As I posted above, U.S. intelligence broke the Japanese code early in World War II, and through Japanese telegraph traffic learned that several hundred Japanese aliens and Japanese-Americans living on the West Coast of the U.S. (and in Hawaii monitoring the 7th fleet) were functioning as spies for Imperial Japan. They monitored Naval activities and movements, shipping, and in addition had infiltrated a number of defense plants. Had they been arrested, the secret that we had broken the Japanese code would have been revealed and our intelligence compromised. The Constitution does not required us to surrender to our enemies early in any war. To sum up and make it simple: hundreds of Japanese spies on our West Coast had to be stopped without revealing we had broken the Japanese code. That is why FDR signed the internment order. Had he not done so, there is a halfway decent chance that I, born on the West Coast, would be speaking Japanese today. I recommend you search out the book I mentioned, it provides useful context for thinking about these matters.
“I so want to play, but I have other things going on today.”
Understandable. This media is nice for getting to things when it is convenient.
“all was shades of gray”
The “fog of war” is ever present, no matter what the commanders do to try to improve things.
“To sum up and make it simple: hundreds of Japanese spies on our West Coast had to be stopped without revealing we had broken the Japanese code.”
And thus the conversation comes down to methodologies, rather then philosophies on individual liberties. Would there have been other methods to deal with the situation without shipping them all to the middle of the country? Certainly, but progressives have never been terribly concerned about individual liberty (and still are not). I think you would agree that the methodology was Draconian. Regardless, though FDR and Lincoln took their actions in war time, less scrupulous executives have taken similar egregious steps in peacetime. We find ourselves in times that are equally as perilous, yet there is not a clear declaration of war to mark the path.
There will come a time, when a President will use his power to deny civil rights to even greater numbers within our citizenry for political gain alone. If not the current occupant of the WH, then others in the future. It is incumbent upon those that think about such issues (and I number you among the legion here at FR that are keen to it), to raise hell when it begins. There are signs that it is has begun already, so it is wise to stomp out the first sparks before a conflagration occurs.
I think we are beginning to see the limits to which a significant percentage of the population will tolerate inroads on their liberties. In other societies, this has not ended well. I suspect even the next year could provide some rather extreme examples of government/citizenry conflict. In my former career, I was something of a professional cynic, so my headware has a bit of tin in it. “When the balloon goes up” I will not be terribly surprised at its occurrence. I’m starting to feel the beginnings of a rather itchy feeling. Hopefully, it’s not going to progress, but I fear that it will.
I think it’s about ready to get interesting. Your thoughts?