaluate candidates based on their positions and policies, it is important to critically examine approaches that diverge from established norms. The role of the military within the United States should remain focused on defending the country from external threats, while other domestic issues are appropriately handled by law enforcement agencies. It is in the interest of the nation’s stability, unity, and adherence to democratic principles that such distinctions are maintained.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
