No Dissension - No Contradictory Thought

[Shaps]

https://www.defense.gov/Explore/News...-in-the-ranks/

There are already regulations established to address this issue. There are standards already in place. There are numerous training programs that Service Members are required to conduct and participate in. There are already security screenings and background checks. There are laws to ensure good order and discipline. Anyone violating those standards should be, and have been, reported through the appropriate channels and actions taken.

Two lines in the article stand out: "There are questions that need to be answered, like what constitutes extremist activity? What is permissible in looking for extremists in the ranks?"

The fact these questions are even asked - at least for me - explains exactly what this is. A political ploy, and a lesson to all Service Members that you will watch what you say and do. Nothing more, nothing less. This is a mechanism to ensure obedience to the current administration - not the Constitution as the Oath administered demands.

That's my personal opinion.

[Seran]

https://www.defense.gov/Explore/News...-in-the-ranks/

There are already regulations established to address this issue. There are standards already in place. There are numerous training programs that Service Members are required to conduct and participate in. There are already security screenings and background checks. There are laws to ensure good order and discipline. Anyone violating those standards should be, and have been, reported through the appropriate channels and actions taken.

Two lines in the article stand out: "There are questions that need to be answered, like what constitutes extremist activity? What is permissible in looking for extremists in the ranks?"

The fact these questions are even asked - at least for me - explains exactly what this is. A political ploy, and a lesson to all Service Members that you will watch what you say and do. Nothing more, nothing less. This is a mechanism to ensure obedience to the current administration - not the Constitution as the Oath administered demands.

That's my personal opinion.

As a service member you've always had to watch what you say or do. Be it disrespecting a commanding officer, being homosexual or threatening to overthrow the popularly elected government you're employed by. I don't know why not being associated with or exhorting treason is an allowable activity in your calcified brain

[kutter]

As a service member you've always had to watch what you say or do. Be it disrespecting a commanding officer, being homosexual or threatening to overthrow the popularly elected government you're employed by. I don't know why not being associated with or exhorting treason is an allowable activity in your calcified brain

Well, when the San Francisco Board of Directors labels the NRA a terrorist organization, I worry about what the persons in positions of power will decide constitutes extremism. As a 22 year veteran of the armed forces and a lifetime member of the NRA, can I be labeled as an extremist? There are many in this current administration who would happily do so. Remember, this country was founded by 'extremist' that fought a war over a 10% tax on tea.

[caelric]

I'm totally okay with weeding extremists out of the military.

I'm not okay when the definition of extremist can change from one administration to another. As kutter said, the NRA is labeled as an extremist organization by some politicians. This administration could easily start saying that anyone tangentially involved with the NRA or other, similar, non-extremist organization (by any reasonable person's definition), needs to be weeded out.

Next administration, when the Republicans win (which will eventually happen), they could say that anyone who supports BLM needs to be weeded out.

Ah, never mind. I see absolutely no way in which this can go terribly wrong.

[Methais]

Eventually anyone who didn't have a raging case of TDS 24/7 since 2016, even if they didn't actually support Trump, will be considered an extremist.

[Shaps]

As a service member you've always had to watch what you say or do. Be it disrespecting a commanding officer, being homosexual or threatening to overthrow the popularly elected government you're employed by. I don't know why not being associated with or exhorting treason is an allowable activity in your calcified brain

Individuals with the reading comprehension level of a 3rd grader, like yourself, are why we're in the situation we're in now.

[Ashliana]

Individuals with the reading comprehension level of a 3rd grader, like yourself, are why we're in the situation we're in now.

Except you didn't point out any of his "reading comprehension" issues. You did, however, prove that you couldn't respond to him utterly dismantling your argument. What a surprising result for a thread you created.

[Shaps]

Except you didn't point out any of his "reading comprehension" issues. You did, however, prove that you couldn't respond to him utterly dismantling your argument. What a surprising result for a thread you created.

I disregard 99% of what you say these days.

[Ashliana]

I disregard 99% of what you say these days.

That's called a concession, my dear. Like how you conceded to Seran. Better luck in your next retarded thread.

[HOUSE]

<clutches pearls>

FUCK, ITS THE LIBERAL BOOGIE MAN!