I haven't seen evidence they have truly exhausted other options. I think presidents jump to the guard option as more of a theatric show of force, which I disagree with.

AtomicActuator said:

---

The whiskey rebellion was a bona fide rebellion which justifies military force. The Civil War was a civil war.

---

In what ways is what antifa is doing not a "bona fide" rebellion? How do you define a "bona fide" rebellion?

Quote:

---

That leaves us the civil rights era, which frankly, sucked quite a bit for this country, and the second largest riot we've ever seen, leaving only an oddball strike breaker action by a pretty questionable president.

---

You're overlooking the frequent use of the NG & military to put down labor strikes and civil disobedience at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. Even dadgum Fort Sheridan was built in that time period to protect the northern Chicago suburbs from the labor unrest in Chicago.

And the use of the military in the civil rights era was not just for one riot. It was used frequently.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

So yeah, we should use the National Guard with care, and almost never use military regulars.

---

---

You seem to be OK with the US of the NG by Presidents and for purposes you like. That seems to be the only differentiation from Trump's use. You simply don't like Trump and do like antifa.

AtomicActuator said:

---

I haven't seen evidence they have truly exhausted other options. I think presidents jump to the guard option as more of a theatric show of force, which I disagree with.

---

Your dems aren't going to take care of it. Someone has to. The citizens that want a peaceful city understand that.

'This is not about locals avoiding the area. It's about local
law-enforcement and the city government working with progressive groups to attack federal agents. They also seem to be arresting or ignoring attacks against conservatives'

It's bad enough when state or city decline to assist federal law enforcement. But when the local leaders instruct law enforcement to NOT protect federal property and to NOT assist federal officers when they call for help, that is borderline sedition. When local officials activity prevent federal law enforcement from carrying out their activities for political reasons, that is sedition by definition.

Use of federal law enforcement and if necessary, national guard, is appropriate here.

If this is allowed to occur without serious ramifications then the county might as well revert to the old articles of confederation.

Not really, just pointing out many of those uses were more extreme and/or were not good outcomes we should aspire to.

I'll admit I had some of the detail crossed in my head between the Whiskey Rebellion and Shays' Rebellion, the latter being more cut and dried, but under the Articles. I'm not sure what options Washington had, but again, not a great outcome with 18 deaths attributable to it.

Bottom line, let's not put boots on the ground if we can avoid it.

"We get paid to protest rain or shine"
"We get time-and-a-half and overtime"

(time and a half IS overtime)....

Need a good laugh?

You’re welcome.pic.twitter.com/IecCg3KclC

— C3 (@C_3C_3) October 7, 2025

Edit to add: I'M not laughing.

bobbranco said:

---

t_J_e_C_x said:

---

But suddenly we care about riotous, unlawful assemblies around federal buildings and want to send in troops to clear it out

---

Thanks to Nancy Pelosi the NG was not deployed as requested beforehand.

---

Thank you bobbranco, James Clapper would call that "the kill shot".

Why aren't you laughing though?

Edit: I hope everyone realized that it's AI slop, so no one should be taking it seriously.

AtomicActuator said:

---

Why aren't you laughing though?

---

Because it's not funny what your party is doing to the country.

tFast said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

AtomicActuator said:

---

Tango.Mike said:

---

…believe his opinion not the statistics

---

which stats are you using that show Chicago as among the most dangerous cities per capita? Everywhere I look, I see Memphis at the top, and Chicago way down the list.

---

houston and several other texas cities have higher violent crime rates than chicago. when are we sending in the army to clean those cities up?

---

I've lived in both Houston (downtown) and Chicago (downtown). You absolutely can't compare the two.

---

turns out you actually can with this cool thing called data! 2024 violent crime rates per 100k:

houston: 1148
chicago: 540

it's obvious the national guard deployments are not about curbing crime at all (except for memphis - that's a legit problem), but rather intimidating the standard blue city punching bags and feebly projecting military strength to mask the administration's incompetence with distractions

AtomicActuator said:

---

Bottom line, let's not put boots on the ground if we can avoid it.

