Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 67

Thread: Bush-Era Debate: Using G.I.’s in U.S.

  1. #1
    Educator sam_w's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    09-24-09 @ 04:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    724

    Bush-Era Debate: Using G.I.’s in U.S.

    Breaking News in the NY Times:

    Bush-Era Debate: Using G.I.’s in U.S.
    Top Bush administration officials in 2002 debated testing the Constitution by sending American troops into the suburbs of Buffalo to arrest a group of men suspected of plotting with Al Qaeda, according to former administration officials.

    Some of the advisers to President George W. Bush, including Vice President Dick Cheney, argued that a president had the power to use the military on domestic soil to sweep up the terrorism suspects, who came to be known as the Lackawanna Six, and declare them enemy combatants.

    Mr. Bush ultimately decided against the proposal to use military force.

    A decision to dispatch troops into the streets to make arrests would be nearly unprecedented in American history, as both the Constitution and subsequent laws restrict the military from being used to conduct domestic raids and seize property.

    The Fourth Amendment bans “unreasonable” searches and seizures without probable cause. And the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 generally prohibits the military from acting in a law enforcement capacity.
    Speechless...

  2. #2
    Sage
    Oftencold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    A small village in Alaska
    Last Seen
    05-09-14 @ 12:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    5,044

    Re: Bush-Era Debate: Using G.I.’s in U.S.

    1. The option wasn't used.

    2. The time may come when it needs to be. Or would you rather send municipal police into a situation where they'd be mowed down?

    3. Life's tough, and sometimes tough choices need to be made.
    Quod scripsi, scripsi

  3. #3
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:06 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,601

    Re: Bush-Era Debate: Using G.I.’s in U.S.

    Quote Originally Posted by sam_w View Post
    Breaking News in the NY Times:

    Bush-Era Debate: Using G.I.’s in U.S.


    Speechless...
    What are you "speechless" about? Perhaps you should look at Waco, 1993.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  4. #4
    Sage
    bhkad's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Last Seen
    08-13-10 @ 01:01 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    10,745

    Re: Bush-Era Debate: Using G.I.’s in U.S.

    WASHINGTON — Top Bush administration officials in 2002 debated testing the Constitution by sending American troops into the suburbs of Buffalo to arrest a group of men suspected of plotting with Al Qaeda, according to former administration officials.

    Some of the advisers to President George W. Bush, including Vice President Dick Cheney, argued that a president had the power to use the military on domestic soil to sweep up the terrorism suspects, who came to be known as the Lackawanna Six, and declare them enemy combatants.

    Mr. Bush ultimately decided against the proposal to use military force.

    A decision to dispatch troops into the streets to make arrests has few precedents in American history, as both the Constitution and subsequent laws restrict the military from being used to conduct domestic raids and seize property.

    The Fourth Amendment bans “unreasonable” searches and seizures without probable cause. And the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 generally prohibits the military from acting in a law enforcement capacity.

    In the discussions, Mr. Cheney and others cited an Oct. 23, 2001, memorandum from the Justice Department that, using a broad interpretation of presidential authority, argued that the domestic use of the military against Al Qaeda would be legal because it served a national security, rather than a law enforcement, purpose.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/25/us....html?_r=1&hpw

    It makes more sense when you include the details.

    OBL 11/24/02

  5. #5
    Professor
    Baralis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    MO
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 03:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,394
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Bush-Era Debate: Using G.I.’s in U.S.

    I could be wrong here but I thought that the federal government could use military forces in the states as law inforcement but that it had to have the states approval and the govenors signature? If not maybe it was something similar.

  6. #6
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Bush-Era Debate: Using G.I.’s in U.S.

    Former officials in the administration said this debate was not as bitter as others during Mr. Bush’s first term. The discussions did not proceed far enough to put military units on alert.

    Still, at least one high-level meeting was convened to debate the issue, at which several top Bush aides argued firmly against the proposal to use the military, advanced by Mr. Cheney, his legal adviser David S. Addington and some senior Defense Department officials.

    Among those in opposition were Condoleezza Rice, then the national security adviser; John B. Bellinger III, the top lawyer at the National Security Council; Robert S. Mueller III, the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; and Michael Chertoff, then the head of the Justice Department’s criminal division.
    Woah, woah, woah - you mean that when an important decision had to be made, two groups of people who took different positions on a complex and unsettled issue had a debate? And the end result of that debate was that the president agreed with one of the parties?

    Holy ****.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  7. #7
    Educator sam_w's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    09-24-09 @ 04:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    724

    Re: Bush-Era Debate: Using G.I.’s in U.S.

    Quote Originally Posted by bhkad View Post
    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/25/us....html?_r=1&hpw

    It makes more sense when you include the details.
    Good lord, you really honestly want to try and argue that they needed the military to arrest a whole 6 people? You want to attempt to explain why the FBI, or any law enforcement for that matter could not be used to legally detain suspects? There is one reason, and only one reason why you would use the military; because it is under the direct command of the President. I guess you don't know your history of Nixon and his enemies list.

  8. #8
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Bush-Era Debate: Using G.I.’s in U.S.

    Quote Originally Posted by sam_w View Post
    There is one reason, and only one reason why you would use the military; because it is under the direct command of the President. I guess you don't know your history of Nixon and his enemies list.
    If you actually read the article, you'd know that that's not the reason why they considered using the military.

    Go on, read it. I won't spoil it for you.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  9. #9
    Guru
    Councilman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Riverside, County, CA.
    Last Seen
    11-04-11 @ 10:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,454
    Blog Entries
    10

    Re: Bush-Era Debate: Using G.I.’s in U.S.

    Some of you might want to learn exactly what the Act entails. Please pay attention to the penalty portion.
    And any person willfully violating the provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor
    To me this says no big deal. Traffic ticket in magnitude. But then the penalties are more than most think of when thinking about misdemeanors.
    Also note that it can be done legally under certain circumstances. And keep in mind not a single person has ever questioned the use Military Fighter Jets as interceptors of possible air borne suicide bombers.
    I hope this doesn't descend into a massive argument of something that wasn't done as so often the case here.

    Posse Comitatus Act of 1878

    SEC. 15. From and after the passage of this act it shall not be lawful to employ any part of the Army of the United States, as a posse comitatus, or otherwise, for the purpose of executing the laws, except in such cases and under such circumstances as such employment of said force may be expressly authorized by the Constitution or by act of Congress; and no money appropriated by this act shall be used to pay any of the expenses incurred in the employment of any troops in violation of this section And any person willfully violating the provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction thereof shall be punished by fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars or imprisonment not exceeding two years or by both such fine and imprisonment.
    Last edited by Councilman; 07-25-09 at 02:37 AM.

  10. #10
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Bush-Era Debate: Using G.I.’s in U.S.

    Quote Originally Posted by Councilman View Post
    Some of you might want to learn exactly what the Act entails. Please pay attention to the penalty portion.
    To me this says no big deal. Traffic ticket in magnitude. But then the penalties are more than most think of when thinking about misdemeanors.
    Also note that it can be done legally under certain circumstances. And keep in mind not a single person has ever questioned the use Military Fighter Jets as interceptors of possible air borne suicide bombers.
    I hope this doesn't descend into a massive argument of something that wasn't done as so often the case here.

    Posse Comitatus Act of 1878
    The argument is based on the question of whether this would be law enforcement or not.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •