Trump Sending TX Nat Guard to Chicago?

[Caveira]

5 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

You said the IL NG only has medics, it’s likely that the Texas Guard has guys trained in the task at hand. 

Genuine question.  When presidents call up state national guard.  They federalize them no?   Meaning it wouldn’t matter hypothetically which state they used other than do they have the troop head count they need?

i guess troop type too.  All medic Hamas supporting anti American rock people troops may be a bad pick … even thought they think fabricated 3 years of service + rock studying makes them an expert in law enforcement 

Edited 20 hours ago by Caveira

[ionel]

18 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

Texas Rangers?

Redneck Rangers?

They are certainly not Pansy Red Vikings. 

[Bigbrog]

13 hours ago, red viking said:

Per IL Governor. Horrible idea and looks like an attempt to provoke violence. I know I wouldn't look kindly on rednecks from TX trying to jerk me around on my own streets. Even though I know most of them also know this is stupid. 

Hopefully the good people of Chicago behave, for the sake of those troops. If they unleash, the troops are gonna,have big problems. That's what I think Trump wants though, so he can justify violence agsinst liberals. He's an evil person. 

Wait...I thought you said that the NG do nothing but stand around??

[Caveira]

10 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

Wait...I thought you said that the NG do nothing but stand around??

Tis when they’re federalized.   Like when called up by orange man.    When called up for reasons local politicians want addressed that’s much better.    Duh.    Like the democratic national convention… that wasn’t a take over.  

[JimmySpeaks]

DC cleaned up by red state NG.  Time for shithole Chicago to get cleaned up too.  

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

10 hours ago, Caveira said:

Maybe walker Texas ranger.

If true, the criminals are self deporting.  Even the ones born in the US.

[red viking]

27 minutes ago, JimmySpeaks said:

DC cleaned up by red state NG.  Time for shithole Chicago to get cleaned up too.  

Crime was already going down there. Dumb statement. 

[JimmySpeaks]

5 minutes ago, red viking said:

Crime was already going down there. Dumb statement. 

Went down from ten murders per weekend to nine. Good job. 

[nick]

What's the plan for the National Guard?

I keep seeing that they are there to support the local police and authorities, but what does support actually entail? Is it just having a physical presence in an area?

[Caveira]

5 minutes ago, nick said:

What's the plan for the National Guard?

I keep seeing that they are there to support the local police and authorities, but what does support actually entail? Is it just having a physical presence in an area?

Did crime go down in dc?

[nick]

6 minutes ago, Caveira said:

Did crime go down in dc?

I didn't ask that question?

[Bigbrog]

26 minutes ago, nick said:

What's the plan for the National Guard?

I keep seeing that they are there to support the local police and authorities, but what does support actually entail? Is it just having a physical presence in an area?

Do some actual research and find out

Edited 8 hours ago by Bigbrog

[Caveira]

15 minutes ago, nick said:

I didn't ask that question?

They’re gonna prolly do the same shyte they did in dc.   This question was also asked 653 times regarding dc and no one really in this forum was briefed on the specifics of their tasks.   And I think you know that and are just rabble rousing 

 

Ask rock lobster.   I guess they just stand around and somehow lowered crime.   

Edited 7 hours ago by Caveira

[nick]

18 minutes ago, Caveira said:

They’re gonna prolly do the same shyte they did in dc.   This question was also asked 653 times regarding dc and no one really in this forum was briefed on the specifics of their tasks.   And I think you know that and are just rabble rousing 

 

Ask rock lobster.   I guess they just stand around and somehow lowered crime.   

I've done some research (apparently not enough for Bigbrog) and it's all more or less the same headline quotes and media hot takes - before supporting the deployment of the National Guard to a city, I'd like to know the details...

If it's just sending the guard to high crime area to show a presence and free up police to do investigative work, so be it, but I'd like to know.

I'm curious if anyone has seen more details on what the plan is

Edited 7 hours ago by nick

[ionel]

1 hour ago, nick said:

I've done some research (apparently not enough for Bigbrog) and it's all more or less the same headline quotes and media hot takes - before supporting the deployment of the National Guard to a city, I'd like to know the details...

If it's just sending the guard to high crime area to show a presence and free up police to do investigative work, so be it, but I'd like to know.

I'm curious if anyone has seen more details on what the plan is

What did NG do in DC?

[red viking]

1 hour ago, nick said:

I've done some research (apparently not enough for Bigbrog) and it's all more or less the same headline quotes and media hot takes - before supporting the deployment of the National Guard to a city, I'd like to know the details...

If it's just sending the guard to high crime area to show a presence and free up police to do investigative work, so be it, but I'd like to know.

I'm curious if anyone has seen more details on what the plan is

I'm actually most interested in the LONG TERM plan. Keep troops (and the extra fbi, ICE agents, etc) there indefinitely ( and away from jobs, other duties and family) and if not what happens after they leave? Either way, unlikely to be a long tem benefit. Few will want to join the NG if this is the crap they end up doing for long periods of time. 