---

No one can argue with that. But that's not what the OP's post was about. He was implicitly accusing Trump of taking over the US by military force simply because he's invoking the Insurrection Clause. That's complete BS.

I support Trump's use of "boots on the ground" against antifa and urban violence. Allowing those groups to use violence unchecked will allow them to fester and grow. We cannot tolerate either in a civilized society. The governors in the affected states and mayors in the affected cities are unwilling to do anything, so Trump has to. What alternatives does he have other than "boots on the ground"?

Link for that data you're throwing out there?

And have you checked to make sure that the data is apples to apples?

Finally, which entity is collecting and reporting the data? How valid/reliable is that data?

Thankfully, the president doesn't need your permission to do his job. You have no say in the matter.

Sorry Kamala lost.

KingofHazor said:

---

Link for that data you're throwing out there?

And have you checked to make sure that the data is apples to apples?

Finally, which entity is collecting and reporting the data? How valid/reliable is that data?

---

Chicago PD is under orders to under report crime, especially violent crime, by reclassifying violent crimes as something much less serious.

AtomicActuator said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

Do black lives matter or not? I think they do, and that all people should live in peace and safety. Defense of the citizenry is one of the few legitimate functions of our government.

Your justifications of all the murders and violence seem to indicate you feel differently.

---

You are getting off topic with that weak sauce, so I'll keep it brief. All crime is bad, but we should focus on cities with high per capita crime rates.

---

It seems you're off topic.
The Feds are trying to protect ICE officers doing their job.
What is ICE's job you may ask.
Well it is enforcement of immigration laws and in this era they are going after the most violent of the illegal aliens.
Now where would ICE tend to target the enforcement of the law?
Seems ICE would begin in the sanctuary cities to detain the most illegal aliens, as illegal aliens flock to these sanctuary cities in Democratic Party strongholds.
In the states that are working with ICE, the use of large numbers of agents is not as important. Especially when ICE is aided by local and state law enforcement.

AtomicActuator said:

---

I haven't seen evidence they have truly exhausted other options. I think presidents jump to the guard option as more of a theatric show of force, which I disagree with.

---

Your Dem leaders are openly saying they won't stop your fellow leftist terrorists from attacking ICE so stop with the disingenuous "every option"

link is already in the post. if you don't believe it, you're welcome to provide your own data disproving it.

'Why aren't you laughing though?'....

Because I have to watch Federal agents/LEO's being harassed and attacked EVERY DAY trying to enforce FEDERAL LAW, while ANTIFA and their 'recruits' become MORE emboldened and vile with the ASSISTANCE of local government.
And NOW they're terrorizing the RESIDENTS unimpeded

Ok, but why post a fake joke video in that case?

Old McDonald said:

---

tFast said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

AtomicActuator said:

---

Tango.Mike said:

---

…believe his opinion not the statistics

---

which stats are you using that show Chicago as among the most dangerous cities per capita? Everywhere I look, I see Memphis at the top, and Chicago way down the list.

---

houston and several other texas cities have higher violent crime rates than chicago. when are we sending in the army to clean those cities up?

---

I've lived in both Houston (downtown) and Chicago (downtown). You absolutely can't compare the two.

---

turns out you actually can with this cool thing called data! 2024 violent crime rates per 100k:

houston: 1148
chicago: 540

it's obvious the national guard deployments are not about curbing crime at all (except for memphis - that's a legit problem), but rather intimidating the standard blue city punching bags and feebly projecting military strength to mask the administration's incompetence with distractions

---

In this case, the use of National Guard is to protect ICE.
So please drop this derailment concerning crime statistics.
In sanctuary cities, Democratic Party leadership is actively trying to thwart ICE performing their lawful duties. This incites idiot minions and Antifa basement video game aficionados into criminal actions.
Throw in the fact that Antifa is a Domestic Terrorist group.

