this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2025
823 points (99.6% liked)

politics

25887 readers
2934 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 120 points 1 day ago (2 children)

"All I've had from them so far, from the people I've talked to, is a combination of disbelief that some of them were made to fly from, some of them, Asia, from all over the world ... all the way to Quanico to listen to the same familiar type of culture war complaints that we've been having since Trump was reelected," she added, calling Trump's remarks a "campaign-style stump speech."

They love making people do shit like this, and absolutely despise being reminded that someone can make them do it.

As long as they don't bitch out and resign, this is going to backfire on trump.

Even if he tries to kick them out, they can drag their feet thru the official process, and if trump starts circumventing that widescale, the rest will close ranks and do a coup out of pure self interest.

You don't get that high up without putting your career over everything, and trump just threatened their careers.

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 50 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Even if he tries to kick them out, they can drag their feet thru the official process, and if trump starts circumventing that widescale, the rest will close ranks and do a coup out of pure self interest.

Things might get spicy when we finally have folks that decide to uphold their oaths to uphold the Constitution. We certainly haven't seen any in the Executive Branch yet, and most of the Judicial and Legislative seems to be abdicating their oaths too.

[–] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 36 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Note the oath the enlisted take specifically says they will follow the orders of the President.

That's not the one that matters.

The officer's oath does not include that, specifically for this reason:

I ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God. (Title 5 U.S. Code 3331, an individual, except the President, elected or appointed to an office of honor or profit in the civil service or uniformed services)

https://www.army.mil/values/officers.html

I'm 99% sure that these oaths apply across the board regardless of branch, because they apply to more than just commissioned officers.

[–] PalmTreeIsBestTree@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au 20 points 1 day ago (1 children)

the rest will close ranks and do a coup out of pure self interest.

No they won't, Americans won't do shit. That much is painfully obvious to everyone in the world by now.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world 69 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I’m surprised that the pentagon reporter is allowed to talk about this.

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 39 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Soon to be “ex-pentagon reporter….”

[–] PattyMcB@lemmy.world 25 points 1 day ago

Or possibly another citizen deportee. Damn i hate this timeline

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] pinheadednightmare@lemmy.world 45 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Just curious how much it cost American tax payers for this meeting that could have been an email?

[–] ameancow@lemmy.world 28 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Speak for yourself, I would have paid DIRECTLY to the defense department to put Hegseth on stage in front of hundreds or thousands of career military professionals from all walks of life and all branches of our highest levels of defense planning and strategy so they all get to see him in person for what he is, a wannabe TED-talking, sound-bite spewing grifter civilian with no leadership qualifications past running a podcast. Telling them each "how it's going to be" in a sad, rambling, uninspired, chat-GTP written lecture that you would expect from a CEO of a silicon valley startup hungup on military aesthetics.

There is no better way to ensure that every competent and concerned armed-forces leader is on the same page as getting them all in a room together to listen to these clowns perform their circus act.

If it comes to it, we do not win revolutions without the military. We need this kind of performance.

[–] RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Hey hey... he's not a civilian... for two weeks out of the year he is a citizen soldier.

A citizen soldier that just called all of the top military brass pussies to their faces.

Is it still considered a fragging if he's a lower rank than them?

[–] ameancow@lemmy.world 2 points 22 hours ago

Is it still considered a fragging if he’s a lower rank than them?

While I love the fantasy, the reality is even colder and harsher.

They likely are not paying this clown any attention at all unless they're forced to.

Policy decisions and recruitment strategies come and go, but they have a saying about war and if it ever changes or not. These lifetime generals and leaders are in their positions because they have far greater concerns than the temporary ravings of a political pundit who captured the spotlight for a moment. They will all go back to their stations, a little time lost, a little more to do, and they will sweep all the performative letters into the garbage so they can focus on the eternal art of finding ways to put holes in other people in mass numbers before they can put holes in us in mass numbers.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 35 points 1 day ago (4 children)

The military may just have to step in and save us on this one guys. This administration is a direct threat to democracy and everyone who has provided material support for Project 2025 is a traitor.

[–] Schmoo@slrpnk.net 23 points 1 day ago

The military isn't going to step in and save us unless they feel strongly that the public will support them wholeheartedly, and they aren't going to feel that way if there isn't massive and unprecedented civil unrest. That means the onus is on us.

[–] electric_nan@lemmy.ml 19 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The military ain't gonna "step in". The only way that could possibly happen is if we have major and sustained civil demonstrations in our cities. Even then, it may take mass civilian casualties before the military intervenes.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago (4 children)

You could very well be right, but without Congress acting on this lawlessness and with SCOTUS's capitulation it leaves the military as the last organization that could step in to end this madness.

First, consider the war crimes this administration has ordered. Second, its continual attacks on the Constitution and the rule of law. Lastly, the outright treasonous Project 2025 this administration has given material support to. The military would be acting well within reason seizing control and ordering a new election.

Everyone who has given material support to Project 2025 should be held by military tribunal or ICC in order to ensure corruption is kept out of the proceedings. After this purge of the right, something we should have done long ago due to their spreading of hate and class warfare tactics, we can finally move on to an imperfect but functional future.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] paper_moon@lemmy.world 42 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

Well, expect all of them to be removed in favor of people who did, by the end of the week.

[–] logicbomb@lemmy.world 39 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You won't find anybody who liked Hegseth's speech, because it didn't appeal to anybody. It was both naive and condescending, and it was presented by a guy who nobody would respect in the first place. Nobody thinks the problem with our military is that some general is overweight.

But I'm sure it would be easy to find some people who say they liked the speech. It's the same way that some people say they like Donald Trump. Strange how often those same people say that he's the dumbest person on the planet once they get too fed up with him and leave.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RattlerSix@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I don't think we have enough Fox news hosts to replace them all

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Did....did Hegseth even make it to NCO?

Christ.

No.

He was a Princeton ROTC brat and made it all the way to Major, O-4, in twenty fucking years.

Throw that level of 'career development' onto an enlisted track, and no, he would not have even gotten to an NCO rank, which typically start around E-5, Sergeant.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] deacon@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Soon to be former pentagon reporter I’m sure.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Kurious84@lemmings.world 19 points 1 day ago (2 children)

They probably bugged their hotel rooms to see if they talk shit about trump

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Gates9@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 day ago

Am I a joke to you?

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›