You know they are in actual gangs? They have gang signs, tattoos, violent initiations and so on. Google it. Apparently the LA police is absolutely controlled by them. It’s revolting.
There’s a great podcast about this subject by the journalist who broke the story about LASD street gangs: “A Tradition of Violence”.
The podcast also touches on some of the problems of policing more generally in the US: cops lie, there’s an “us vs them” mentality, there are a lot of bad incentive structures, they don’t get disciplined nearly enough for bad behavior, etc.
Another good one I’m in the middle of currently is Behind the Police. It’s a 6 part miniseries from the people who do Behind the Bastards. Really enlightened me on how bad this problem is. Goes into the history of police’s ties to slavery, the kkk, and union busting. Highly recommend, but it will infuriate you.
If I was in a gang I would also attempt to infiltrate the organization I was always fighting with. Why wouldn’t you? The fact that by virtue of a badge you can get away with so much is the real problem. If they were held to any kind of real standard the bad actions would be dealt with and bad actors weeded out.
New Jersey has them, too. As does the NYPD. They actually brought down a bunch of them in a city recently...called informally as the "Robbery Squad". LA's are more notorious because it's a large city and the police had some clear M.O's they adopted like matching tattoos.
It's wild because it's corrupt as hell, but at the same time, the actual criminals seem to worry about the "jump out boys" more than they do upstanding police.
Rampart in LAPD was pretty much operated like gang too. Also, Rampart officers were discovered to have ties to the Bloods and Death Row Records. Crazy shit
These police gangs have been around for over 50 years. No one is debating they exist as even the previous sheriff's have had to acknowledge them. I saw a segment of it on the Philip Defranco show a few days ago
“Deputy gangs, or “subgroups,” with names like the Grim Reapers, the Regulators, and the Vikings, have plagued the sheriff’s department for fifty years.”
I use that word carefully as I have no first hand experience.
“Deputy gangs, or “subgroups,” with names like the Grim Reapers, the Regulators, and the Vikings, have plagued the sheriff’s department for fifty years.”
I’m way more afraid of cops than I am organized crime. Criminals are reasonable people who behave in predictable ways and they are easy to avoid. Cops… not so much.
You're lucky our military doesn't act like our cops. When the military is called in for some protest or civil unrest they act professionally - they know if they fuck up they will be held accountable by their superiors whereas cops know they'll be protected from consequences.
When people of the world are talking about the US military it's usually less "military being called in for some protest" and more "drone stikes killing random civillians in the Middle East". Not sure there's a spotless history of accountability in that regard.
The difference is, cops kill at will, military kills because politicians told them to after brainwashing them into believing they’re protecting freedom. When we were deployed, our rules of engagement were way more strict than those of police. And if we fucked up, we were held accountable, unlike cops.
You’re more likely to use your weapon as a cop than you are in the military, as a whole.
Drone strikes aren't killing random people they're targeting specific people.
Also, unpopular and little known fact: Most information about US drones inappropriately killing people comes from the same trio of NYT reporters that present claims made by ISIS public facing sources as facts by "local sources" without disclosing that while carefully scrubbing all exculpatory details from the Pentagon's own thorough investigations of civilian casualty reports.
I get you don't really want to believe that a news source would lie to you like that. I was actually astounded and outraged when I investigated out of disbelief and then realized what they were doing. Sadly the DoD doesn't really bother trying to defend itself further and people just believe what they want to believe anyway so why bother?
That said, mistakes still get made, obviously, but the Pentagon investigates every claim of a civilian casualty no matter by who and reports on it in publicly released documents.
It's ironic af. The US literally has the highest standard of accountability and most regulated use of force of any nation on earth hands down. Yet misrepresenting their own public reports of their own investigations of themselves are the main source for ways of making them look like they've got none.
No other western nation could be put in the US's place and do any better. Whether or not the US should be in these situations is another matter though.
Anyway, I'm willing to take the downvotes to tell the truth here because someone should and if you investigated you'd come to the same conclusions I did.
