Jimi Hendrix - say it isn't so....Un-American?

[Kenny Shovel]

I will stop now, as this could easily plunge into politics!

This whole threads been about politics of one kind or another, and I've seen no problems.

 

[Robert]

Okay, let me try an example that might ring true with you, based on what I know about your beliefs.

In the US, the Democrats get in and constitutionally state that first trimester abortion is legal. Are you going to accept that? No, I doubt it. You'll still be against abortion. Just because the elected party implements a policy doesn't mean you have to agree with it and doesn't prevent you from protesting it. Equally so with war. If you don't agree with the cause or the methodology it's your right, as part of a free-speaking country, to do something about it (recall we are talking about 'freedom' here, not Hendrix specifically)! Besides, I don't think any military unit should have a soldier in their midst who does not believe in the overarching cause.

Not sure about you, but I don't check my personal beliefs at the door when a political party gets in that I don't agree with. I'll pay my taxes and obey the laws, but they don't get to dictate what I can think nor prevent me protesting what I believe is unjust.

You're right, I don't have to agree and I might even protest. However, if my elected government believes that going to war is necessary to ensure the safety of our nation, then the right thing to do is support it. Even if my party lost the election, it’s still my elected government.

 

[Motokid]

You're right, I don't have to agree and I might even protest. However, if my elected government believes that going to war is necessary to ensure the safety of our nation, then the right thing to do is support it. Even if my party lost the election, it’s still my elected government.

I'm going to have to disagree here. The beauty of America is that you can strongly disagree with "the" elected government, and not fear for your life, or risk becoming a political prisoner wasting away in some corrupt prison.

I can rightfully disagree with America's policy on anything, and everything. I can do my best to support whatever causes I wish. The only thing I am required to do as far as supporting the "current elected" government is pay my taxes, and obey the laws as they stand.

The right thing to do is voice your opinion and stand by your beliefs. Regardless of who's elected and where they take our country. I don't have to "support" our government on every issue simply because they are the ones in office at this moment.

It's actually my duty as an American to speak out against the things that I see as wrong, and that's exactly the kind of freedom every soldier who's ever fought for this country has fought for.

I actually despise the idea that just because dubya was elected by roughly half the voting population of this country, I have to "support" his every decision. That, in my opinion is not what this country is about. This country is about the idea that I can call him a completely worthless, and incredibly brainless twit that should never have been allowed to enter the White House in the first place. I would have said the same thing about Gore and/or Kerry too.

The freedom and ability to not support the elected government is a very important part of what this country is about. Except when it comes to taxes...never forget the taxes....

 

[Zolipara]

I would answer that, by saying that we know A MINISCULE FRACTION of what our government knows (and that's a good thing). We are not in the position, nor do we have the global responsibility, of the President/Congress. When they call us to fight for our country, our only response should be "where do I sign up?". We elect them to make these decisions. We pay them to take the responsibility. If we don't like the decisions they make, then we need to replace them, but while they are in office, they are the Commander-In-Chief. If Clinton had instituted the draft when the USS Cole was bombed by terrorists in the port of Bahrain, (and I weren't over 28), I would have been first in line, even though I would not have voted for the man for dog catcher.

So what you want is blind obedience to a few men regardless of what they do?

 

[Kenny Shovel]

The beauty of America is that you can strongly disagree with "the" elected government, and not fear for your life, or risk becoming a political prisoner wasting away in some corrupt prison.

Small point, but an important one: this is the beauty of many countries, not just America. I appreciate you understand that, but Americans might find that some of the, IMO over the top, criticism they receive would be lessened if they didn’t phrase things like this in a way that makes them sound as if they regard their country as the only democracy in town.

Regards,

K-S

 

[Motokid]

In the US, the President cannot take a country to war without consent (majority vote) from Congress, another body of elected officials.

ummm....isn't that exactly what happened with Iraq? As I recall, there was, nor has there ever been a Congressional vote or Decree about war with Iraq. Which is in part why America can hold hundreds of "suspected terrorists" captive in Cuba without charging them with a crime, but also without the label of "prisoner of war".