Old McDonald said:

---

link is already in the post. if you don't believe it, you're welcome to provide your own data disproving it.

---

Ya got me. You're right. Let's send in the NG to Houston also. From your post, you'd seem to be in support of that, right?

But, by the way, your use of data is suspect. Are the reporting criteria for violent crimes the same in Chicago and Houston? Has anyone been fudging the data?

Your link isn't very helpful. It just takes one to the FBI website, not to the page publishing the data you are asserting.

It's also significant that you selectively chose "violent crime" rather than murder/homicide. For 2024, the homicide/murder rate was 21.1 per 100,000 in Chicago and ~14 per 100,000 in Houston (derived from 322 murders and a population of ~2.3 million).

Everyone knows crime is up, statisticians be damned.

AtomicActuator said:

---

I haven't seen evidence they have truly exhausted other options. I think presidents jump to the guard option as more of a theatric show of force, which I disagree with.

---

What other options are there, especially when it comes to Portland? ANTIFA basically runs that city for the past 5 years.

We also all know that leftist cities were whitewashing their statistics. Reality be damned.

Trump is not the enemy and never has been. The Democrats are the enemy and always have been.

You need to wake up.

In fact, both are the enemy of regular people. Our rulers are only in it for themselves.

AtomicActuator said:

---

In fact, both are the enemy of regular people. Our rulers are only in it for themselves.

---

Literally untrue. Trump actually works for the American people. Barely sleeps travels all over the place does the best he can do correct the Democrat nightmare. Yeah he has his narcissistic side, but he's actually trying to help people unlike the Democrats.

You also need to wake up.

Old McDonald said:

---

tFast said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

AtomicActuator said:

---

Tango.Mike said:

---

…believe his opinion not the statistics

---

which stats are you using that show Chicago as among the most dangerous cities per capita? Everywhere I look, I see Memphis at the top, and Chicago way down the list.

---

houston and several other texas cities have higher violent crime rates than chicago. when are we sending in the army to clean those cities up?

---

I've lived in both Houston (downtown) and Chicago (downtown). You absolutely can't compare the two.

---

turns out you actually can with this cool thing called data! 2024 violent crime rates per 100k:

houston: 1148
chicago: 540

it's obvious the national guard deployments are not about curbing crime at all (except for memphis - that's a legit problem), but rather intimidating the standard blue city punching bags and feebly projecting military strength to mask the administration's incompetence with distractions

---

I think it's about time to flag for derail. The influx of NG has no direct connection to per capita crime. It has to do with protecting federal employees and property as has been duly noted here multiple times.

Since you failed on the first part of your argument, your second part is countered by default.

However, I will comment that you are wrong about the 'intimidation tactic' anyway even if you weren't wrong on the first part. For the 'intimidation tactic' to be true, it would require that that the mobs attacking, harassing, and preventing ICE from doing their jobs as part of the scheme. Since this is demonstrably not true, the idea of an 'intimidation conspiracy' falls apart.

The actual logical conclusion is exactly as it appears. The NG is appropriately and lawfully present because ICE is threatened by mobs WITH the willing help of the city and state governments comprised entirely of democrats and their accomplices.

Old McDonald said:

---

tFast said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

AtomicActuator said:

---

Tango.Mike said:

---

…believe his opinion not the statistics

---

which stats are you using that show Chicago as among the most dangerous cities per capita? Everywhere I look, I see Memphis at the top, and Chicago way down the list.

---

houston and several other texas cities have higher violent crime rates than chicago. when are we sending in the army to clean those cities up?

---

I've lived in both Houston (downtown) and Chicago (downtown). You absolutely can't compare the two.