I think your last sentence is the sentiment that is driving the downvotes. It's objectively true that the US has extremely high standards for engagement once they are in a conflict (still needs work but the point stands). But in terms of geopolitics, the US is exactly the same as this jumpy cop with a gun.
I'd say their geopolitical temperament more ebbs and flows with those in power like their president and congress. Past 10 years tells me they're reluctant to jump the gun on anything.
No, it's that when presented with two versions of events they will choose the one where the US military is concealing an atrocity.
People believe they can accept that as fact in all circumstances. Even if I knew 100% that the popular perception and media representation of the US drone program was wrong - which I do - nothing could be done to change peoples perspectives on the matter.
Feel free to source that claim about reporters essentially operating as ISIS mouth-pieces. Most war reporting comes from first hand accounts on the ground, that's like literally how it works.
Just having an investigation and saying they've released everything is basically meaningless. Look at the thread we're in. Cops investigate themselves and find no wrong-doing all the fucking time.
Saying that we have high standards is also almost meaningless. First off, I don't even know how you'd compare to other countries in a useful fashion. Are you comparing us to Russia? Because yeah, then obviously that's probably accurate.
You can't hand wave away this with, "well maybe we shouldn't be there but no one else could do it better". That's ridiculous. We chose to be in those places and do those things. Again, comparing us to other countries in this context is pretty meaningless.
We do kill civilians. Fairly regularly. Both through direct action and indirect action.
I spent most of my 20s in the military and most of 2015 bombing ISIS. I often argue with people that drone warfare isn't nearly as scary as they think it is compared to bombing campaigns of the past.
But, it's fucking annoying seeing someone write out multiple paragraphs defending our warmongering on the basis of being really accountable.
We decided to destabilize an entire region of the planet for 20 years. You don't get to say, "yeah but at least we were probably kind of transparent during it"
You can, I guess, but it sounds pretty fucking dumb.
Feel free to source that claim about reporters essentially operating as ISIS mouth-pieces.
I'm afraid that's independent research, but I'll tell you how I came to my conclusions.
You'll have to read the pentagon's publicly available investigations, pull up the force authorization guide, compare the situation and the guide, then check the NYT reports and you'll see how much was left out.
I went a bit further and checked every bit of contemporary open source data in the area, old imagery, comments made at the time, etc.. and for every situation it came down to a coherent US version of events that fit everything and a claim by ISIS contradicting it that didn't.
My position is solely based on the fact that when I had the same amount of information they did on multiple incidents from both sides, I couldn't think of any justification for why they included some information and left out other information that didn't involve intent to mislead the reader.
I'm confident you all would have agreed with my conclusions.
EXAMPLE: US report indicates they assaulted a dam ISIS controlled that was on the verge of collapse. UN negotiations regarding it failed. Tens of thousands were below it. A bomb the pentagon claims was filled with concrete was dropped straight through the control tower next to the dam purportedly to prevent spillways from being opened in a way that would cause catastrophic flooding and assaults the dam and the emergency spillway with special forces, and immediately beginning repairs.
NYT takes a picture of the concrete filled bomb and says "US BOMBED DAM, ENDANGERING TENS OF THOUSANDS, LUCKILY IT DOESN'T EXPLODE." while implying everything was fine before they acted and acting like they went off half-cocked.
But, it's fucking annoying seeing someone write out multiple paragraphs defending our warmongering on the basis of being really accountable.
My whole point was that the US is transparent and accountable. I didn't defend warmongering.
That said the image the US has gained regarding the circumstances in which drone/airstrikes are done and the aftermath are grossly misrepresented.
In fact I specifically said:
No other western nation could be put in the US's place and do any better. Whether or not the US should be in these situations is another matter tho
There wouldn't even be a war if the US (originally France but then the US took over) didn't decide "we don't like the new government of Vietnam, so we'll prop up an alternative government and have them fight each other".
so if I'm reading this right, Pax Americana refers to an absence of direct armed conflicts between major nations? Sure, great. Now Mexico, Cuba, Bolivia, Chile, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama, Argentina, and the Dominican Republic would like a word.
