this post was submitted on 02 Aug 2025
203 points (99.5% liked)

politics

25045 readers
1737 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
 

A Department of Homeland Security memo obtained by TNR signals top-level discussions about a potential escalation of the Pentagon’s domestic anti-immigration role, and lays out new details.

Archived copies of the article:

The memo itself is published here with archived copies at:

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone 46 points 19 hours ago (3 children)

Having read the memo--which is basically meeting minutes between the DoD and DHS-- it's seems to be missing an understanding of how much Trump is disliked up and down the ranks. They ultimately did almost nothing in LA. The birthday military parade had clear signs of everyone phoning it in on purpose. Signalgate convinced all but the most diehard MAGA soldiers (not as big a group as you might think) that this leadership is a bunch of clowns.

What this means is that the White House still overestimates how much the military is in their pocket. Good.

From Ur-fascism:

Fascist governments are condemned to lose wars because they are constitutionally incapable of objectively evaluating the force of the enemy.

What's missing from the analysis is that they can't objectively evaluate their own forces, either. As much as they go on about strength and fighting and war, they're actually really bad at it.

[–] redsand@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

The fuck trump shuffle was funny to hear about. The logistical failures in LA and Afghanistan are great signs of poor strategy and basic understanding of.. Any military not just the US.

load more comments (2 replies)