By John Q. Hosedrinker 
National Guard troops and Marines deployed to Los Angeles to quell anti-Trump protests express deep dissatisfaction with their assignment, citing concerns about being used as political pawns in a domestic operation outside their expertise. Multiple advocacy groups representing military families report widespread unhappiness among service members, with no dissenting opinions heard. The deployment, ordered by President Trump without California’s governor’s consent, has been criticized as a provocation, with reports of inadequate living conditions for the troops. Public opinion polls reveal significant disapproval of both the deployment and Trump’s immigration policies.
Read the original article here
Troops and marines deeply troubled by LA deployment: ‘Morale is not great.’ The current deployment of troops and marines to Los Angeles is causing significant unrest within the ranks. Many service members are expressing deep concern and disillusionment over their role in what they perceive as a politically motivated mission. The feeling is widespread and palpable, significantly impacting morale.
The deployment feels deeply wrong to many involved. The lines between military duty and domestic political maneuvering are blurring, leaving service members feeling like pawns in a larger political game. This situation raises serious questions about the ethical implications of using the military for internal political purposes, and the consequences for the troops themselves.
The troops are facing a moral dilemma. Their oath is to defend the Constitution, yet they are being asked to act in ways that feel fundamentally at odds with its principles. This inherent conflict is leading to profound inner turmoil, with many questioning whether their actions align with their values and sense of duty. The pressure to obey orders clashes with a growing sense that these orders are fundamentally unjust.
The political context adds another layer of complexity. The deployment’s timing and nature suggest a strong political motivation. This perception exacerbates existing tensions, leading to increased feelings of betrayal and resentment among the troops. The service members feel exploited and used, their service manipulated for ends beyond the traditional scope of military operations.
Many are grappling with the potential ramifications of their actions. The consequences of disobeying orders are severe, yet the moral implications of complying with what many see as unlawful and unethical directives are even more troubling. This internal conflict is taking a toll on mental health, potentially contributing to increased rates of stress, anxiety, and even suicide among service personnel.
There’s a significant disconnect between the current deployment and the reasons many enlisted. Protecting the country from external threats is a common motivator, but confronting fellow citizens in a domestic political context is entirely different. This dissonance between expectation and reality fuels the sense of disillusionment and fuels the already low morale.
The lack of visible leadership resistance is adding to the problem. While individual service members might feel powerless to disobey orders, a lack of open dissent from higher ranks is perceived as tacit approval of the current situation. This reinforces feelings of isolation and helplessness among those already deeply troubled by the deployment.
The situation demands a closer look at the chain of command. The orders being given raise serious questions about legality and the potential abuse of power. The lack of open defiance from senior officers is particularly concerning, implying complicity or a failure of leadership. This silence amplifies the feeling of abandonment among the troops on the ground.
Ultimately, this deployment poses a significant threat to military morale and the image of the armed forces. This deployment risks eroding public trust and undermining the integrity of the military. Addressing the deep-seated concerns of these service members is crucial not just for their well-being, but for the long-term health and stability of the military itself. The current situation is unsustainable and demands immediate attention from civilian and military leadership alike. A failure to address these concerns could have far-reaching consequences.