possible changes in military's role

[pants_happy]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-0...-military_x.htm

 

i think that yes, we should vote to temporarily give palpatine full control of the senate. after that, maybe we should disband the senate and send in the clones to "establish order".

 

to quote a friend, "There is already an organization that's supposed to take care of emergencies last time I checked and it's known as FEMA. The idea would be to fix FEMA not allow th military more power. "

[Gabrielle]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-0...-military_x.htm

 

i think that yes, we should vote to temporarily give palpatine full control of the senate. after that, maybe we should disband the senate and send in the clones to "establish order".

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's an idea. Mr. Bush needs more power to crush all of those evil terrorist out there.

[Cantousent]

This is terrible. Of course, quite a few liberals blamed Bush because the national guard did not act like as domestic police force. Now, other liberals bemoan the fact that we have the national guard taking on the role of police in "emergencies." I don't like the sound of that at all. I hope this doesn't go anywhere.

 

I hope this doesn't pass and I hope Bush quits caving to public hysteria over the NO flood. It detriments far outweigh the benefits of using the armed forces as a domestic police force.

[Calax]

To give the troops the ability to be used in local law enforcement would allow for a quick coup and turn us into a military run tyrrany. Just kidding

 

If the troops were to become enforcement officials then we'd have a serious problem on our hands. The army does not try to apply laws only to situations that demand it. they apply it everywhere. I'm guessin that if this were to get through and the government were allowed to use the military as poliece at its own disgretion then we'd have some very angry people on our hands. eventually (worst case senario here) we'd either be faced with a revolution, or at the very least a civil war.... and if a general gets dissatisfied he has the power to create his own personal fiefdom within the area his army polieces.

[Azarkon]

Here's an oft-considered conspiracy theory: Bush is merely a puppet in a long line of puppets. His push for a change in the military role is not intended to give him any leverage in the remaining days of his presidency, so getting rid of him is not at all going to change things. Instead, this is just a step for those who really are in power to strengthen their control of the system. But of course, they understand that the American people will never give ground except in times of crisis, and they are patient. As such, they wait for (or perhaps even engineer) the moments of crisis when the public is most vulnerable, and then make their move, one subtle step at a time.

 

Probably an overly alarmist theory, but I do have to admit that everyday the Bush administration pushes me closer to belief. As much as RoTS might have sucked in certain areas, its equation of Palpatine and Bush is perhaps one of the more worthy-of-debate moments in Lucas's filmmaking. Democracy does indeed die with rounds of applause, though likely not as the result of a single villain. As bad of a president as Bush may seem at times, no individual, not even a Sith Lord, can single-handedly engineer the downfall of a republic.

 

What we gotta ask ourselves, and soon, is whether this is really even a problem, rather than the natural evolution of a flawed philosophy. Democracy and capitalism maybe the best systems we've ever achieved, but then again, they maybe the last we ever achieve.

 

EDIT: Btw, whenever we talk about "liberals", we should remind ourselves of something: today's "liberals" and "conservatives" are peas in the same pod, just as the Democrats and the Republicans are increasingly united in their ideologies. I'm not sure if this implies a reversal of positions, in the future, of the Democrat-Republican parties as much as it points to a single oligarchic entity that's no longer really cares about freedom, human rights, etc. as much as it cares about spewing out the right keywords in order to stimulate the right voters.

[Darque]

I hate it.

 

I never thought I'd consider this, but I wonder if I should imigrate to another country. <_<

[alanschu]

Spellmar says "Emigrate"

[Commissar]

What a horrible idea.

[Cantousent]

Don't push the panic button just yet, folks. I don't believe in anything so sinister, Azarkon. I simply think it's bad policy. I don't think there's some person sitting in the background wringing his hands, counting the days until he can make his move. Rather, I think it puts the policy in place that, given the right opportunity, someone in the future might be able to use against the Republic.

 

For a second, forget your hatred of Bush. Look at it this way, there were plenty of Democrats complaining about the National Guard. If the National Guard has greater power, then most folks will probably applaud, as Azarkon says. The danger isn't now. It isn't even this century. Most laws aren't enacted for sinister reasons. Folks just find ways to use those laws for their own ends later.

 

This isn't just an opportunity for liberals to bash Bush. It's an issue for Americans altogether. This is a terrible policy. If we start making crazy conspiracy accusations, then it will only be easier to marginalize the dissent. Even if you think Bush is a Sith Lord, it's better to use a more reasoned approach in attacking this vile measure.

 

While it might not do any good, I would suggest writing to your congressman and senator. Write in snail mail. Call also. Yes, I'm one of those nut jobs who does these things. I don't know if it does any good, but at least I didn't sit idly by while the government put in place the policy of using the armed services as a police force.

[EnderAndrew]

This is terrible.  Of course, quite a few liberals blamed Bush because the national guard did not act like as domestic police force.  Now, other liberals bemoan the fact that we have the national guard taking on the role of police in "emergencies."  I don't like the sound of that at all.  I hope this doesn't go anywhere.

 

I hope this doesn't pass and I hope Bush quits caving to public hysteria over the NO flood.  It detriments far outweigh the benefits of using the armed forces as a domestic police force.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

My sentiments exactly, and I heard about this last week.

 

Again partisan politics getting in the way.

 

I propose we have a civil and rational debate about what level we'd really like our federal government to operate on rather than pointing fingers.

[Commissar]

The military is simply not designed for police actions, no matter what it may claim; the wheel has had to be reinvented out east, and it's a universally bad idea to invite the troops across the Rubicon.

[pants_happy]

read this:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051004/ap_on_.../bush_avian_flu

[Hildegard]

Bush made clear that the potential for an outbreak of avian flu is much on his mind, and has had him talking with "as many (world) leaders as I could find," consulting a book he read over the summer on the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic that killed 40 million and meeting with staff and experts.

 

(w00t) Bush actually read a book?! Say what you want, but I'm not buying it.

Edited October 4, 2005 by Hildegard

[Walsingham]

It's merely a smokescreen to distract from the fundamental lack of leadership shown in any of the systems employed in NO. BBC reporters were appalled at how everyone seemed to be terrified of exceeding their federal/state/military/civilian authorities and avoiding doing simple things like using their assets on jobs right in front of them.

 

We saw precisely the same type of bullpoop here in the UK over the Foot and Mouth affair. But we have cracked heads and should be pretty well set up for any similar events. We have done exercises with joint service HQs, joint field exercises between all types of emergency services, the police, fire, and military. People know what has to be done. In fact we're taking things even further off the back of that and trying to improve regular interservice military cooperation. It's what you boys should be doing, and instead you are allowing the various bureaucracy branches to play empire-building games.

 

This is not some conspiracy, nor is everything fine. What is needed is a lot of nitty-gritty overhaul from comms to culture.

[taks]

bush also has a degree from yale, and managed to outdo kerry in the process.

 

either way, posse comitatus is the reason he must change the laws for inside the border action. this is the very reason that he could not go into new orleans without permission.

 

those liberals that are foaming at the mouth over bush's "failure" in new orleans have no idea what kind of **** storm they may have created. unbelievable. btw, yes, though the original intent of the law was for voting purposes, it certainly is a worthy protection for the people of the US. allowing willy-nilly action inside the borders is bound to result in abuse. slippery slope? maybe, but if anything is true, we do have history of the government's unwillingness to give up any power we give it.

 

taks