 

[Motokid]

Small point, but an important one: this is the beauty of many countries, not just America. I appreciate you understand that, but Americans might find that some of the, IMO over the top, criticism they receive would be lessened if they didn’t phrase things like this in a way that makes them sound as if they regard their country as the only democracy in town.

Regards,

K-S

I'm not sure I've ever stated that I think America is the only place where this type of thing can happen, but if that's the illusion any of my posts have given, I can assure you that I'm aware that America is not the only place stuff like that can happen. I know we're not the only democracy.

 

[Kenny Shovel]

I'm not sure I've ever stated that I think America is the only place where this type of thing can happen

I didn't say you had, in fact I didn't suggest that any Americans beleived this.
I was merely trying to point out that such phrases can be interpreted to imply that by people who want to make an anti-american point.

 

[Robert]

ummm....isn't that exactly what happened with Iraq? As I recall, there was, nor has there ever been a Congressional vote or Decree about war with Iraq. Which is in part why America can hold hundreds of "suspected terrorists" captive in Cuba without charging them with a crime, but also without the label of "prisoner of war".

No it isn't, Moto. Mr. Bush had concent from Congress.

As far as I know, those boys in Club Gitmo are prisoners of war.

 

[Robert]

I'm going to have to disagree here. The beauty of America is that you can strongly disagree with "the" elected government, and not fear for your life, or risk becoming a political prisoner wasting away in some corrupt prison.

I can rightfully disagree with America's policy on anything, and everything. I can do my best to support whatever causes I wish. The only thing I am required to do as far as supporting the "current elected" government is pay my taxes, and obey the laws as they stand.

The right thing to do is voice your opinion and stand by your beliefs. Regardless of who's elected and where they take our country. I don't have to "support" our government on every issue simply because they are the ones in office at this moment.

It's actually my duty as an American to speak out against the things that I see as wrong, and that's exactly the kind of freedom every soldier who's ever fought for this country has fought for.

I actually despise the idea that just because dubya was elected by roughly half the voting population of this country, I have to "support" his every decision. That, in my opinion is not what this country is about. This country is about the idea that I can call him a completely worthless, and incredibly brainless twit that should never have been allowed to enter the White House in the first place. I would have said the same thing about Gore and/or Kerry too.

The freedom and ability to not support the elected government is a very important part of what this country is about. Except when it comes to taxes...never forget the taxes....

That’s ok, Moto, you’re entitled to disagree.

 

[Motokid]

"The unconstitutional war in Iraq. "The Inquiry should examine whether President Bush and Vice President Cheney have gone beyond the bounds of the Constitution, defied the rule of law, and if so, whether impeachment is the appropriate constitutional punishment," said Nader. The United States Congress never voted for the Iraq war. Congress voted for a resolution in October 2002 which unlawfully transferred to the President the decision-making power of whether to launch a first-strike invasion of Iraq. The United States Constitution's War Powers Clause (Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11) vests the power of deciding whether to send the nation into war solely in the United States Congress. This can only be changed by a constitutional amendment. "

Bush may have had Congressional consent, but it was not done the right way, there was no constitutional amendment.

As for the guys in Gitmo...they are not classified as POW's...they are classified as "enemy combatants" which means the Geneva Convention does not apply, and they can be held indefinitely without being charged with a crime....

 

[Motokid]

See this link on enemy combatants:

http://www.cfr.org/publication.php?id=5312


"The President has determined that al Qaida members are unlawful combatants because (among other reasons) they are members of a non-state actor terrorist group that does not receive the protections of the Third Geneva Convention. He additionally determined that the Taliban detainees are unlawful combatants because they do not satisfy the criteria for POW status set out in Article 4 of the Third Geneva Convention. Although the President's determination on this issue is final, courts have concurred with his determination."

