Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Re: the shooting of National Guard members in DC:
Snip
James Surowiecki, columnist for The Atlantic: “No vetting process can guarantee that you’ll catch all bad actors (or that someone won’t flip out in the future). The shooter worked with a CIA-backed unit in Afghanistan, fighting against the Taliban. He’d lived in the US for 4 years with no trouble. He had 5 kids (which you normally would think would keep him from destroying his life in a pointless attack). It was not surprising, or irresponsible, that he was admitted in 2021, or that the Trump admin formally granted him asylum this
. . . The Atlantic: “Before an Afghan refugee shot two National Guard members who had been deployed by Trump to DC, military commanders had warned that their deployment represented an easy ‘target of opportunity’ for grievance-based violence. The troops, deployed in an effort to reduce crime, are untrained in law enforcement; their days are spent cleaning up trash and walking the streets in uniform. Commanders, in a memo that was included in litigation challenging the high-visibility mission in DC, argued that this could put them in danger.”
. . . DOJ countered that the risk was merely ‘speculative.’ It wasn’t. There are costs to performatively deploying members of the military - one of which is the risk of endangering them. The National Guard is stranded somewhere on this battlefield of partisan politics. They are not ready for this arena, and we should never have asked them to be. Politics is not a military mission.”
James Surowiecki, columnist for The Atlantic: “No vetting process can guarantee that you’ll catch all bad actors (or that someone won’t flip out in the future). The shooter worked with a CIA-backed unit in Afghanistan, fighting against the Taliban. He’d lived in the US for 4 years with no trouble. He had 5 kids (which you normally would think would keep him from destroying his life in a pointless attack). It was not surprising, or irresponsible, that he was admitted in 2021, or that the Trump admin formally granted him asylum this
. . . The Atlantic: “Before an Afghan refugee shot two National Guard members who had been deployed by Trump to DC, military commanders had warned that their deployment represented an easy ‘target of opportunity’ for grievance-based violence. The troops, deployed in an effort to reduce crime, are untrained in law enforcement; their days are spent cleaning up trash and walking the streets in uniform. Commanders, in a memo that was included in litigation challenging the high-visibility mission in DC, argued that this could put them in danger.”
. . . DOJ countered that the risk was merely ‘speculative.’ It wasn’t. There are costs to performatively deploying members of the military - one of which is the risk of endangering them. The National Guard is stranded somewhere on this battlefield of partisan politics. They are not ready for this arena, and we should never have asked them to be. Politics is not a military mission.”
https://www.meidasplus.com/p/today-in-politics-bulletin-259-112825?r=9qw74&utm_medium=ios&triedRedirect=true
7 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
