Plans for Trump's July 4 'Military Tanks on The Mall' parade remain secret

[anon87143080]

[DonatellaNobody]

[anon61221983]

Oh, you’re just here to be a condescending dick. Got it.

Have a nice day.

[anon15383236]

No no no, he’s just being a gentleman, by helping out a person who’s sadly afflicted with Lady Brain Syndrome.

[DukeTrout]

@Perrin_Rynning

Redcap In Chief

Ooh, that’s a good one.

Make America Goblin Again

[d_r]

@anon15383236

It’s about establishment Democrats who accept money from and do the bidding of financiers.

Biden is most accurately described as an unemployed Democrat.

[anon61221983]

Oh so kind of them!

One of Piper’s few shining moments in that show, TBH (up to the end of season 5, at least - have not seen season 6 yet, so maybe she improves?)

[DonatellaNobody]

And that’s not about to change anytime soon

[orenwolf]

@Mister44

And as long as we are listing tanks, there really is only one best kind of tanks. Sci-fi legged ones:

How is Metal Gear not your go-to?

Additionally, isn’t the 4th of July the celebration of armed liberation of the USA from Colonialism? I know tanks weren’t involved, but I’d at least argue (ETA: incorrectly as I’ve learned) that a strong military is one of the reasons the USA remained independent, at least initially.

The military machine has been used for good or ill throughout history, but if most Americans generally feel that overthrow of colonial England was a just cause, then I suppose this is one of the more relevant holidays for a military display, at least from this Outsider-currently-Inside’s perspective.

And frankly, doing so is likely less disruptive than all the terrified animals and house fires caused by the other great holiday tradition.

Specific imagery of Tanks-on-the-mall aside, a military display is probably not entirely out of bounds. Now, what display is appropriate and what signal it sends to the rest of the world is another discussion entirely.

[anon15383236]

@orenwolf

Now, what display is appropriate and what signal it sends to the rest of the world is another discussion entirely.

Especially from an empire that’s as wanton and rapacious as we’ve been, and continue to be.

[heckblazer]

@orenwolf

Additionally, isn’t the 4th of July the celebration of armed liberation of the USA from Colonialism? I know tanks weren’t involved, but I’d at least argue that a strong military is one of the reasons the USA remained independent, at least initially.

Nope, it’s the celebration of declaring political independence and the universal rights that justified doing so. If we were celebrating military liberation the holiday would likely be April 18 (Lexington and Concord) or October 19 (the surrender at Yorktown).

A strong military really wasn’t a feature of the early republic, either. They disbanded the Continental Army as soon as the war was over .because of fears of having a standing army.

[FGD135]

@orenwolf

Now, what display is appropriate

[anon36155390]

@orenwolf

a military display is probably not entirely out of bounds.

As a display of military might, was it even very effective? A couple of jets, a couple of helicopters, a few tanks. If we were going to war with Rhode Island, it may have been a little imposing, but it certainly didn’t indicate much in the way of military hardware. I think it was just intended to tweak the noses of lefties, and I’d say it worked.

[MalevolentPixy]

Joe Kassabian (jkass99)

[Mangochin]

@orenwolf

I’d at least argue that a strong military is one of the reasons the USA remained independent, at least initially.

The USA didn’t have a strong military until about 150 years after its founding. It was a pretty ad hoc force that was a bit behind the times for most of its history. We owed our independence largely due to geographic isolation from Europe, good relations with the British and their navy after 1814 and hashing out our issues with our neighbors. So much so that civilians were sporting more powerful weapons than the military until well into the 1890’s. (See Little Big Horn)

In terms of relations with our neighbors, we won our war of aggression against Mexico but lost our war of aggression against Canada.

[Mister44]

I never got into Metal Gear, but that one is nice.

[Wanderfound]

ChuckModi (ChuckModi1)

[knoxblox]

@orenwolf

I know tanks weren’t involved, but I’d at least argue (ETA: incorrectly as I’ve learned) that a strong military is one of the reasons the USA remained independent, at least initially.

@heckblazer

A strong military really wasn’t a feature of the early republic, either.

@Mangochin

The USA didn’t have a strong military until about 150 years after its founding.

I’d say the Polish, French, and Spanish also contributed a fair amount of experience, manpower, and money to our cause. Even if it was also to further their own ambitions.

[Wanderfound]

@knoxblox

I’d say the Polish, French, and Spanish also contributed a fair amount of experience, manpower, and money to our cause.

Your revolution was dumb and it filled us with refugees: A Canadian take on...

Speaking of autocrats, the American rebels counted one of the world’s most notorious as their best friend in Europe. Louis XVI, the absolute monarch of France, wholeheartedly backed the colonists’ cause as a way to embarrass the English. France smuggled weapons and advisers to the rebels, dispatched thousands of troops to the colonies and ordered its navy to travel the world and harass British efforts to supply their North American armies. Historians generally agree that, without French support, the British would likely have crushed the American Revolution. Meanwhile, the incredible cost of the American proxy war helped to lead an unstable France ever closer to financial ruin, revolution and, ultimately, the execution of Louis. So in effect, the United States owes its existence to an impulsive dictator who ran his country into the ground so hard that he got himself beheaded.

[knoxblox]

I never claimed it was righteous.