674

Trump: ‘I Need the Kind of Generals That Hitler Had’ (www.theatlantic.com)

submitted 1 day ago by usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml to c/politics@lemmy.world

113 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] Disgracefulone@discuss.online 8 points 12 hours ago

Personally none of the things this article says surprise me. But unfortunately, the author doesn't seem to provide any sources for Trumps statements, only the denials of those statements. Idk if people are just scared and want to remain anonymous or what but it loses integrity when people refuse to identify themselves or rather when A reporters article doesn't have sources like this.

[-] Kbobabob@lemmy.world 3 points 12 hours ago

Idk if people are just scared and want to remain anonymous or what but it loses integrity when people refuse to identify themselves

Better than someone losing their life for not remaining anonymous IMO.

[-] YeetPics@mander.xyz 13 points 16 hours ago

Wow, tankies may actually drop the mask and openly support their orange hero

[-] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 3 points 12 hours ago

I don't like those losers. I like the generals who knew where to put the suitcase.

[-] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 18 points 17 hours ago

There was no evidence of election irregeluarities in 2020, and Trump's "deny everything, and always claim victory" has included admissions by him that there was no evidence, but the philosophy was more important. Generals supporting sending an army to assist insurection, or other unconstitutional acts such as rounding up all Haitians in a city, because a neighbour reported their cat missing, with suspicion of one neighbour (cat came back next day).

This is as serious of a concern as his promise to provide absolute immunity to all police abuse. Israel's token concession to ICJ to prosecute rape torture of prisoners, would turn out the same in USA, if Trump supremacists destroy everything with immunity, and those not happy about Trump fascism get fascisted.

[-] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 18 points 16 hours ago

There was plenty of evidence of election irregularities. People have gone to jail for stuffing extra votes for Trump.

[-] karl_chungus@lemm.ee 3 points 12 hours ago

Have you forgotten yet?

[-] MehBlah@lemmy.world 19 points 19 hours ago

He means the ones that got tired of hitler and tried to kill him.

[-] undergroundoverground@lemmy.world 3 points 13 hours ago

Not because they disagreed with him morally or anything of course. They just thought that they could do a better job.

Tbf, British high command agreed that the potential replacements, which included his best generals, would have been better at leading the nazis. They also realised hitler would kill them all when he found out.

Still, shame they found out though hey?

[-] Blackmist@feddit.uk 7 points 17 hours ago

You don't deserve the kind of generals Hitler had. That's why you have JD Vance and Elon Musk.

[-] jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 42 points 1 day ago

"Bad ones, weak enough to listen to me"

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] frezik@midwest.social 82 points 1 day ago

Is he aware that Germany lost?

[-] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 18 points 1 day ago

Pretty sure he would consider murdering millions of Mexicans as a win, even if it ends with a bullet to his temple.

[-] Event_Horizon@lemmy.world 22 points 1 day ago* (last edited 21 hours ago)

Ya know I realise this is complete conspiracy theory.

However, I'm still willing to give a 2-5% chance that if Trump gets back into power, within the last 12-18 months of his presidency he'll declare a special operation into North Mexico to 'secure the border', 'stop the illegal immigrants' and 'remove the drug cartels'.

Then he'll claim it's too dangerous to hold the election, or not appropriate, or whatever excuse because of the special operation. And then he'll postpone the election with the approval of the SC as a presidential duty and therefore not illegal.

And I know this is insane but every time I ask myself "would trump attempt something like this?" The answer is always "yes"

[-] lennivelkant@discuss.tchncs.de 16 points 1 day ago

If someone tells you they're a Nazi, believe them and treat them accordingly.

load more comments (8 replies)

load more comments (21 replies)

[-] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago

No problem dude, we'll put a few of them on your upcoming juries.

[-] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 157 points 1 day ago

His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.

https://phdn.org/archives/www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/documents/osssection3pt1.htm

load more comments (20 replies)

[-] waddle_dee@lemmy.world 109 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Read the whole and thing and, wow. It's just unbelievable to me that people can support this man so fervently.

I guess it's what happens when you give people permission to be completely selfish and devoid of empathy. He's a fucking psychopath.

load more comments (7 replies)

[-] Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 1 day ago

As long as they are like von Stauffenberg I would be okay with it.

load more comments

this post was submitted on 22 Oct 2024

674 points (98.7% liked)

politics

19090 readers

4069 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News