...so Geraldo was on FOX this morning, expounding on ???, AND on drone strikes aimed at Al Queda, Taliban, Islamofascists, etc, etc, ad finitum, ad nauseum. And he says that we SHOULDN'T be killing Americans without giving them due process, via courts, judges, etc when they are fighting for those groups. Then he as much as says, it's 'unprecedented' in American history, and THAT boys and girls is where he steps on his wiener.
Let's go back to days of old, circa 1754, we, the British Colonists in America, fought the French and Indian War. I have no names and dates, but I'm betting that just like in ALL wars there were people From Side "A", who were fighting for, spying for, hoping for Side "B" to win. Some of those people would have been killed during that war.
There was NO judge, warrants for arrest, or court system to sort them out BEFORE they were killed on a battle field.
Next, let's go back to days of old, circa 1767, we, the British Colonists
in America, were being pushed as far we wished to be pushed BY the British Crown, and OUR King. I have no names and
dates, but I'm betting that just like in ALL wars there were people From
Side "A", who were fighting for, spying for, hoping for Side "B" to
win. Some of those people would have been killed during that war.
There was NO judge, warrants for arrest, or court system to sort them out BEFORE they were killed on a battle field.
Now obviously I can go on ALL day long doing this. There are, in every conflict, people who side with the natural enemy of the group they find themselves in. Those people work often as spies for the side they favor, or they can and do go into the battlefields and openly fight against the side they 'should' be supporting. What I don't get, is this near constant mouth flapping about Americans being killed while fighting AGAINST the U.S. in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, IRAN, and elsewhere, without due process or before they are tried in absentia, found guilty and sentenced to death.
Here's the problem, hand wringers AND Geraldo, we don't know WHO they are in many instances before they show up IN those places. There is no written or set-up system for signing out of the country and becoming an enemy combatant, and, there never has been. And what the legal process would be for identifying people who sneak out of the U.S., to go elsewhere and fight against American Imperialism. is beyond the knowledge of even legal scholars if I read the OpEds correctly.
So where does this leave us?
To me, it leaves the United States government and the Military and Intelligence Agencies in the same situation as Law Enforcement personnel find themselves in daily. An American citizen has decided of their own free will, to attempt to kill other American citizens, and at the point where they are actively caught in the act, or at the point where they are hiding out with or traveling with people who have been earmarked for being killed by the U.S., THEY have placed themselves there. If they are in the wrong place at the wrong time, it's not the fault of the Army, Air Force, SEALS, CIA, NSA or anyone else, when the bombs start dropping or the drones start firing at them.
They chose that, and the Geraldo style handwringers need to accept that THEY chose that lifestyle and its possible endings. When a guy with a gun, points a gun at a cop or deputy in Arm Pitt, AR or NYC, and the police shoot that person, no one says they should have gotten a judge involved BEFORE the LEOs defend themselves.
.
And I understand that people go on and on daily about police brutality or bad shootings. We've got one of those right now in Fayetteville, NC over a guy who tried to evade the police in a car, and the officer shot and killed him. There is proof that the runner was shooting at the police as he drove, but the NAACP is still bitching about the shooting being 'excessive'.
.
But I've never heard anyone say the LEO's aren't giving the perps their due process, and that they should get a court order before they protect the citizens from the crazed killers..
.
.
Schteveo
3 comments:
Just more evidence of the liberal mantra that so long as "they" are safe, it is better for you to be a victim than to prevent someone who has a 1 in a trillion chance of making a positive contribution to society from making that contribution.
On a side note, I saw an interesting comment on the 2nd ammendment the other day. It isn't so much so that you have a right to hunt, or defend yourself from criminals, or to have a national guard. The second ammendment is there to ensure that the third and fourth amendments are not ignored. Think about it.
And the 1st Amendment too alan.
Ef dey brack, mudlim or Riberal, I shay just keyll'm
Post a Comment