Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In the real world, Holder is simply stating that Obama can use military force on US soil, as per the Posse Comitatus Act, and that there are some, improbable scenarios that would require such action, which is clearly true.
Yet if these statements were made 6 years ago under the Bush administration many of the liberals and Democrats who support Obama would come unglued and start the Hitler comparisons. I understand that one day military force could be needed on American soil but we are not at that point and I find it uncomfortable that the idea is even being considered. I also do not like giving the government power because once they have it they never give it back. Another problem is the "war" we are in is vague, undefined, and open ended. We will essentially always be at "war" with "terrorism" and the definition of a "terrorist" is pretty open ended itself so the President being able to whack American citizens on US soil is ripe for abuse.
This situation exposes the threat to American freedom and democracy the "WAR ON TERROR" represents.
THIS WAR IS CONCIEVEBLY A NEVERENDING CONFLICT.
When you think about it, organized crime has killed far more Americans, costs the country far more money, corrupts politicians at all levels and is just as much a threat to security as the terrorists have ever been.
If the mobsters were treated the same way as the terror suspects are, the country could rid it's self of these skumbags in short order. The players are well known so just round them up, and all of the people who associate with them. Throw them into a concentration camp hidden away some place without charge or trial, torture the names of all accompliceses out of them, plus the location of all of their money so it could be siezed. HOLD THEM INDEFINETELY BECAUSE THE WAR ON ORGANIZED CRIME WOULD MAKE HABEUS CORPUS NULL AND VOID. This is how Facist Italy rid it's self of the Mafia
Do you know who would most likely be next? Political enemies are the next logical target.
Then critics of the regime.
Then anyone who displeases the Leader.
Yet if these statements were made 6 years ago under the Bush administration many of the liberals and Democrats who support Obama would come unglued and start the Hitler comparisons.
And if liberals jumped off a bridge, would you do it too?
Some liberals definitely would do as you say - just as some are coming unhinged about Obama now. I wouldn't. In fact, I absolutely agree that GWB, as President, had the authority to use to US military to repel invasions, end rebellions or total lawlessness, and the like. I had no issue whatsoever with the invasion of Afghanistan, in theory, and in fact wish that he had sent *more* troops there, rather than invade Iraq.
Quote:
I understand that one day military force could be needed on American soil but we are not at that point and I find it uncomfortable that the idea is even being considered.
But it's not currently being considered. Or at least, not by the administration.
Quote:
I also do not like giving the government power because once they have it they never give it back. Another problem is the "war" we are in is vague, undefined, and open ended. We will essentially always be at "war" with "terrorism" and the definition of a "terrorist" is pretty open ended itself so the President being able to whack American citizens on US soil is ripe for abuse.
I do agree there, and I think that the authorization of military force against Al Qaida should have been far more limited even outside of US soil. However, since the Obama administration is stating clearly that they won't be using drone strikes, or any other military actions, against some guy walking around in the US, I find Paul's filibuster to be wrongheaded. Simply put, the president is enabled to use "all necessary and appropriate force" against the terrorist group, and those who aid them, and has determined that the use of military force in the US would be unnecessary or inappropriate.
In other words, If Paul wishes to make a reasonable point, he should be railing against the AUMF, and not against the Obama administration.
We know that JFL ordered the assissation of castro but no citizen US. I doubt it could be done except i nmovies and people's minds .Nothig can not leak in any administration these days.Washingto is like some old ladies gossip meeting with everyone leakig to media for their own agenda.
In the real world, Holder is simply stating that Obama can use military force on US soil, as per the Posse Comitatus Act, and that there are some, improbable scenarios that would require such action, which is clearly true.
Its intent (in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807) was to limit the powers of Federal government in using federal military personnel to enforce the State laws.
Under 0bama that means if he thinks you are a threat, he can kill you with a drone attack.
What worries me most about this is the fact that the President can do this with no review. Essentially the President is Judge, jury, and executioner. Anyone who is a "threat" can be taken out and only the President would know why. Scary stuff.
Its intent (in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807) was to limit the powers of Federal government in using federal military personnel to enforce the State laws.
Under 0bama that means if he thinks you are a threat, he can kill you with a drone attack.
Well, no. LEt's look at the AUMF Act, specifically Section 2:
Quote:
Originally Posted by AUMF Act
(a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.
This clearly puts the sole responsibility on the President to determine if one is an Al Qaida sympathizer, and authorizes attacks on such people on US soil. I dislike it, but it was overwhelmingly passed by congress, and signed by GWB. So Obama has this authority, the end.
Obama's policy, thus far, is to explicitly reject the use of this authority on US soil, except under extreme circumstances, such as 9/11 or Pearl Harbor. I simply see no issue with this.
Yet if these statements were made 6 years ago under the Bush administration many of the liberals and Democrats who support Obama would come unglued and start the Hitler comparisons. I understand that one day military force could be needed on American soil but we are not at that point and I find it uncomfortable that the idea is even being considered. I also do not like giving the government power because once they have it they never give it back. Another problem is the "war" we are in is vague, undefined, and open ended. We will essentially always be at "war" with "terrorism" and the definition of a "terrorist" is pretty open ended itself so the President being able to whack American citizens on US soil is ripe for abuse.
And yet if these statements were made under Bush, republicans would have backed him and applauded it just like they applauded the Patriot Act because Bush wanted to protect the country.
And yet if these statements were made under Bush, republicans would have backed him and applauded it just like they applauded the Patriot Act because Bush wanted to protect the country.
There is no use in debating which party rapes you more. In the end, you're still raped.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
