I guess you are going to tell me we should have ignored Pearl Harbor because reacting would have been "stooping" to the level of the Japanese.
I play to win. By any means necessary. If some Arab terrorist loses some rights, I hate it for him. If he doesn't like it, he can go back home.
Don't be dense Appy. That argument is a strawman, not applying to the issue at hand. Fighting the Japanese was an action of self-defense against an agressor similar to our action in Afghanstian
I play to win. By any means necessary. If some Arab terrorist loses some rights, I hate it for him. If he doesn't like it, he can go back home.
I see, and someone who stands up for PROVEN Constitutuional principles is somehow NOT playing to win. This is the USA, Home of the Brave and Free, we respect certain inalienable rights such as those of life and self-defense. Our system is set up, for good reason, with the burden of proof to rest on the accuser. When good investigative work is done, and the rules are followed, we put away the bad guys almost every time. Innoscense does not have to be proven. It is assumed, until proven otherwise. That's the proven system we have. Those are our principles and our rules. To violate them is to go against everything that is "American" in the first place. You want a court that does as it pleases, when it pleases, with the accused move to China or Cuba. If you want to support such measures, if you are not mature enough to understand the underlying principles, fine, but please refrain from ever calling yourself a patriot or lover of this great land again.