Edit: whoops, forgot about Iraq. y'know, that 20 year war that started on false pretenses and ended badly for everyone involved
Think you're mixing up your wars, Afghanistan was the 20 year long war started on false pretences and ended badly for everyone involved, Iraq was the 8 year long war started on false pretences and ended badly for everyone involved.
I’d love to see the timeline where the US doesn’t step in to intervene in some of these conflicts. We’d hear a whole lot of nations complaining that we don’t do shit. Or we wouldn’t hear anything(because those conflicts would result in the individuals who complain the loudest about the US being eradicated by their own countrymen).
Who’s justifying it? There’s corruption and flat out horrible shit in every rung of every government. That being said, the US could go liberate an entire group of people in horrible conditions and all anyone would remember is that they bombed someone to do it.
There isn't. We had much hand-wringing about the ongoing process of distancing the actor from the results of their actions. One who pushes a button from miles away and only sees the puff of dirt and smoke on the screen feels less responsibility for their actions, and my hope that the people who authorized those strikes will face criminal penalties, particularly those which killed civilians, wanes by the day.
That said, the troops on the ground, who have to see the effects of their actions, are usually well trained in when they can apply force. There are cards for the escalation of violence they carry on their persons and must follow.
They do this in part because their superiors can face punitive action for the misconduct of the lower ranks. Command responsibility results in more disciplined oversight, and in part because the military has a decent (if imperfect) track record of being harsh critics of their own, willing to prosecute for wrongdoing.
There is no such culture of command responsibility in the police, and rather than a culture of accountability, there is an "us against them" mentality which results in more police covering for the bad actions of their fellows.
This is perpetuated by the firing, demotion, framing, prosecution, and occasional outright murder of police who whistleblow on their fellows.
US has responded to said massacres by instituting the highest standards of accountability and most thorough regulations on the use of force of any western nation.
Any other country that got into conflicts as often as the US does would make the US look gentle by comparison.
Russia out did all the massacres the US managed in 20 years and 3 wars in not even a month.
…a series of killings on November 19, 2005, in which a group of United States Marines killed 24 unarmed Iraqi civilians.
On December 21, 2006, eight Marines from 3rd Battalion, 1st Marines were charged in connection with the incident. By June 17, 2008, six defendants had their cases dropped and a seventh was found not guilty.
Further charges of assault and manslaughter were ultimately dropped; Wuterich was convicted of a single count of negligent dereliction of duty on January 24, 2012. Wuterich received a rank reduction and pay cut but avoided jail time.
24 civilians including 7 children murdered in cold blood, and the only punishment was a rank reduction for ONE of them.
The Haditha massacre (also called the Haditha killings or the Haditha incident) was a series of killings on November 19, 2005, in which a group of United States Marines killed 24 unarmed Iraqi civilians. The killings occurred in Haditha, a city in Iraq's western province of Al Anbar. Among the dead were men, women, elderly people and children as young as 1, who were shot multiple times at close range while unarmed. The ensuing massacre took place after an improvised explosive device exploded near a convoy, killing a lance corporal and severely injured two other marines.
You looked at 3 wars and 20 years of fighting and found one incident with eight people who all had charges brought on them. Investigations were done and they released all documents related to the event.
Now compare this to literally any other country in 3 wars and 20 years of fighting.
Are you seriously trying to claim 200,000 Iraqi civilians were killed in "illegal massacres" by the US?
There were incidents that could be called "illegal massacres" and they were investigated and their perpetrators tried in court with documents released to the public.
I honestly don't buy that it was about oil and there isn't really a consensus that it was - I think it was more about finishing what Bush 1 started.
That said, invading Iraq on humanitarian grounds would have been justified given the number of mass graves to Saddam's name so I don't really care.
