this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2024
118 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19120 readers
2103 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ptz@dubvee.org 30 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

And to make this even more ridiculous than it already is, they're calling this board the "warrior board".

If Donald Trump approves the order, it could fast-track the removal of generals and admirals found to be “lacking in requisite leadership qualities,” ... But it could also create a chilling effect on top military officers, given the president-elect’s past vow to fire “woke generals,” referring to officers seen as promoting diversity in the ranks at the expense of military readiness.

As commander in chief, Trump can fire any officer at will, but an outside board whose members he appoints would bypass the Pentagon’s regular promotion system, signaling across the military that he intends to purge a number of generals and admirals.

...

But some former officials believe the potential Trump administration is looking to politicize the military. “Do they start wearing MAGA hats in formation to signal who’s where?” asked one former senior Pentagon official. “The potential for this to go wrong is infinite.

Emphases mine.

[–] adarza@lemmy.ca 15 points 1 week ago

he's already outsourced executive branch and parts of judicial and legislative; so why not outsource our military leadership to russia, too.

[–] henfredemars@infosec.pub 10 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

This always ends in a yes-men military filled with unskilled ass-kissers.

People will optimize for the grading system.

[–] nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 week ago

Interestingly, the damage done to the US military this way by itself makes all of Russia's investments in Trump worthwhile. Incredible bang for the buck - far more than they'd get investing in their own military.

[–] MapleEngineer@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

This is one of two ways that it can end.

The other is that the military says, "No".

[–] jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

Nazis play opposite day to confuse everybody.