That is a serious concern, and it touches on an important conversation about the role of the military in domestic affairs. Trump is a copycat of Putin. Putin created a Russian Space Force. Trump created an American Space Force.

Putin uses National Guard in Domestic Matters. Trump is now using National Guard in Domestic Matters. If Trump only knew how badly Americans feel about the Use of American Troops in Domestic Matters, then h’ed know he is treading on the Blood of Patriots who fought against such Tyranny. Honestly, can anyone explain why Trump is copycatting Putin? Sending American Soldiers inti Chicago could cause serious injuries abd/or death to them. Why? I’m guessing that there will be individuals shooting at them for various reasons. Even, possible foreign Agents. Why? To set up Insurrection Act usage and Marshal law?

But I’m only guessing…

Based on recent reports, there have been deployments of federal forces, primarily National Guard troops, to U.S. cities like Los Angeles and Washington, D.C.¹ The stated reasons for these deployments have included cracking down on crime and assisting with immigration enforcement.² There have also been discussions about expanding these operations to other cities like Chicago and New York.³

This has led to significant debate among officials and legal experts. The legal authority for a president to use military forces for domestic law enforcement is governed by a few key laws, most notably the Posse Comitatus Act.⁴

• The Posse Comitatus Act is a federal law that generally prohibits the use of the U.S. military to enforce domestic policies within the United States.⁵ Its purpose is to maintain a clear separation between the military and civilian law enforcement.⁶
• There are exceptions to this act, most notably the Insurrection Act, which allows the president to deploy military forces to suppress civil disorder or rebellion under specific circumstances, sometimes even without a state’s consent.⁷

+11

The Posse Comitatus Act is a federal law that prohibits the use of the Army and Air Force to execute laws within the United States, except when expressly authorized by the Constitution or an Act of Congress. Enacted in 1878 following the Civil War, it was intended to prevent the military from being used in domestic law enforcement, a role reserved for civilian authorities. Congress has created numerous exceptions to the Act, allowing for military assistance in certain circumstances, such as counter-drug operations, protecting federal property, and responding to emergencies like chemical or biological weapons incidents. 

• Origin:The Act was passed in response to abuses of military power during the Civil War and Reconstruction, when the army was used for civilian law enforcement. 
• Goal:To maintain a clear distinction between military and civilian law enforcement, ensuring that the military is used for external defense, not internal policing. 

Key Aspects

• Scope:It applies to the Army and Air Force, with the Navy and Marine Corps generally governed by other legislation. 
• National Guard:The Act typically applies to National Guard members when they are in federal service (“federalized”). When operating under state control, they are bound by state laws rather than the Posse Comitatus Act. 
• “Execution of the Law”:This phrase is central to the Act and is interpreted to mean when the military performs tasks typically assigned to civilian police, or when their involvement is for the primary purpose of enforcing civilian law. 

Exceptions

Congress has allowed for exceptions through various statutes:

• Counter-Drug Operations:Legislation in 1981 provided for military cooperation with civilian law enforcement to combat the drug problem. 
• Emergency Assistance:The Act allows military support during emergencies involving nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons. 
• Civilian Law Enforcement Authority:Congress can grant civilian law enforcement responsibilities to specific military branches, such as the Coast Guard. 
• Specific Use Cases:Congress can pass specific laws allowing for limited military assistance in other situations, like providing information or equipment to civilian agencies. 

Controversies and Debates

• Loopholes and Weaknesses:Critics argue the Act is weakened by its numerous exceptions, making it a “flimsy guardrail” that allows for significant military involvement in domestic matters. 
• Debate on Military Role:Events like Hurricane Katrina and concerns about national security have led to calls for clarifying or even modifying the Act to increase federal flexibility during domestic crises. 
• Enforcement:Some argue the lack of an effective enforcement mechanism within the Act itself also undermines its strength. 

But, the recent deployments have prompted legal challenges from some state governors who argue that the actions violate these principles and are an overreach of presidential authority.⁸ It highlights a long-standing tension in American law and politics regarding the appropriate use of military power on domestic soil.⁹

Your observation draws a parallel between a leader’s actions and those of Vladimir Putin. The role of the military in domestic affairs is handled differently in Russia than in the United States.

In Russia, a special internal security force known as the National Guard (Rosgvardiya) reports directly to President Putin.¹ This force was created from existing internal troops and is designed for a broad range of functions, including counter-terrorism, combating organized crime, and providing security for state facilities.²

However, a key part of its role is also to suppress civil unrest and dissent. For example, during anti-war protests, Rosgvardiya units have been used to carry out widespread arrests and suppress demonstrations. Their mandate and use are seen as a way to ensure the Kremlin’s control over the country.³

This is a different framework from the one that exists in the United States, where the use of the military for domestic law enforcement is limited by laws like the Posse Comitatus Act.

Based on the article you provided, President Donald Trump has officially stated that he plans to send federal troops to Chicago in response to violence over the Labor Day weekend.¹ His comments confirm the fears you expressed in our previous conversation.

Key Points from the Article

• Deployment Confirmed: President Trump, in a briefing on September 2, said federal troops are “going in” to Chicago to address crime, calling the city “the worst and most dangerous city in the World, by far.”²
• Local and State Opposition: Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson has signed an executive order to prevent city police from assisting federal agents, including those from ICE, who are also being sent to the city.³ Both Mayor Johnson and Governor J.B. Pritzker have publicly opposed the deployment.⁴
• Differing Perspectives:
  • Critics (such as Illinois Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton and Congressman Chuy Garcia) describe the move as a political show of force to “manufacture a crisis” and intimidate opponents.
  • A Supporter (Alderman Raymond Lopez) sees the National Guard’s presence as a way to free up local police to respond to more critical 911 calls, rather than guarding downtown landmarks.
• Contrasting Crime Data: The article notes that while Trump referred to Chicago as “the murder capital of the world” on social media, city data shows homicides are at 278 for 2025 and the city’s violent crime rate is down 22% compared to the previous year, a trend seen in many other American cities.⁵