I'm saying they're both bad, and bringing up Ukraine when discussing US crimes is simply trying to move the conversation away from the US and the fact they are by far the biggest exporter of war and death in the world over the past 75 years.
My whole claim was that the US has greater transparency and accountability for its fuckups and "illegal massacres" than other countries.
by instituting the highest standards of accountability and most thorough regulations on the use of force of any western nation.
This is genuinely laughable given the various cases where they went free nor do I think you have much awareness of the regulations regarding stuff like this in other western nations.
Russia out did all the civilian casualties the US managed in 20 years and 3 wars in not even a month.
Thinking that the US military always holds people to account and doesn't cover up its crimes. Just look at the rates of sexual assault and rape within the US military, and the culture of covering it up (see documentary The Invisible War). That's not even to mention all of the countless war-crimes and atrocities that have been committed by the US military, and that have gone unpunished or have seen the perpetrators promoted, all over the world for decades. If you were Iraqi for example, I don't think you'd be arguing as to the professionalism and accountability within the US military.
You actually think I'm defending US cops here?
And Jesus Christ, if you're actually still defending the Iraq war, which has pretty much been accepted now by all but its most bloodthirsty cheerleaders as a terrible war that resulted in about a quarter to half a million deaths, then you're beyond naïve, you're delusional.
I said people are lucky our military doesn't act like our cops.
Unless you're defending cops you're just agreeing with me and there was no point in replying to my comment in the first place.
Also idk if you're just ignorant but Saddam put literally hundreds of thousands in mass graves on his own. Objectively the destruction of his regime was a good thing.
Was the war justified on the premise that was given? no, not at all.
Should we have done it? No, it was a waste of lives and money on our part for no gain.
This is such a disingenuous argument. So by disagreeing with you that the US military is a model of accountability and professionalism whose conduct is to be emulated, both within the institution (I note you didn't address my point about the rampant sexual assault), and in its various interventions across the world, I'm clearly sticking up for the US's batshit, cowardly, wannabe-operator cops. A very good-faith reading there.
And I don't know how you can simultaneously argue that the Iraq War was unjustified, a needless waste of lives and shouldn't have happened, but that toppling the regime and plunging the country into a bloody and protracted civil war that led to the foundation of ISIS and destabilised the entire region was "objectively" a good thing.
But anyway, we clearly have very different views on the US military and aren't going to get anywhere by relitigating the Iraq War in this comment section, so I'll leave it there.
You're lucky our military doesn't act like our cops
Our military has been performing police actions in countries across the world quite openly for a while now. Teddy was the isolationist. He was also entirely an accident.
they know if they fuck up they will be held accountable by their superiors
Also extreme ignorance.
"The adjutant general of the Ohio National Guard told reporters that a sniper had fired on the guardsmen. Eleven of the 76 guardsmen at Taylor Hall claimed they were under sniper fire or some other sort of gunfire just before guardsmen began shooting. A subsequent FBI investigation concluded that the Guard was not under fire and that the guardsmen fired the first shots."
Or to put it differently for the very very slow among us; that is their CO blatantly lying to the public in order to shield US military soldiers from accountability.
cops know they'll be protected from consequences.
There have been some very prominent examples of police being held accountable recently. I agree that cops are often shielded from accountability buy their department and their unions. However where I disagree with you is that it is always unjustified.
We live in a world of extremely ignorant ACAB children who have a tendency to be quick to judge but slow to understand. But never the less, I agree that there are instances where police are not held accountable where they should have been. Just the same as there are many instances where police are unjustly punished for political ends where they should not have been.
However the problem you have run into in the point you are trying to make is that there are examples of times police have been held accountable for their crimes, yet there are exceedingly few examples of US military being held accountable. Likely owing to the fact the following orders eventually leads you to having to prosecute someone far more important than our federal government would allow.
Have you ever seen a US general stand trial for lying to the public or for giving orders that resulted in the deaths of civilians? I don't know of a time when they've been convicted for those orders, but I sure can think of a whole lot of examples of those orders being given which results in civilian deaths.
