Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: 1bigdictator
The proposal or ammendment was not to substitute the military for our police force, but rather, under a very narrowly defined set of circumstances, allow the military to confront foriegn national terrorists on our own soil.

They are already allowed to fight against foreign soldiers. Heck, that's their job.

63 posted on 07/22/2002 8:57:26 AM PDT by Dr. Frank fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies ]


To: Dr. Frank
"They are already allowed to fight against foreign soldiers. Heck, that's their job."

If Liberals would agree, as you state, that foriegn nationals plotting to commit acts of terror are "soldiers", and therefore legitimate targets for our military, I would be comfortable with the implication of your statement. Unfortunately, Liberals talk of due process for these foriegn nationals and don't categorize them as soldiers.

For instance, if a national gaurdsman had shot the Arab terrorist at LAX two weeks ago rather than El Al security, there would be a furor in the press about the unlawful nature of the militaries action. One wonders whether the gaurdsman would have been charged.

64 posted on 07/22/2002 9:06:39 AM PDT by 1bigdictator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson