Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dale Baker who wrote (72165)	6/14/2008 12:36:09 PM
From: Rambi	Respond to of 542010

Yay. (eom)

To: Dale Baker who wrote (72165)	6/14/2008 12:54:15 PM
From: KonKilo	Respond to of 542010

Someone in DC needs to sit down, admit that and create a new body of coherent law for dealing with terrorism instead of this pseudo-contrived BS we have now. I'm afraid it will require a less ideological Admin than the one we have at present. This one was so eager to "Shock and Awe" and "throw some crappy little country against the wall" that it failed to differentiate, let alone to weigh whether or not a military approach was best. All it sees in "those people" is a presumption of guilt that reaches all the way to the Supreme Court. Here's hoping for a return to reason on Jan '09.

To: Dale Baker who wrote (72165)	6/14/2008 3:15:03 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 542010

So the "war" definition is absurd on its face I am so wary of all these "it's obvious" responses. There are so many what ifs. If your point is that it is not war and it is not crime but some third thing, I'm OK with that. But if you are saying it obviously isn't war ergo it's crime, not so much. For example, if a few thousand of these guys, whoever and whatever they are, decided to cross the southern border at Nogales and do some damage, who do we send to combat them? The beat cop in Nogales? The Arizona state police? The National Guard? Special Forces? The last one, surely. But if these guys are civilians on their way to commit a crime, do we have to wait until a crime is committed and then punish them, which is what we do with criminals such as stalkers? If we send in Special Forces, what about posse comitatus. I guess we could wait while congress decides to authorize the suspension of posse comitatus. Meanwhile Nogales and Tucson are in ruins. I think there's a terrible lack of clarity, that we're making it up as we go along. Notions that this is simple make me itch.