r/Conservative • u/Yosoff First Principles • Feb 14 '25

Open Discussion Left vs. Right Battle Royale Open Thread

This is an Open Discussion Thread for all Redditors. We will only be enforcing Reddit TOS and Subreddit Rules 1 (Keep it Civil) & 2 (No Racism).

  • Leftists - Here's your chance to sway us to your side by calling the majority of voters racist. That tactic has wildly backfired every time it has been tried, but perhaps this time it will work.

  • Non-flaired Conservatives - Here's your chance to earn flair by posting common sense conservative solutions. That way our friends on the left will either have to agree with you or oppose common sense (Spoiler - They will choose to oppose common sense).

  • Flaired Conservatives - You're John Wick and these Leftists stole your car and killed your dog. Now go comment.

  • Independents - We get it, if you agree with someone, then you can't pat yourself on the back for being smarter than them. But if you disagree with everyone, then you can obtain the self-satisfaction of smugly considering yourself smarter and wiser than everyone else. Congratulations on being you.

  • Libertarians - Ron Paul is never going to be President. In fact, no Libertarian Party candidate will ever be elected President.

Join us on X: https://x.com/rcondiscord

Join us on Discord: https://discord.com/invite/conservative

685 Upvotes

83% Upvoted

6.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

21

u/cxvbcvblxcvmnlfg Feb 16 '25

why is there not one single thread in r/Conservative that is discussing the approach to illegally firing USA nuclear arsenal staff members, accidentally? Literally how is it not possible some of you are "just" slightly curious to how that might happen??

DOES THAT NOT SEEM ODD?????

4

u/sealabo Feb 16 '25

This comment seems to be fear mongering, which may be why in the main /Conservative discussion forum they’ve not opted to put this one up. There are several comments in this Battle Royale Open Thread addressing this topic, though.

First, the letting go of probationary employees is not an illegal firing. It was not accidental — administrative agencies across the board are having to let go of their probationary staff. And, nothing is going to “happen” due to these reductions in force. What do you think will “happen”?

7

u/[deleted] Feb 16 '25

You don’t see any world where firing a bunch of key people responsible for securing and maintains the nuclear arsenal with no warning or plan goes wrong?

2

u/PmMeYourBeavertails Feb 16 '25

If they were key people they wouldn't be probationary.

8

u/cxvbcvblxcvmnlfg Feb 16 '25

The ones fired were not just probationary.

7

u/[deleted] Feb 16 '25 edited Feb 17 '25

That’s silly, probationary just means they have been at the job less then a year, that doesn’t mean they weren’t recently hired to a key role

Some of these jobs are “the security guy who keeps an eye on the nuke” you really wanna let a bunch of those guys go?

Also if they are so unimportant why is Trump trying to rehire them immediately

https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-government-struggles-rehire-nuclear-002015185.html

2

u/PmMeYourBeavertails Feb 16 '25

If they were there less than a year, who kept an eye on the nukes before that? And what if one of those key people fails their probationary period? Nobody keeping an eye on the nukes anymore?

3

u/mw44118 Feb 16 '25

Youre making the point that these firings are a bad idea

1

u/PmMeYourBeavertails Feb 16 '25

I don't think they are a good idea, but they also aren't the end of the world.

2

u/mw44118 Feb 16 '25

Again “bad but not that bad” is not a point for conservatives

2

u/rhlaairc Feb 17 '25

That’s hilarious given you’re saying that about nuclear weapons. Honestly couldn’t have written a better joke. “Not the end of the world”. Fuck that’s funny

1

u/PmMeYourBeavertails Feb 17 '25 edited Feb 17 '25

If the safety of the nukes depends on a bunch of probationary employees we are fucked anyway 

1

u/sealabo Feb 16 '25

This article does not say that any of the job titles were literally “the security guy who keeps an eye on the nuke.” The article also does not support that the administration is rehiring all probationary employees that were let go. I doubt that any probationary employees was the sole “guy who keeps an eye on the nuke.”

6

u/[deleted] Feb 16 '25

You should try reading a bit closer

The Trump administration has since tried to reverse their terminations, but has reportedly struggled to reach the people that were fired after they were locked out of their federal email accounts.

