Thoughts:
1. Cotton's rhetoric (especially on Twitter) has been reprehensible.
2. The NYT decision to publish him isn't dangerous.
3. Outrage is based in part on a misunderstanding about our troops.
4. Soldiers are generally more-disciplined and more-restrained than cops. /1
1. Cotton's rhetoric (especially on Twitter) has been reprehensible.
2. The NYT decision to publish him isn't dangerous.
3. Outrage is based in part on a misunderstanding about our troops.
4. Soldiers are generally more-disciplined and more-restrained than cops. /1
Americans who aren't familiar with our modern military don't truly realize that the Guard (and the regular army, though I oppose invoking Insurrection Act) will likely be quite effective at 1) ending rioting while 2) protecting the right of peaceful protest. /2
This is partly because troops (who've often experienced time downrange or are led by men and women who've been downrange) are less-easily rattled and less likely to be fearful in the face of urban unrest. Looting in Chelsea is nothing compared to unrest in Anbar. /3
Moreover, the chain of command is extremely focused on not destroying trust in the military for the sake of Trump's political id (see Gen. Milley's memo today). It took decades to build trust. They don't want to toss it away in a summer. /end
