HSX Forum

TVStocks, MusicStocks and Life

Reply Topic List All Forums

Open the door a little, more and more freedoms are taken away by the criminals in government...

Posted by: accountant_4_Jesus (a.k.a ) on Mar 07, 14:44 in response to BSmurf's post This whole thing comes down to a philosophical debate as...

Better to completely shut the door and bolt it closed than to open it and lose more freedoms.

That hypothetical argument you put forward will never come to pass because:

1. Contrary to popular belief nuclear bombs can't just go off willy-nilly. They require perfect timing, where a whole range of factors have to line up perfectly before the atoms will even split. If it's not detonated within that perfect time-range, it just buries itself in the dirt and starts producing radiation poisoning.

2. You can't execute someone as a criminal if they've not even committed the crime yet. That's just barbaric.

3. Once due process is abandoned for one type of crime, it's just a matter of time before it's abandoned for all types of crime. Why give the president a free pass to start that ball rolling?

4. Drone strikes are a military measure. Unless the US is at war with foreign powers (with an actual declaration of war being passed through both houses of parliament), they have no reasonable justification for using them at all, let alone on their own citizens.

5. "Last resort" options, once resorted to, tend to become the norm over time. Is that really the norm that you want?

6. Who determines whether or not the intended strike victim is actually a threat? I realise the point you're trying to make is that stopping the guy in your example would save lives etc, but as soon as you justify its use against Americans on American soil once, then it's up to the current administration to determine whether or not future drone strike victims are actually a threat. The way that the US is going, it's just a matter of time before someone usurps the role of president and becomes a Soviet-style dictator (you're almost there now, actually), and then where will that leave you guys with the drones? Answer: Political opponents and those who are very vocal in their condemnation of such things will be executed using those drones by those in power to silence them. Better to outlaw it period now than to lose even your own security later.

Filibuster Comment wroberson Mar 07, 02:18

I'm just glad Obama says he probably won't murder me without due process. Probably. {nm} Samuel_L_Bronkowitz Mar 07, 04:57

For once, I agree with John Cusack: "Where are the so-called progressive Democratic senators?â�� WHY did they not stand in agreement? edzep - Port Monkey! Mar 07, 05:47

There was a Democrat - Wyden - who joined the filibuster. (I'm not saying this is a great turnout, but credit where it's due) {nm} RogerMore Mar 07, 06:21

True. WHY was the fillibuster and the drone issue NOT covered much by the mainstream media? edzep - Port Monkey! Mar 07, 06:33

Probably because it's boring (except to people who are interested in that sort of thing). But it's the most prominent story at WaPo.com RogerMore Mar 07, 07:00

Yeah, nothing interesting about Dear Leader saying he probably won't abandon due process and use drones to kill Americans in America. Samuel_L_Bronkowitz Mar 07, 07:04

It makes for a boring news story. The pictures are Rand Paul talking on the Senate floor. The commentary is about due process and RogerMore Mar 07, 07:15

There would be blood in the streets if Dubya had even suggested something so heinous as killing Americans on American soil. Samuel_L_Bronkowitz Mar 07, 06:36

This whole thing comes down to a philosophical debate as to whether the ends justify the means. BSmurf Mar 07, 11:08

Uh, that same 'urgency' argument was repeatedly sneered at by liberals (and a few squishy cons), when discussing waterboarding, which they edzep - Port Monkey! Mar 07, 11:32

ezdep - I was not trying to put forward a political agenda or defense of any stance. Looking for actual conversation without the he partisan BSmurf Mar 07, 11:43