Taking victory off the table means the Constitution is toast anyway. Kindly count me out of your surrender!
The question is: would you prefer we trash the Constitution temporarily in order to preserve the nation, or allow the Islamonazis to trash it permanently when they finally get us in a position from which we can't escape?
Besides, who says roundups and detainment camps are unconstitutional? Not the Supreme Court. "It should be noted, to begin with, that all legal restrictions which curtail the civil rights of a single racial group are immediately suspect. That is not to say that all such restrictions are unconstitutional. It is to say that courts must subject them to the most rigid scrutiny. Pressing public necessity may sometimes justify the existence of such restrictions; racial antagonism never can" [Supreme Court Associate Justice Hugo Black, Korematsu v. U.S., 323 U.S. 214 (1944)]. Even if they are contrary to the Constitution, in a real emergency all bets are likely to be off. If (God forbid) the terrorists someday succeed in hitting us with a WMD, you may be surprised at the steps the federal government can take to ensure the survival of the nation -- court decisions be damned. As Supreme Court Associate Justice Robert Jackson pointed out in Terminello v. City of Chicago (1949), "if the Court does not temper its doctrinaire logic with a little practical wisdom, it will convert the constitutional Bill of Rights into a suicide pact".
Congratulations on the recent addition to your family, by the way, and may God bless you and yours.
LOL! Who do you propose as your favored Monarch?