 

[Robert]

See this link on enemy combatants:

http://www.cfr.org/publication.php?id=5312


"The President has determined that al Qaida members are unlawful combatants because (among other reasons) they are members of a non-state actor terrorist group that does not receive the protections of the Third Geneva Convention. He additionally determined that the Taliban detainees are unlawful combatants because they do not satisfy the criteria for POW status set out in Article 4 of the Third Geneva Convention. Although the President's determination on this issue is final, courts have concurred with his determination."

Thanks for the update, Moto.

 

[Robert]

"The unconstitutional war in Iraq. "The Inquiry should examine whether President Bush and Vice President Cheney have gone beyond the bounds of the Constitution, defied the rule of law, and if so, whether impeachment is the appropriate constitutional punishment," said Nader. The United States Congress never voted for the Iraq war. Congress voted for a resolution in October 2002 which unlawfully transferred to the President the decision-making power of whether to launch a first-strike invasion of Iraq. The United States Constitution's War Powers Clause (Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11) vests the power of deciding whether to send the nation into war solely in the United States Congress. This can only be changed by a constitutional amendment. "

Bush may have had Congressional consent, but it was not done the right way, there was no constitutional amendment.

As for the guys in Gitmo...they are not classified as POW's...they are classified as "enemy combatants" which means the Geneva Convention does not apply, and they can be held indefinitely without being charged with a crime....

You may not agree, but the president did it lawfully. As for the guys in Gitmo, let 'em rot there.

 

[Zolipara]

You may not agree, but the president did it lawfully. As for the guys in Gitmo, let 'em rot there.

Yes lets not bother with anything resembling a fair trial. Innocent until proven guilty should only apply to americans, not those dirty foreigners.

 

[Robert]

Yes lets not bother with anything resembling a fair trial. Innocent until proven guilty should only apply to americans, not those dirty foreigners.

Not dirty foreigners, they’re well educated terrorists determined to murder innocent people.

 

[novella]

Oh, I see, Robert. They don't deserve due process because they're guilty. Makes sense. And the war is justified because, well, we're already fighting it, and what would be the point if we weren't right? Hmmm. That seems clear. And every time American soldiers set foot on foreign soil, they're obviously fighting for freedom and the democratic process, right? Except that those things don't apply to foreigners until they are all personally approved by the US. Is that how it goes?

 

[Motokid]

According to the Constitution, the President can not declare war. Period. It has to be an act of Congress. The fact that congress gave the President permission to invade Iraq is in direct defiance of the constitution. There has been no amendment. Unless I missed that somewhere...

 

[Robert]

Oh, I see, Robert. They don't deserve due process because they're guilty. Makes sense. And the war is justified because, well, we're already fighting it, and what would be the point if we weren't right? Hmmm. That seems clear. And every time American soldiers set foot on foreign soil, they're obviously fighting for freedom and the democratic process, right? Except that those things don't apply to foreigners until they are all personally approved by the US. Is that how it goes?

These aren't just foreigners, novella. These are people sworn to murder as many people as they can in the name of Allah. Some of the foreign combatants believed to be less dangerous were let go, and were killed trying to kill American soldiers, Iraqi policeman or setting off bombs in a public place like a crowed market. These aren’t men sitting passively in jail, trying to convince their jailers that they don’t deserve to be there. They continue to threaten the life of the prison guards and their families if they’re ever released, and attack the guards at every opportunity. These are not people that you want to see set free, novella.

 

[novella]

These aren't just foreigners, novella. These are people sworn to murder as many people as they can in the name of Allah. Some of the foreign combatants believed to be less dangerous were let go, and were killed trying to kill American soldiers, Iraqi policeman or setting off bombs in a public place like a crowed market. These aren’t men sitting passively in jail, trying to convince their jailers that they don’t deserve to be there. They continue to threaten the life of the prison guards and their families if they’re ever released, and attack the guards at every opportunity. These are not people that you want to see set free, novella.

These generalizations don't apply to every one of the prisoners. I'm not advocating 'setting them free.' I'm asking why you are so sure they are guilty if they have not yet had a trial.