199

Internal 82nd Airborne Division communications reviewed by Military.com reveal a tightly orchestrated effort to curate the optics of Trump's recent visit, including handpicking soldiers for the audience based on political leanings and physical appearance. The troops ultimately selected to be behind Trump and visible to the cameras were almost exclusively male.

One unit-level message bluntly said "no fat soldiers."

"If soldiers have political views that are in opposition to the current administration and they don't want to be in the audience then they need to speak with their leadership and get swapped out," another note to troops said.

Cherry picking your fan boys, very Alpha move.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] fluxion@lemmy.world 47 points 1 year ago

The article is some great and ballsy reporting, and the other details are pretty shocking. The military is being rapidly corrupted to becoming a partisan force that serves Trump above America

[-] Bluefalcon@discuss.tchncs.de 14 points 1 year ago

Military.com does a good job of reporting. I would assume more are anti trump than for him

[-] BassTurd@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

The military has always been heavily populated by some of the shittiest people. The prospect of carrying a weapon and killing others or just wielding power over others, attracts a certain type of person. In the US since at least 9/11, there's been a disgusting amount of military propaganda that has certainly brought in some people that care and want to do the right thing (for the ignorant wrong reasons) but also the shits that are all in because they think they're tough shit.

Service people don't deserve any more respect than any other profession, and I'd argue in many cases, they deserve less respect. There's hasn't been a draft in a hot minute, so everyone currently in is voluntary. Some soldiers do wind to in life threatening situations, but it's far from the most dangerous job and to me, killing innocence in the middle east for no good reason doesn't earn you any valor in my book.

They're all a bunch of pawns, and I've seen about 2 out of all of them actually stand up and oppose the Trump admin and thousands of others bend over, take it, and ask for more. This article and LA further reenforces my belief that being in the military isn't something noble, but more akin to being in a gang where all of the members are brainwashed and have no spines.

this post was submitted on 11 Jun 2025
199 points (99.5% liked)

politics

31179 readers
2686 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

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

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS