Let's see. We've got: 'use military on Venezuela', 'use military on American allies', 'use military on Americans.'
Yeah, that all seems like something the winner of the FIFA peace prize would do.
this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2026
222 points (99.6% liked)
politics
27280 readers
2424 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Don't forget that we're going to 'use the military on Iran' because they are... um, cracking down on protesters.
But the prize was made of chocolate, so it's only peace until it's completely gone. Then it's back to authoritarianism.
If you don't stop resisting my illegal violent takeover, I'll get more illegal and more violent!
The beating will continue until morale improves.
Strategies straight from the fascism playbook.
Just going to put this right here for you service men and women out there...
"Our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders. Like us, you all swore an oath to protect and defend this constitution. Right now, the threats coming to our constitution aren't just coming from abroad but from right here at home."
Our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders.
I mean that's kind of a cop out that relies on the least educated people in the chain of command to not only successfully refuse an illegal order, but to defend its legality in a court where you're guilty until proven innocent.
If scotus and other federal judges take weeks/months to deliberate if these are actually illegal orders, I'm not exactly confident that a bunch of privates and specialist are going to figure it out in the moment.
In extreme cases we're starting to see now, I'd say if given an order to fire upon US citizen protesters, I'd hope the soldiers would have common sense in knowing that'd be illegal. In a recent scenario where given the order to fire a second strike upon a down vessel with survivors, that also should have been a common sense in its legality, or at the very least morality.
I can see, however, a dilemma of soldiers disobeying and fearing the repercussions in the moment of doing so until proven otherwise. I do urge, though, that "i was just following orders" does not hold up in a tribunal sense. It's a double edged sword and an unfortunate situation this regime should NOT be putting our military in.
In extreme cases we're starting to see now, I'd say if given an order to fire upon US citizen protesters, I'd hope the soldiers would have common sense in knowing that'd be illegal.
I think even if someone had the notion that it's an illegal order, I would bet they'd still follow it. The military has made it very clear over the decades that they will protect soldiers following illegal orders before they protect soldiers disregarding illegal ones.
"i was just following orders" does not hold up in a tribunal sense.
The problem being that US soldiers are immune from prosecutions from international courts. The government has illicitly stated that we would invade the Hague before allowing a US military member be tried before their courts.
International courts of justice are largely a legal farce that allow countries to transmute their hard power into soft power to influence geopolitics.
International sanctions and property seizures for the US regime and its oligarchs would seem fair.
i have been assured that the military will not fire upon civilians. let's see.
Maybe if you just bend over and take it a little longer, it will start to help...