Edited 6 hours ago by red viking

[mspart]

23 minutes ago, red viking said:

I'm actually most interested in the LONG TERM plan. Keep troops (and the extra fbi, ICE agents, etc) there indefinitely ( and away from jobs, other duties and family) and if not what happens after they leave? Either way, unlikely to be a long tem benefit. Few will want to join the NG if this is the crap they end up doing for long periods of time. 

The long term should be increase police presence, meaning hiring more police to maintain the short term fixes that Trump is supporting.   Any Political worth his/her salt would see the short term reduction in violent crime and want that to continue if they want to keep their job.   DC sees the change and Bowser has acquiesced.   Smart politician.   Right now Chicago mayor and IL gov look like idiots.   They don't want violent crime reduced?   Say what?   Violent crime in big cities is primarily against blacks.   So black lives do not matter?   Say what?   This is not going unnoticed.   Hence all the folks in Chicago posting videos asking for help to get their neighborhoods safe.  

It will  not be a panacea but the effort will show that the violent and non-violent crime can be reduced by greater police presence on the streets.   But Trumps effort will be short term.   It will be up to the cities to man up and get their police up to proper numbers.   This is a losing position for the D big city leaders and D governors that are saying no to reducing crime.   

mspart

[mspart]

I have been to Istanbul and Bogota for work.   Istanbul in 1996 or so.   There were armed guards at the entrance to malls and historic sites.   I can't tell you how violated I felt.   Just kidding.   I did  not feel unsafe or uneasy other than my hope that these folks had proper gun training.  

I was in Bogota during the cartel time.   Bogota was safe but I was told not to leave the city limits.   There were armed guards on all the carreterra overpasses and mall entrances.   Again, I felt safe, much safer than if they had not been there that's for sure.   Red Herring that armed officers of the law create a feeling of unsafety.   Totally.   When the area is crime ridden, no one is going to have a problem with increased officer presence.   The only exception are illegals and people who act illegally.  

mspart

[mspart]

57 minutes ago, mspart said:

The long term should be increase police presence, meaning hiring more police to maintain the short term fixes that Trump is supporting.   Any Political worth his/her salt would see the short term reduction in violent crime and want that to continue if they want to keep their job.   DC sees the change and Bowser has acquiesced.   Smart politician.   Right now Chicago mayor and IL gov look like idiots.   They don't want violent crime reduced?   Say what?   Violent crime in big cities is primarily against blacks.   So black lives do not matter?   Say what?   This is not going unnoticed.   Hence all the folks in Chicago posting videos asking for help to get their neighborhoods safe.  

It will  not be a panacea but the effort will show that the violent and non-violent crime can be reduced by greater police presence on the streets.   But Trumps effort will be short term.   It will be up to the cities to man up and get their police up to proper numbers.   This is a losing position for the D big city leaders and D governors that are saying no to reducing crime.   

mspart

Speaking of Bowser, the below is from WAPO and it says, D.C. Mayor Bowser issued an executive order that would welcome federal law enforcement officials to stay in the city indefinitely, an indication of her willingness to cooperate with President Trump’s effort to take over public safety in the District.

https://www.facebook.com/washingtonpost/posts/dc-mayor-bowser-issued-an-executive-order-that-would-welcome-federal-law-enforce/1149775563680984/

Of course MSNBC has a different take. 

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/trump-dc-mayor-muriel-bowser-executive-order-police-rcna228607

There's a cost to the way Muriel Bowser is trying to play the game with Trump

The D.C. mayor's cooperation with Trump might be a strategic play — but it has consequences.

mspart

 

Edited 4 hours ago by mspart

[Offthemat]

23 minutes ago, mspart said:

Of course MSNBC has a different take. 

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/trump-dc-mayor-muriel-bowser-executive-order-police-rcna228607

“but her decision to cooperate with Trump even more than she needed to sets a troubling precedent.“

Sets a troubling precedent, how.  Too whom?

[mspart]

1 hour ago, Offthemat said:

“but her decision to cooperate with Trump even more than she needed to sets a troubling precedent.“

Sets a troubling precedent, how.  Too whom?

Exactly.   Cleaning up the city is setting a troubling precedent?   Reducing violent crime is setting a troubling precedent?  Having residents feel safer is setting a troubling precedent?

How  much more in the tank can you be.   it is obvious the Ds and the press are against clean and safe cities.   

mspart

[WrestlingRasta]

I think a distinction that is being missed here is the difference between cooperating with, and being thankful for (as it pertains in the other thread) for law enforcement engagement, vs military troops engaging in law enforcement in American cities.  Military policing Americans has always been a no no.  It’s a big reason for the revolution that started our nation.  And it is not what is being agreed to here.  DC, while appreciating and encouraging the assistance of law enforcement agencies, is also suing the administration over the use of military troops policing our citizens.  Can’t undo what has been done, so I’m assuming they are suing for the sake of it not becoming the norm, which it seems to be creeping toward. 

[Caveira]

Hopefully this nonsense doesn’t occur.  Maxine waters is a tool 

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1CELDg8yxG/?mibextid=wwXIfr