..preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States…

So far, 0 for three..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOgT9Ifw6Io&feature=related

SouthernGal on June 11, 2009 at 11:41 AM

Dear Madame, the question at hand is not a broad view of general rights, such regulations and laws currently exist in terms of how soldiers handle prisoners. The problem for which you appear unable to discern is that your liberal interpretation of rights, that if adopted would extend very specific constitutional rights to those who heretofore did not qualify for the protections you seek to provide.

There is a stark difference between a US citizen and their rights stipulated by the US Constitution and those provisions afforded to POWs or illegal enemy combatants.

My advice, don’t be captured on the battlefield fighting the US military or spend time with terrorists and you should be just fine.

You can like it or not.

thomasaur on June 10, 2009 at 7:38 PM

Hey! I like that!

Doesn’t matter. As long as my tax dollars are propping up a military that is restrained by the Constitution, we should demand that anyone in their custody is also protected by it.

The accused has rights, like it or not.

SouthernGal on June 10, 2009 at 10:14 PM

Thank you for propping me up. Give yourself a big pat on the back…. now slap yourself across the face and wake up! We are “restrained by the Constitution” concerning operations on US Soil. After that, it has no bearing on how we conduct war. You may want to check out this thing called the Geneva Conventions. They are often referenced in this debate, but seldom actually read. Interestingly enough, we have to learn about them.

The applicable part:
We can hold captured opposing forces for as long as hostilities exist. No charges, no miranda rights, no trials.

#1 point lady… we are not police, we are NOT social workers, and this not CSI Iraq/Afghanistan. Maybe we should just send a bunch of FBI agents to Iraq since it’s no longer a war… then I wouldn’t have to spend so much time away from my family.

SouthernGal

SouthernDailyKosGal

Everyone should know that the first thing a US soldier must do before taking a captive on foreign soil, during a war and after a pitched battle, is read them their rights under the US Constitution which since the soldier is a US citizen and which means the captive is now also a US citizen.

Taking their weapons, ammo, and body searches are secondary.

If the captive lashes out and otherwise injures said soldier, then this is just another combat death to be placed on Bush and Cheney’s arrest warrants. The captiive was only doing what he felt was right.
—
Another way of looking at this new International Justice Movement by Obama is we will now have a huge demand for lawyers, and so this will solve not only the man-caused-tragedy problem but also save or create untold new jobs.

They should rule who are able to rule best.

Obviously Aristotle would not be fond of Obama. Obama`s “ethos” is painfully lacking in character.
If he were merely more character than a character lacking character I could accept that. But his occupancy of the office of president obviates my acceptance of the man.

Constitutional Law 101.

SouthernGal on June 10, 2009 at 10:27 PM

Are you an attorney?

“The administration has decided to change the focus to law enforcement. Here’s the problem. You have foreign fighters who are targeting US troops today – foreign fighters who go to another country to kill Americans. We capture them…and they’re reading them their rights – Mirandizing these foreign fighters,

I side with the Soldiers viewpoint on this:

I LOVE THIS SOLDIERS VIEWPOINT ON THE ARMCHAIR LAWYERS VS. THE SOLDIER ON THE GROUND IN DEALING WITH TERRORIST.

The Drill SGT said…
AL said…Massacring people or killing prisoners is not one of those values.

Sadly, you aren’t in touch with life in a combat zone as it occurs down at the squad level. where SGT’s rule.

I’m not even close to talking about killing prisoners. What I am saying is that squadies care about squadies and about getting home, and then about completing the mission.

There is “killing prisoners”, which I am NOT saying happens, nor am I advocating, and then there is “being very careful”, and not creating many circumstances were there are prisoners to be taken.

Understand, taking prisoners is risky. SGT’s will just decide those risks are not worth it, unless the old man insists.

1. Get them surrounded is tough some times and dangerous. If you don’t surround them, they’ll slip away to kill you tomorrow, while you are talking

2. get a friendly in close enough to talk and convince them to surrender. gives away your position, risky for our talker, etc

3. you get 4 guys to walk out of the hut with their hands up. When you secure em,their guy on the RPD LMG hoses you all down. risky

4. Or, you get the 4 guys off to the side and one of them detonates his belt bomb and the Old man has to write more letters home. risky

better some times to stand back and call for a smart bomb on the hut or put a couple of 40MM through the windows, followed by a grenade in the door then sort things out

everybody is playing for keeps, and ultimately our casualties are the only thing that counts.

This insanity may lead to this:

The Drill SGT said…

OK, AL, what would you do now that my SGT captured, guys that tossed grenade that killed SPC Nieves, and wounded PFC Johnson with the RPD?

let me get you started.

1. you gonna have your FBI agents bag the RPD as evidence, establish a chain of custody all te way to trial. take all the crime scene photos (under fire)

2. put another agent on the medevac (kicking of 1 of our lightly wounded) in order to get back to the EVAC Hospital and get control of the bullet comnout f Johnson’s leg?

3. stand down the mission to get witness statements?

4. Fingerprints and DNA all around?

then what?

a. release to the local miliary? can’t do that, they might be hurt?

b.stand trial in Federal court 3 yeas later? bring all the witnesses in?

c. just send them home?

what would you and Obama do?

Reading Miranda rights to terrorist is just another example that this administration is more concerned about appearances and theory than doing what it takes to defeat the enemy and making sure EVERYTHING is done concerning ROE to put the lives of our Soldiers first.

The Obama administration is making the Carter administration look smarter and stronger everyday.

This is in the same way that looking at Helen Thomas makes
Rosanne Barr look hot.

It’s lose – lose all the way around.
Unless you are the jihadist.

We capture them…and they’re reading them their rights – Mirandizing these foreign fighters,” says Representative Mike Rogers

I’m pretty sure someone else has already pointed this out, but unless he’s (somehow) granting foreign fighters the same rights as Americans accused of crimes, then the FBI is informing them that they have rights that they don’t actually have.

This would be remarkably stupid.

History is not on the side of people who follow the rule of law when convenient

equality on June 10, 2009 at 6:29 PM

Exactly, that is why Obama won’t be around for a second term…he needs to learn to follow the rule of law.

FOR TERRORIST ENEMY COMBATANTS????

THIS INSANE TWIT IS GOING TO GET US ALL KILLED!!!!!