Skip to comments.
Bush-Era Debate: Using G.I.’s in U.S.
New York Times ^
| July 24, 2009
| MARK MAZZETTI and DAVID JOHNSTON
Posted on 07/24/2009 6:54:54 PM PDT by rdl6989
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-54 next last
1
posted on
07/24/2009 6:54:54 PM PDT
by
rdl6989
To: rdl6989
2
posted on
07/24/2009 6:56:18 PM PDT
by
rdl6989
To: rdl6989
The idea of sending troops to arrest people within in the US makes me really uncomfortable. That’s the job of the FBI. Imagine if he had sent this precedent, and then it became okay for Obama to do this with “right-wing extremists.”
3
posted on
07/24/2009 6:59:42 PM PDT
by
Rodebrecht
(If everybody just left everybody else alone, everybody would be a lot happier.)
To: rdl6989
So what’s the point? They considered doing something they chose not to do and didn’t. Wow, now there is some big news right there by golly.
If the NYT knew what all I have dreamed of doing in response to their traitorous acts against my country, they would move to an undisclosed location.
4
posted on
07/24/2009 7:03:45 PM PDT
by
Gator113
(I live in "one of the largest Muslim countries in the world." Imam Obama told me so.)
To: Rodebrecht
“Obama to do this with right-wing extremists.
Give it time....he’ll do it.
5
posted on
07/24/2009 7:08:40 PM PDT
by
Fireone
(Jim Thompson's message speaks my thoughts exactly! Thanks JimRob!)
To: Rodebrecht; rdl6989
The idea of sending troops to arrest people within in the US makes me really uncomfortable. That’s the job of the FBI. Imagine if he had sent this precedent, and then it became okay for Obama to do this with “right-wing extremists.” Plus the FBI doesn't have that many people. They often have to rely on cooperation with local law enforcement agencies.
To: rdl6989
That is not a “Bush era debate” topic.
It’s a “Washington era debate” topic, and the prohibition that was decided upon is coded into law.
7
posted on
07/24/2009 7:14:37 PM PDT
by
MrEdd
(Heck? Geewhiz Cripes, thats the place where people who don't believe in Gosh think they aint going.)
To: Paleo Conservative
The reasons to do this would be:
a) To establish the legality of the practice, in case it needed to happen on a mass scale.
b) To avoid putting terrorism suspects into civilian courts.
8
posted on
07/24/2009 7:16:27 PM PDT
by
furquhart
(Would it not be easier to dissolve the people and elect another?)
To: rdl6989
Hrmmm...
Anyone ever figure out who called these guys to Alabama?
9
posted on
07/24/2009 7:16:27 PM PDT
by
Domandred
(Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.. I am Jim Thompson.)
To: rdl6989
Not just NO!!!, but HELL NO!!!!
Next thing you know, there are some thing American troops can’t or refuse to do, so the gummint hires foreigners, aka mercenaries.
NO MILITARY TROOPS IN OUR STREETS!!!!!
10
posted on
07/24/2009 7:17:43 PM PDT
by
djf
(The "racism" spiel is a crutch, those who unashamedly lean on it, cripples!)
To: rdl6989
Wait till we find out what the Thug in Chief is up to.
11
posted on
07/24/2009 7:18:57 PM PDT
by
PghBaldy
(http://www.blackfive.net/main/2009/06/president-obama-visits-wounded-troops.html)
To: rdl6989
As I see it, there was a discussion and nothing happened. The Constitution prevailed.
On the other hand, Zero has sh!t on the Constituion so many times in his short tenure, that this might become reality under his regime.
12
posted on
07/24/2009 7:27:46 PM PDT
by
Road Warrior ‘04
(I'll miss President Bush greatly! Palin in 2012! The "other" Jim Thompson)
To: Bushbacker1
Constituion = Constitution
13
posted on
07/24/2009 7:29:15 PM PDT
by
Road Warrior ‘04
(I'll miss President Bush greatly! Palin in 2012! The "other" Jim Thompson)
To: furquhart; Rodebrecht; rdl6989
The reasons to do this would be: a) To establish the legality of the practice, in case it needed to happen on a mass scale.
b) To avoid putting terrorism suspects into civilian courts.
In 1942 the US arrested, tried, convicted, and executed a group of NAZI saboteurs who were smuggled into the US via U-boat. They were tried by military tribunals on US soil. Some of them even had dual US-German citizenship. There's already precedent for trying saboteurs by military tribunals on US soil regardles of who apprehended them.
To: Rodebrecht
Obama doesn’t need precedent to take action against his enemies.
15
posted on
07/24/2009 7:34:46 PM PDT
by
rabidralph
(http://www.thealaskafundtrust.com/ http://www.sarahpac.com)
To: Paleo Conservative
“There's already precedent for trying saboteurs by military tribunals on US soil regardles of who apprehended them.”
Well, I say it's time to apprehend Obama, Pelosi, Reed, Franks, Dodds, Schumer, Watters and the rest of the commie scum.
To: bamahead
17
posted on
07/24/2009 7:46:07 PM PDT
by
KoRn
(Department of Homeland Security, Certified - "Right Wing Extremist")
To: Rodebrecht
You’re right to be uneasy about it. Just look at what happened in New Orleans after Katrina. The federalized National Guard helped carry out an unconstitutional and criminal order from the mayor to violate citizen’s Second Amendment rights under color of law.
To date no charges have been brought against the mayor, the police chief, the General in charge of the troops, or anyone who participated in the crimes.
18
posted on
07/24/2009 7:46:12 PM PDT
by
SUSSA
To: KoRn; Abathar; Abcdefg; Abram; Abundy; akatel; albertp; AlexandriaDuke; Alexander Rubin; ...
19
posted on
07/24/2009 7:57:16 PM PDT
by
bamahead
(Few men desire liberty; most men wish only for a just master. -- Sallust)
To: rdl6989
How soon some forget tanks at Waco.......another democrat president
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-54 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson