Gaylene Pheysey 🌮
LightNews LightNews
banner
desertortoise.bsky.social
Gaylene Pheysey 🌮
@desertortoise.bsky.social
1K followers 1K following 900 posts
Mom to 3 fantastic kids, got a cute hubby and cute dog, living in SE WA, closer to 50 than 40, member of https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/?lang=eng 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🫶
Posts Replies Media Videos
Reposted by Gaylene Pheysey 🌮
pwnallthethings.bsky.social
I know you already know, but for other folks who don't, Goldsmith was previously head of OLC, is a genuinely brilliant mind on executive authority and separation of powers, and is usually very cautious about making claims this unqualified and direct. That he is saying it so starkly is v significant
November 29, 2025 at 5:54 AM
Reposted by Gaylene Pheysey 🌮
annabower.bsky.social
It’s almost as if there were signs!!
want to fight us toe to toe; civilians are central to their strategy. Making such a presumption endangers American troops and gives an advantage to savage enemies-who don't play by the rules. Citing no new evidence, the Biden administration simply reversed course in July 2023. Now persons and objects in combat zones—in places where US troops are fighting —must be presumed to be civilian. They must be assumed to be innocent. In short, this means our troops are going to have to hesitate every time they fire. This change reminds me of the stupid legal brief we received at FOB Falcon in Baghdad in 2005. Bad ideas have been around for a long time, but now they're fully institutionalized. When you send Americans to war, their mandate should be to lethally dominate the battlefield. If that makes you uneasy, keep us at home. I could write five thousand more words on the ins and outs of the philosophy of warfare, the folly of international law, and the crazy maze of rules of engagement. I've heard it
November 29, 2025 at 3:25 AM
Reposted by Gaylene Pheysey 🌮
annabower.bsky.social
Hegseth included the below in a chapter titled “The Laws of War, For Winners”

It’s almost as if there were signs!
10:12 Japanese anu vennan sumers anu uncers lu death in the aftermath of the conflict that it had so egregiously failed to prevent. Article 51 of the United Nations made war legal only if you were attacked. The escalation of that war was left TBD-to be determined. Illegal wars continued, and violence still escalated. If our warriors are forced to follow rules arbitrarily and asked to sacrifice more lives so that international tribunals feel better about themselves, aren't we just better off winning our wars according to our own rules?! Who cares what other countries think. The question we have to ask ourselves is, if we are forced to fight, are we going to fight to win? Or will we fight to make leftists feel good-which means not wining and fighting forever. In this context, the Europeans are the worst. Outdated, outgunned, invaded, and impotent. Why should America, the European "emergency contact number" for the past century, listen to self-righteous and impotent nations asking us to honor outdated and one-sided defense arrangements they no longer live up to? Maybe if NATO countries actually ponied up for their own defense-but they don't. They just yell about the rules while gutting their militaries and yelling at America
November 29, 2025 at 3:16 AM
desertortoise.bsky.social
😆
November 17, 2025 at 6:18 AM
desertortoise.bsky.social
😧
November 17, 2025 at 5:43 AM
Reposted by Gaylene Pheysey 🌮
charlene411.bsky.social
November 17, 2025 at 1:16 AM
desertortoise.bsky.social
I wish that when people made such broad statements like Buttigieg, he’d give examples as such even personal ones so at least we’d understand why.
November 15, 2025 at 7:10 PM