[kpw94]

> military forces exist to protect the country from existential threats — such as an invasion or rebellion — not to enforce the law.

serious question: are Countries such as Italy, France etc not a democracy?

All of them are, verbatim from wikipedia, "a military force with law enforcement duties among the civilian population.". Ditto for spain Guardia Civil, and many of the countries listed in that same wiki page: Algeria, Netherlands, Poland, Argentina, Romania, Turkey, Ukraine, Chile, France, Italy, Portugal, Spain, ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gendarmerie

[the_gipsy]

Having police not separated from military doesn't invalidate the democracy, it just makes it easier to subvert democracy at some point.

The spanish Guardia Civil is a very good example of a police force tied too deeply with the military. In 1981 some parts of the force attempted an actual coup, with one guy entering the parliament and shooting in the air (or ceiling).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1981_Spanish_coup_attempt

The continuity of the Guardia Civil after Franco's dictatorship is one of many vestiges that has not been removed due to fears of creating an instability leading to some coup and a reversal to fascism. IMHO this may have been justified the years immediately after Franco's death, but should have been addressed at some point. See the 1981 coup as for why "appeasing" the oppressors usually doesn't work out, or even works out for the oppressors.

[anthk]

The Guardia Civil itself predates Franco, and to be fair some GC agents fought for the Republican side in the war.

[forty]

Gendarmerie are simply policemen with a military status which give them some duty (like I think they cannot strike) and some benefits (earlier retirement) but they are still really a police force in reality. I don't think it would look good to send actual army to fight citizens, and I don't think the army would appreciate it either (it might have been done already, no idea)

[Y_Y]

What you say is true, but I'd add that Gendarms/Guardia Civil/Carabinieri etc.; tend to hang around carrying big guns, are responsible to the country as a whole (rather than the local community), are under the relevant defence ministry (while also reporting to the interior ministry).

In my experience they don't act at all like normal cops, and sometimes can be in conflict with them. The only interactions I ever hear of with citizens is if they beat the shit out of someone. You're not going to be going to them for a lost phone or a cat in a tree.

[closewith]

That is not universally true. A Gendarmerie is literally a military force with law enforcement duties and many are exactly that.

In the Netherlands, the Royal Marechaussee are literal soldiers who perform military police duties and also many civilian policing duties, but all of them are soldiers first.

[aredox]

Superficial argument. The "gendarmerie" is exclusively trained in law enforcement. The military aspect is only relative to organisational aspects.

[jxjnskkzxxhx]

In Portugal, the Guarda Civil are cops in rural areas. I have no special insight into their training or hierarchy, but I can tell you that in practice they interact with the population like cops, not like soldiers. E.g. you wouldn't report shoplifting to the army, but you can report to the Guarda Civil.

So I don't think your comment makes any sense, at least in Portugal.

[tiagod]

There is no "Guarda Civil" in Portugal. It's called Guarda Nacional Republicana (GNR).

[AnimalMuppet]

If the US has laws that forbid that, and other nations have laws that establish that, then the US military being used for police activities is threatening to democracy - or at least to the rule of law - in a way that it is not threatening in other countries.

Other countries can do that if they want. It may or may not be a threat to them. But in the US, it's absolutely a threat to democracy, because it's already the executive deploying the military against the law.

[JumpCrisscross]

> serious question: are Countries such as Italy, France etc not a democracy?

They are, but not in the the "framework of US constitutional democracy." A system for which we have more evidence of stability than either of Italy or France's modern republics. (Note, too, les gendarmes' heritage: imperial France. Also, gendarmes aren't usually deployed overseas. They are, in a sense, more similar to the FBI than the U.S. Marines.)

[gabaix]

I have always found confusing the existence of the gendarmes. They are indeed a vestigial force of the XIXth century, and should be transformed into a regular police force.

[eldgfipo]

As a French, I'd argue we're a flawed democracy. Shame on us when we compare ourselves to Scandinavian countries.

[dontlaugh]

Those are bad too. Anyone that grew up in a country with a gendarmerie knows they are the most violent, unpleasant and fascist (personally, not like "all cops are fascist") people you’ll ever meet.

[hotmeals]

Some of the cases you mention involve "military" police who are under the authority of the Ministry of the Interior, instead of the Ministry of Defense. Many also are not the only police force, in Chile the investigative duties fall to the non-military PDI.

IMO as Chilean, it's a pretty bad thing democratically, for both historical (dictatorship) and more recent reasons. Still, there is a clear difference between when the police with deep ties to the army enforce the law and when actual troops do it.

While copper Gutiérrez and grunt Herrera both technically have the rank of corporal, one mostly writes tickets, deals with noise complaints, and has riot training, while the other only knows how to march and shoot an assault rifle.

The actually important thing is that this is testing the waters. Trump will use the troops for flimsier and flimsier reasons.

NOTE: Chilean police are semi-routinely brutal; this is not an endorsement.