A question on the constitution

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gssixgun

As I suspected ....

No rules yet for the Jihadists :hmmm:

---

They have already set their own rules of behavior which pretty much everyone is disgusted with. So no point in discussing that I think. Pretty much boils down to which side's rules of behavior can win militarily for a start as talking is obviously out of the question for now.

Bob

If anyone watches Bill Maher, last night he made one devastating statement about the Arab Countries. basically they have a problem banding together to fight ISIS but had no trouble banding together to fight Israel.

Makes you think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

If anyone watches Bill Maher, last night he made one devastating statement about the Arab Countries. basically they have a problem banding together to fight ISIS but had no trouble banding together to fight Israel.

Makes you think.

---

Yes, but I think the coin might drop soon that the Arab nations have a common enemy in ISIS. Egypt just ran air strike on ISIS elements in Libya the other day in retaliation for the beheading Egyptian Coptic Christians. I mean after all even though they were Coptic Christians they were first and foremost Egyptian citizens. Several other Arab countries are running sorties into Syria and Iraqi targeting ISIS elements there. The Iranians seem to be chomping at the bit to get involved too. Maybe there is a glimmer of hope yet.

Bob

I think the main reason for Arab willingness to combat ISIS at this point is the realization among the Arab countries NOT currently being insurrected is that they could be NEXT. Arab and Islamic solidarity is all well and good until it is YOUR neck on the chopping block.


Once they ISIS threat is neutralized (or at least SEVERELY diminished) things will get back to "normal" over there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by prodigy

The Constitution of the United States of America provides protection to the citizens of the United States. Based on what you keep saying, I get the impression that you feel it applies to all people, everywhere. So to me not all people deserve the rights that I have as an american. I'm a second generation american, my grandfather is Russian born who fled from country to country his entire life. He ended up speaking 5 languages by the time he was 15, living in France at the end of WW2. He assisted in helping the Allied forces relocate the many thousands of displaced people in Europe at the end of the war. He then worked for the US government, doing top secret things we will never know. My grandmother was German, and also survived the war. Her father was a German officer, but his passion in life was being a classical music teacher. Many of his students were jewish, and he helped many survive the war. The Russians took over the town she lived in, and the only reason her friends were raped and she was not, was not because my great grandfather was a nazi officer. It was because he was a POW during WW1 in russia, and he spoke fluent russian. She was a member of the Hitler youth, where everything they learned was along the lines of brainwashing. She still remembers hearing the stories at the end of the war about the atrocities that were committed, and it was her belief that the normal, everyday germans, had no idea what was happening to the Jewish people. My family has enjoyed the benefits that America has to offer. They worked very hard to obtain this oppertunity, and had to endure hardships in life that people in today's time can not imagine in their worst nightmares. This brings me back to the constitution, it only applies to US citizens. If you are an illegal immigrant, you have no constitutional rights. If you are a member of a terrorist organization who actively seeks to harm americans, you have no constitutional rights. Do I agree with GITMO, and the tactics and policies used in the last 10+ years, not really. Is it in violation of anyone's rights under the constitution, definitely not.

---

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness

Look at that statement.

It says 'all men'.
It says 'self evident' meaning the commons sense interpretation is that this is right, and violations are wrong.

If this is indeed self evident and universal, it is evident for all people. Not just Americans.
Following the line of reasoning that these same self evident truths are true for all people, torture is wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruno

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness

Look at that statement.

It says 'all men'.
It says 'self evident' meaning the commons sense interpretation is that this is right, and violations are wrong.

If this is indeed self evident and universal, it is evident for all people. Not just Americans.
Following the line of reasoning that these same self evident truths are true for all people, torture is wrong.

---

Your quote is from the Declaration of Independence, which is an entirely different document than the Constitution. The context in which it was written was basically challenging the monarchy. The assumption in Europe at that time was that royal blood was of a higher value than common people. So just to clarify, if a known terrorist was captured and he has knowledge of future attacks, it's not ok to force him to give up this information? I mean he obviously is not going to want to say anything, so I guess we can just let him go? It is wrong to torture him, it is wrong to hold him in prison... what is the best way to handle these people? It's a bad situation, there is no right way to do it, but saying all the ways we have used are wrong without acknowledging the options are very limited doesn't really help. These guys don't play by the rules, if they did they wouldn't be here still. If you play a game against someone who doesn't play by the rules, do you think you can still win?

Well, then there's that whole Universal Declaration of Human Rights thing to think about . . .

Torture is wrong. Worse, it doesn't work. I agree with Jesse Ventura . . . give me five minutes and a water board and I could get Dick Cheney to admit to the Kennedy assassination.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruno

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness

Look at that statement.

It says 'all men'.
It says 'self evident' meaning the commons sense interpretation is that this is right, and violations are wrong.

If this is indeed self evident and universal, it is evident for all people. Not just Americans.
Following the line of reasoning that these same self evident truths are true for all people, torture is wrong.

---

That statement was from the Declaration of Independence as a justification for the formation of a new government choosing to separate itself from an existing government. Clearly if it is to be taken to a literal extreme, then no war and no imprisonment would ever be allowable either.

Rights do have their limitations, most notably when they infringe upon the rights of others. Maintaining that balance is where it continuously gets difficult. Maintaining that balance is where it MAY be justified to kill, to imprison, and to torture.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Orville

give me five minutes and a water board and I could get Dick Cheney to admit to the Kennedy assassination.

---

Or at least implicate daddy Bush.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NlJQJUUqR4

I don't want to come off sounding pro torture, I'm really not, and yes it is wrong. I also agree with every human having basic, universal rights. However, when do you draw the line? When you plant bombs on the side of the road? When you murder women and children to prove a point? When you capture, torture, then behead or burn another human alive? There has to be a line where you no longer have the rights that law abiding, beneficial members of the human race follow. These people you are so strongly defending would kill you in a heartbeat and not have the slightest remorse.