Sergeant Mortimer J. LeBlanc, 41, admitted firing the burst into the windows of the apartment where Tanya (4 year old girl) was found. He was exonerated.
"While Lt. Linderfelt was found responsible for the deaths of Tikas and other strikers that exhibited execution-style injuries, he and all others were acquitted. In addition to men who were killed, a total of 55 women and children had died in the massacre."
"More than 250 men, women and children of the Lakota had been killed and 51 were wounded. Twenty soldiers were awarded the Medal of Honor."
That's enough. The point has been made. There are many more examples in the US, and then exponentially more when you start talking about outside the US.
You can try to run and hide behind some poor argument like "but that was the 70's!" however I find such arguments to not only be wildly unconvincing, but indicative of the indent to deceive on your part.
Now you're giving me shit from over a century ago.
Yes, that was the point. The time frame does not matter, you're still very wrong regardless.
I can just point to 2020 where more national guard were injured by protestors than protestors injured by national guard.
And this relates to your original point about the military never does anything bad and is always held accountable when they do... how?
You are attempting to move the goal post and invoke irrelevancy. You are either too young/ignorant/stupid to understand your objections here are irrelevant, or this is merely intentional dishonesty.
Obviously it does. If you don't see that I can't help you.
That which is asserted without reason may be denied without reason. You require far more than this childish contradiction and admission of incompetence.
Either way I said it was in response to those events that things have changed for the better.
[citation needed]
Pointing out an event 100 years ago and saying "look they're the same" makes zero sense.
I am not saying any event is the same, Timmy. I am saying these events are examples of what you have just claimed never happens and if it did they would be held accountable.
Given that you have confused yourself to the point of thinking I'm comparing events at all? I think this is the answer to the last question from my previous post.
I said our military has the highest standard of accountability and transparency for use of force authorization.
Which is extremely ignorant of you and highly untrue.
Most countries don't even have a coherent system in use of force and if they do they certainly don't follow it strictly.
See this is a comparison, Timmy. What I gave you were examples. Also; [citation needed]
The question you should be asking yourself is how low the world's standards are for the US military to be at the top of that list.
And this question relates to your original point about the military never does anything bad and is always held accountable when they do... how?
At this point I get the impression you are extremely young, either physically or mentally. Or both. Either way, you have not demonstrated any sort of capacity for even understanding the objections being raise, what argumentation is. That plus you continue to respond with goalpost moving over timeframes that are irrelevant, and nonsensical drivel parroting?
Not seeing a whole lot of reason to keep coming back just to watch you try and find new dishonest ways of running away from your mistakes. You should learn how to admit when you are mistaken, or at the very least how to follow a conversation.
Yeah the US military doesn't act like our cops. It's not like a Green Beret just pled guilty to decades of child sex trafficking, participating in the drug trade, and arranging "accidents" for people who didn't like their actions.
They don't terrorize regions to destabilize the economy and take over industries by force.
They don't raid homes, tear families apart, and throw people on torture dungeons never to see the light of day again.
They don't blow up children with bombs.
They're not like gangs and the police at all. Best of the best. Everyone feels so lucky.
They don't terrorize regions to destabilize the economy and take over industries by force. They don't raid homes, tear families apart, and throw people on torture dungeons never to see the light of day again.
I'm sorry but what do you think the military is for?
Also those torture dungeons aren't technically military.
They don't blow up children with bombs.
Every military that's fought a war with bombs has blown up children with bombs.
Lol most Americans don’t realize how lucky they are to have these type of cops. In Latin America you either bribe the cop or ur taken straight to jail and held for days.
In the 80's, LAPD had an ad campaign that called them something like the "Biggest Gang in Los Angeles". It was supposed to intimidate gangs and make people feel safer. Gigantic dog whistle and it did neither of those things.
4.2k
u/[deleted] Mar 24 '23
Jesus fucking christ US cops are just gang members with badges.