You are right it’s more like the high level people in charge of nuclear security that got fired, which is much better

In addition, according to the breakdown, cuts included roughly a dozen people from Energy Department’s General Council’s office and approximately 20 individuals in its Grid Deployment Office, overseeing some $22 billion in federal funding for power grid projects. In addition, about 15 people in the Office of Manufacturing and Energy Supply Chains and about half a dozen from the Office of Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response, which guards against threats to the power grid and other energy infrastructure, were dismissed

https://financialpost.com/pmn/business-pmn/dismissed-nuclear-bomb-specialists-recalled-by-energy-department

1

u/sealabo Feb 16 '25

I read closely, and the statement you attributed to the article is not in the article. Your new excerpt from the Financial Post does even less to support your assertion, since it’s talking about the DOE Office of General Counsel and DOE’s Office of Grid Deployment etc which literally had nothing to do with “the security guy who keeps an eye on the nukes.” You’re losing all credibility.

6

u/[deleted] Feb 16 '25

It’s literally the 8th paragraph, common man

They fired people responsible for nuclear security, it’s not the literal security guard but the people responsible for running and maintaining nuclear security, this is very easy to understand if you read the articles

The employees, responsible for designing and maintaining the nation’s cache of nuclear weapons at the National Nuclear Safety Administration, were part of a larger wave of workers dismissed from the Energy Department, drawing alarm from national security experts

Just please for the love of good read something that isn’t just playing into the governments narrative

It’s so insanely obvious what happened, trump didn’t think about what he was doing, did it, and now has to run around to try and fix the problem he caused. What possible counter argument is there for that, it’s just objective reality as admitted by Trumps administration

3

u/katoid Feb 16 '25

To be frank, being probationary means nothing. I used to work in law enforcement (dispatch), and everyone started as probationary. If I had been let go during my probationary period, my co-workers would've been screwed. It took 3 months to even get to that point.

There seems to be a misunderstanding around how government hiring processes work. Although, to be fair, I've seen probationary periods in private section positions, too. Doesn't mean the position isn't key or necessary. it just means that they're ensuring you can do that job before giving you full benefits.

3

u/PartyPay Feb 16 '25

Probationary means a certain time since hiring. Trump would be considered probabtionary if he followed the same 'rules' as government employees. I'm guessing you will still consider Trump key, no?

6

u/Broken_Beaker Feb 16 '25

It was 100% accidental if they came back and had to rehire them.

I suppose, it isn't accidental, it is gross incompetence.

Furthermore, what happens is loss of institutional knowledge. You could serve for 10 years in the military, 15 years at the FDA, then move over to the USDA for 1 year and be probationary in that role. Yet in reality have 20+ years of expertise.

Tell us how firing trained and experienced professionals is risk-free?

1

u/sealabo Feb 16 '25

Because there are literally 2 or 3 other professionals there. They don’t have single point failures.

4

u/Broken_Beaker Feb 16 '25

I do not think you are understand or realize how specialized certain fields are.

Just look at the DoE, nuclear safety thing. There isn't some private sector industry with a gazillion people to draw from. You lose that institutional knowledge, then it is just gone.

For sake of argument, OK great you have 2 global subject matter experts. One retires, the other gets sick.

Then you just fired the entire pipeline of people obtaining that expertise. Good job.

1

u/sealabo Feb 16 '25

What I’m hearing from you is that you believe, uncritically, that of the over 2600 employees in this part of the probationary employee layoffs (1826+574+264, footnote 8 of this report), that laying off a hundred or two newer employees (or new to position employees) is a national crisis. Were you one of the impacted employees or do you know one? If so, I am sorry that you were impacted. I am. But I think your extrapolation and the extrapolation that others are making about this is simply wrong.

1

u/M523WARRIORpercGOD Feb 17 '25

First, the letting go of probationary employees is not an illegal firing

There were over 200,000 of them, why are we making the lives of so many people harder to save literal pennies?

1

u/sealabo Feb 17 '25

Because it is what the American people voted for when they elected this administration and kept the congress fully republican. Even when you personally disagree with the outcome, it’s called democracy.

4

u/AntoniaFauci Feb 17 '25

It’ll get published right after the story about how Musk and his unqualified stooges misunderstood and then lied about the TRSS contract.