4 comments

  • alfiedotwtf 1 hour ago
    This is how you create a subservient military… well, I mean even more so
    • stinkbeetle 58 minutes ago
      The military is supposed to be subservient to the civilian government in liberal democracies.
      • jackb4040 44 minutes ago
        IDK what is covered by "liberal democracies", but in the specific military at hand every individual member takes an oath to uphold the Constitution regardless of contradictory orders from the government.
        • voidfunc 42 minutes ago
          An oath isn't a binding legal requirement. The military reports to the government.
          • cperciva 36 minutes ago
            The oath isn't legally binding, but the law is. Committing war crimes is illegal even if the civilian government orders it.
          • hackyhacky 37 minutes ago
            Obeying the law is a legal requirement. Following illegal orders is not (usually) a defense.
          • jackb4040 34 minutes ago
            The legal system is one of the three branches of the government. The military voluntarily subordinates itself to civilian courts during peacetime outside of a constitutional crisis. A fact that becomes increasingly irrelevant with every new story like this one.

            You and every politician in history on the losing side of a military coup can scream "that's illegal" till the cows come home, it won't change a thing.

            • noduerme 19 minutes ago
              The US still hasn't experienced a military coup in the 250 years of its existence. The form a military coup would take in this country would not be a coup against the elected executive branch, it would be a runaway executive branch itself. Which is an important distinction because the political echelon needs to maintain at least an appearance of democracy.
    • derektank 56 minutes ago
      This is obviously a terrible decision, but let’s be real. The overwhelming majority of US servicemembers aren’t getting their news from Stars and Stripes; they get their news from the same place everyone 18-30 gets their news, social media.
      • bad_haircut72 41 minutes ago
        Its an avenue for people inside the organization to spread messages to other people inside the organization.
        • derektank 33 minutes ago
          Sure, it’s one avenue that exists along private military and national defense outlets and blogs such as War on the Rocks, Task and Purpose, Breaking Defense, Foreign Policy, etc.

          I am more concerned that this change means the troubles our servicemembers are having with base HVA/C or water supplies may go unreported, than the risk of some kind of cultural conformity.

          • jackb4040 26 minutes ago
            Did Stars and Stripes cover any of those stories anyways? I feel like what I've seen has come through Snapchat or individual sources straight to liberal MSM outlets.

            Forgive me for saying so, but it's basically state media. It's purpose more or less is to facilitate coverups and limited hangouts. This story is notable for the same reasons Colbert being cancelled was notable, it's a dispute within the mainstream / elite media.

      • chabska 31 minutes ago
        First they came for the niche news, and I didn't say anything because it's only 0.5% share of the viewership. Then they came for the regional news, and I didn't say anything because it's only 3.5% share of the viewership...

        (How you respond to these little transgressions will determine whether your society will recover to normal or slide further into ruin)

  • awinter-py 1 hour ago
    I mean he voiced them before being fired too, it's the reason they fired him right?
  • mcswell 1 hour ago
    Minitrue is here, and it works for Hegseth over at Minipax.
  • like_any_other 49 minutes ago
    No more censorious than Cambridge or Ghent universities: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cevmrjd9lj1o
    • applfanboysbgon 43 minutes ago
      Could you tell me what Cambridge has to do with US government censorship? I'm afraid I don't quite see the connection.