Let's talk about Trump troops deployments, PR, and a question...

episode

Belle of the Ranch 5 min 1 speaker 6 chapters transcribed 1 month ago

▲ 0

Transcript

jump: chapters · speakers · find in transcript

Transcript

Transcript generated automatically by AI and may contain errors.

What is the premise behind Trump's National Guard deployments and why might they be a PR stunt?

Belle of the Ranch 0:01

Well, howdy there internet people it spell again. So today we're going to talk about Trump's troop deployments. As more and more comes out about Trump's National Guard plans, it looks more and more like a PR stunt, designed solely for optics. But it's prompting a lot of questions. Quote. In several videos, you have attempted to calm our fears of POTUS doing a military takeover of the country. And how unlikely that would be. Due to the complex logistics, as well as the numbers of troops that would need to be involved. However, I We are now learning about the rapid response force the administration wants to put in place. Composed of perhaps a hundred National Guard, ready to deploy in any city at a moment's notice.

How does the rapid response force concept work and which cities are targeted for potential deployment?

Belle of the Ranch 0:55

This, on top of the expected militarization of the largest cities in the country is NYC, Chicago, Baltimore, and Philly. With the guard already active in LA. Seems like it would make the military takeover we all fear completely possible with the least amount of military personnel. Perhaps less than ten thousand. It seems like more and more, the admin is taking steps to get around the posse comatatis. Am I paranoid or is this a real concern? I'm really curious to know your take on this. Okay, so I get it. You're not paranoid. I've seen the commentary.

Is a small National Guard contingent enough to enable a military takeover, and what historical examples illustrate the limits?

Belle of the Ranch 1:40

Short version, a whole lot of people are pushing out statements about military effectiveness and what it takes to militarily control an area and so on. that frankly have no idea what they're talking about. As far as getting around Possecomatatis, I'll put a link down below to an explainer on martial law. Pay attention to the last line of the Pasicomatatis law. Politicians can plan all they want, but a whole lot of military commanders will give them a single finger salute if it doesn't follow the law. Let's be clear. The military couldn't take Panama with ten thousand troops. Literally, there were more than ten thousand troops already there, and during the invasion we about doubled it. Nothing is going to change the math on what it takes to occupy a country the size of the US with the population of the US.

Belle of the Ranch 2:38

I think what might be a better illustration for most people is to use National Guard numbers from normal tasks in the US. How many troops do you think deployed to deal with the aftermath of Katrina?

What do the numbers from past emergencies (Katrina, 2020 protests) reveal about the scale needed for effective control?

Belle of the Ranch 2:53

A thousand? Five thousand. ten thousand. fifty thousand. fifty thousand to restore order to the coast. Ten thousand can't control the country. Under Trump last time in May of twenty twenty. There were more than eighty three thousand National Guard troops deployed. I would guess most people are trying to figure out why. Some due to COVID responses and some due to protests. Eight times the number being floated were actually deployed, and you probably didn't notice, and couldn't even remember why.

Why does the host argue that visible troop placements are more about optics than actual enforcement capability?

Belle of the Ranch 3:32

Trump's setup so far appears to be about optics, not control. Standing troops in public parks or outside buildings isn't martial law. It's a stupid waste of resources from a guy who doesn't know anything about the military. The reason you didn't remember eighty thousand troops being deployed is because when spread out, it's not that many. And because they weren't out engaged in enforcement operations. If they were engaged in enforcement operations and got out of line. It would have prompted a backlash from the local populace. And they wouldn't have been able to maintain control because they didn't have the numbers. Just one of the cities he's mentioned has more than thirty thousand cops. A few thousand National Guard isn't going to do anything, except create optics and annoy people.

Belle of the Ranch 4:29

It's one of the reasons the military doesn't like doing enforcement roles.

What is the overall conclusion on the feasibility of surging forces to seize control under Trump’s plan?

Belle of the Ranch 4:34

They don't want a song written called F the National Guard. I understand the idea being proposed is to surge forces to cities when needed. Search strategies for control of the local populace have failed. Pretty much every time they've been used in the last couple of decades. I'm not saying Trump can't deploy the National Guard and make a mess of things and cause a bunch of chaos. He can. And I think he will.