---

turns out you actually can with this cool thing called data! 2024 violent crime rates per 100k:

houston: 1148
chicago: 540

it's obvious the national guard deployments are not about curbing crime at all (except for memphis - that's a legit problem), but rather intimidating the standard blue city punching bags and feebly projecting military strength to mask the administration's incompetence with distractions

---

Biggest difference is that Houston allows ICE to do their job. Chicago, not so much

Rockdoc said:

---

AtomicActuator said:

---

I haven't seen evidence they have truly exhausted other options. I think presidents jump to the guard option as more of a theatric show of force, which I disagree with.

---

Your dems aren't going to take care of it. Someone has to. The citizens that want a peaceful city understand that.

---

For anyone with kids, and their heads on straight, THAT is the number one concern.

Old McDonald said:

---

tFast said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

AtomicActuator said:

---

Tango.Mike said:

---

…believe his opinion not the statistics

---

which stats are you using that show Chicago as among the most dangerous cities per capita? Everywhere I look, I see Memphis at the top, and Chicago way down the list.

---

houston and several other texas cities have higher violent crime rates than chicago. when are we sending in the army to clean those cities up?

---

I've lived in both Houston (downtown) and Chicago (downtown). You absolutely can't compare the two.

---

turns out you actually can with this cool thing called data! 2024 violent crime rates per 100k:

houston: 1148
chicago: 540

it's obvious the national guard deployments are not about curbing crime at all (except for memphis - that's a legit problem), but rather intimidating the standard blue city punching bags and feebly projecting military strength to mask the administration's incompetence with distractions

---

Yep, democrats do ruin cities, you have a great point.

Houston's BAD is spread out across a gigantic area...but Chicago's BAD areas are pockets of the city which are basically warzones. Not much of Chicago is affordable to the typical hoodlum. No way nearly as many people are getting shot on a routine basic in 3rd and 5th Ward Houston, compared to South Side Chicago and places like West Garfield,,,where you sometimes hear of 30-40 people getting shot on any given wknd. These places are REALLY BAD, and I truly feel sorry for the good people in those areas who just cannot move.

Dirty_Mike&the_boys said:

---

shiftyandquick said:

---

Trump saying he may invoke the Insurrection Act because of the Portland situation.

I knew this was always the plan. If not right here, right now, then very soon.

Gather the generals, warn them of the "enemy from within" - I predicted this too. This exact phrase.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/10/06/trump-insurrection-act-national-guard-00595241

---

Where was all your concern in 2013 when your half tone savior and his wing man sent in US troops to takeover the City of New Orleans and the New Orleans Police Department on January 11, 2013. Eric Holder gave federal authorities oversight of the NOPD to address widespread corruption, violations of civil rights, excessive violence, radical organized criminal activities, and a culture of impunity, when NO lead the nation in murder. The DOJ forced the NOPD to implement reforms, and mandated the enforcement, of the rule of law. Under the insurrection act they enhanced Terry searches, to aide in the disarmament of the thugs that took over post Katrina and force accountability on the NOPD, with a court-appointed monitor overseeing progress until compliance and law and order was sustained.

---

Oh I remember that. How can we forget all the conservative mobs, the threats to our troops, all the trans snipers, spitting and cursing in their faces, the cocktail bombs, rock throwing, looting, and burning of buildings?

Oh. Right. We never did that. Only the libs hate civility and peace.

Old McDonald said:

---

AtomicActuator said:

---

Tango.Mike said:

---

…believe his opinion not the statistics

---

which stats are you using that show Chicago as among the most dangerous cities per capita? Everywhere I look, I see Memphis at the top, and Chicago way down the list.

---

houston and several other texas cities have higher violent crime rates than chicago. when are we sending in the army to clean those cities up?

---

Thank you for defeating your and your comrade's argument about the "crime rate" distraction. We aren't sending NG to any city to clean them up. They are being sent there to protect federal employees and property. AGAIN, the difference is the city of Houston and the State of Texas aren't trying to prevent the enforcement of federal law in the manner of Chicago and Illinois along with others.

It's funny watching y'all dance around the obvious.

AtomicActuator said:

---

Ok, but why post a fake joke video in that case?

---

I'm an old, and easily FOOLED.