Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Sola Veritas; xzins
it isn’t a real “threat” to national security

What??

This begs the question Sola:

Tens of millions entering the U.S. illegally, to the extent where they were found wandering around the inside of the private residence of Bush's Homeland Security boss, and nuclear submarine bases during war time is not a threat to national security?

Considering all the historic deadly economy changing terrorist attacks, tens of millions entering illegally from God knows where is NOT an epic national security threat?

Take your time here Sola...

110 posted on 07/22/2014 8:06:42 PM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies ]


To: dragnet2

“it isn’t a real “threat” to national security”

Obviously open borders are a threat the national security - but that is not the issue I was discussing. What I meant by “reat threat” is in the sense of an invading military force.

Chaplain xzins has cited a portion of the COTUS that prohibits a “state” (like Texas) from conducting a war (which implies a somewhat organized armed force - not illegal children) unless a rapid invasion (implied again is a military force) occurred that required the state to react quickly because of a logistical/communication delay for the “countries” forces to respond.

When the COTUS was written in the late 18th Century, it was set up with the Central/Federal government alone having the power to wage a war. States could not do so. The only exception - and necessary for that time period - was if an invading force was to rapidly move into a state. The state could then wage a (of necessity) limited war until the central/federal government could take over. The circumstances would not allow for the delay of the federal military to get organized and respond. Plus, a state’s officials would get news of the invasion much sooner than the federal officials in Washington would (under the communication systems of the 18th Century). The times required this exception to be put into place.

Illegal children crossing the border is bad and undesirable, and even a threat to the nation’s security. However, it would not (IMO) meet the criteria for a court to rule that a Governor was correct to “wage” war on these illegals. They are not an invading army or even a para-military organization.

Now if the Mexican Army was to cross the border, or their federalles, etc. (or even the para-military drug cartels) as an armed force...then this may meet the criteria for the state of Texas to wage war. However, since there are numerous federal military forces already stationed in Texas..that could respond rapidly to such an invasion. The danger of a “delay” is not there as the COTUS invisioned. I’m not sure if a court would agree with Texas waging a war then either.

Bottom line is that there is no invading military (or para military) force, and the central/federal government is aware of what is taking place and has not acted (as dead wrong as this may be), therefore, the state of Texas does not have the constitutional authority to wage a war(the central gov has decided there is no imminent danger - again dead wrong). I am not remotely an attorney and I can clearly see the meaning of the COTUS.....even a dumb judge could as well.


117 posted on 07/23/2014 11:07:17 AM PDT by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson