Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Ashrak on October 28, 2006, 06:46:18 pm
-
http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/10/28/1934208&from=rss
-
Crikey.
-
Hairs on a bobbin...
-
Bally! :p This is serious, US going Nazi stuff.
-
****.
-
**** me. Well, one things for sure, I dont think this is going to help the Republicans in the upcomming elections, which is a good thing. I hope.
-
Screw impeaching him, looks like deposing him is the only safe bet.
-
It's not that bad, is it? I mean, if another Katrina hits an American state hard, wouldn't it be a plus that the President can declare Martial Law at the drop of a hat and prevent pandemonium from reigning supreme?
-
yeah because that's the only thing this neofascist administration would use it for
-
Except he's about to go out of office. I'm not quite sure why he's doing this, and I don't think the Republicans are stupid enough to declare martial law on contested states in the next election.
And I'm sure if this is actually used out of context (say, declaring martial law for some stupid cause) - the states would go completely bonkers.
-
he's about to go out of office? wha?? next presidential election is 2008
-
So, what would happen if he declared Martial Law in heavily democratic states during the election?
-
he's about to go out of office? wha?? next presidential election is 2008
That's "about to". And if this next senate/house election follows the predictons, those last two years are going to be a lame duck, because he couldn't get anything through a D-controled congress.
And Mefustae: Most likely: States will sue, *****, moan, and threaten until it's undone. Then everyone hates Republicans for a very long time.
Very likely: No one will care and it will continue as long as the election is.
Less likely: Civil war?
-
he's about to go out of office? wha?? next presidential election is 2008
That's "about to". And if this next senate/house election follows the predictons, those last two years are going to be a lame duck, because he couldn't get anything through a D-controled congress.
yes he could... he could get an indictment for treason through a d-controlled congress :D
-
Doubt it. And the Dems (I hope) wouldn't be stupid enough to do it while he was still in the Presidency. Bill Clinton Mk 2, anyone? All of America would basically see it as a betrayel and Capitol Hill party squabbling - which would tarnish the Dems high ground in this fight.
-
*starts collecting gatling gun parts*
-
So, what would happen if he declared Martial Law in heavily democratic states during the election?
There is a basic impracticality to it; he would have to do so early enough to stop voting, it would be reported on CNN, and voter turnout would in all likelyhood soar...against him. Or Congress would throw his ass out of office. Under those circumstances I don't think the Republican Party would back his play. So, it's suicide even if it actually gets that far. Which it may very well not.
Put simply, such an action would be blatantly wrong and certainly violate the spirit if not the letter of the oath everyone who joins up swears at some point. The military, in the august persons of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, doesn't like Bush much anyways. They may refuse to carry it out. Even assuming they do, declaring martial law requires troops...and the only practical options in most democratic states are National Guard troops already in place. Who are even more likely to refuse to carry out such orders, since they adminstratively "belong" to the state. It's happened once in US history already, over the enforcement of Brown v. Board of Education. So at the least the troops would have to be shipped in from elsewhere, which takes time. The vote would probably go forward and be done before it could be effectively implemented, or by the time the vote would take place Bush would have been tossed from the steps of the White House. Take your pick.
-
There is a basic impracticality to it; he would have to do so early enough to stop voting, it would be reported on CNN, and voter turnout would in all likelyhood soar...against him.
Then again if there was a big, invented emergency, there would be no uproar.
-
he's about to go out of office? wha?? next presidential election is 2008
That's "about to". And if this next senate/house election follows the predictons, those last two years are going to be a lame duck, because he couldn't get anything through a D-controled congress.
yes he could... he could get an indictment for treason through a d-controlled congress :D
No he couldn't.
Section 3: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.
bye bye treason meme
-
he's about to go out of office? wha?? next presidential election is 2008
That's "about to". And if this next senate/house election follows the predictons, those last two years are going to be a lame duck, because he couldn't get anything through a D-controled congress.
yes he could... he could get an indictment for treason through a d-controlled congress :D
No he couldn't.
Section 3: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.
bye bye treason meme
edit: this thread is completely full of hyperbole, maniac speculation and weak fascist comparisons, even for a leftist european this is pretty ridiculous.
-
Then again if there was a big, invented emergency, there would be no uproar.
That requires such an emergency to
A: take place, which is asking a lot of the US government; perhaps you don't understand their limits so well as I do.
B: Last, also unlikely.
C: Not trigger giant backlash.
You could manage one or possibly two of those things. Not all three.
-
Backlash they can handle. There's been backlash for pretty much every governmental descision for the past few years now, but the greater American public is too cowed and stupid to make it really mean anything. They've been announcing terrorist attacks for years, so making a big announcement followed by stringent measures wouldn't be too much of a stretch. Just drop a reference t 9/11 in there, and you'll have most people locking themselves in and thinking about anything but voting. All you need to do it is in one or two democratic strongholds, and most people'll be none the wiser.
Granted, there are hurdles, but nothing the US Government can't handle in earnest. Remember, the administration has been using the threat of terrorists for a while now to diffuse tense political situations... or it could have just been several huge coincidences.
-
A: take place, which is asking a lot of the US government;
Well, the CIA has plenty of experience with creating havoc in other countries. It isn't asking quite as much as you think it is.
-
They had actual funding then. And people actually listened to them. There's a good reason nobody in the intelligence community listens to the CIA anymore. They're tosh.
It seems a common affliction of people who don't live here to realize that this is, well, a big place. The CIA could, back in the fifties, cause what amounts to annoyance in a country that is about the size of, say, Washington state. It would cost infinitely more now, and you can't stop at one state if you seriously hope to alter the outcome of the next election. The smallest state in the US, Rhode Island, is about a hundred fifty square miles or so. If you want to seriously stop the Democrats winning the next election your best option is to knock out New England, and frankly that may not be enough, so California too. These two areas are seperated by 3000 miles and lots of areas that could vote Republican that you don't want to put under martial law. So, it's now two seperate emergencies. Maybe more, since New England is about the size of, say, the British Isles and about as densely populated. This is no mean feat. I don't think you could have a real emergency short of armed invasion or civil war that would cover even one of the two you would need.
What are you going to do? Claim Canada's invading Maine?
-
They had actual funding then. And people actually listened to them. There's a good reason nobody in the intelligence community listens to the CIA anymore. They're tosh.
bollocks - the CIA knew saddam had ****, they told the president so much - he just conviently omitted that when he took the **** to congress
-
Which is bull****, they should have sniped his ass and his family, back then and there.
-
bollocks - the CIA knew saddam had ****, they told the president so much - he just conviently omitted that when he took the **** to congress
They knew that because the NSA told them.
-
They had actual funding then. And people actually listened to them. There's a good reason nobody in the intelligence community listens to the CIA anymore. They're tosh.
It seems a common affliction of people who don't live here to realize that this is, well, a big place. The CIA could, back in the fifties, cause what amounts to annoyance in a country that is about the size of, say, Washington state. It would cost infinitely more now, and you can't stop at one state if you seriously hope to alter the outcome of the next election. The smallest state in the US, Rhode Island, is about a hundred fifty square miles or so. If you want to seriously stop the Democrats winning the next election your best option is to knock out New England, and frankly that may not be enough, so California too. These two areas are seperated by 3000 miles and lots of areas that could vote Republican that you don't want to put under martial law. So, it's now two seperate emergencies. Maybe more, since New England is about the size of, say, the British Isles and about as densely populated. This is no mean feat. I don't think you could have a real emergency short of armed invasion or civil war that would cover even one of the two you would need.
What are you going to do? Claim Canada's invading Maine?
"And tonight on Fox News, why you should be ****ting a brick about our next story. But first, why the democrats [insert generic accusation of incompetence]."
"And tonight on ABC News, why you should be ****ting a brick about our next story. But first, why the democrats [insert generic accusation of incompetence]."
"And tonight on CNN, why you should be ****ting a brick about our next story. But first, why the democrats [insert generic accusation of incompetence]."
"And tonight on CBS, why you should be ****ting a brick about our next story. But first, why the democrats [insert generic accusation of incompetence]."
I trust my point is well taken.
-
Yea, and then on all those stations you see the Democrats highly capable response:
[insert sound of incredible ineptitude, taking form in the words of a thousand incompetent politicians]
-
It isn't. :p
CNN's bias is all over the place these days. I miss it when they were predictable.
"And tonight on MSNBC, why you shouldn't be ****ting bricks because it's all fake..."
-
of course good politicians are very seldom good people, and definitely arent the people that should be running the government.
-
It isn't. :p
CNN's bias is all over the place these days. I miss it when they were predictable.
"And tonight on MSNBC, why you shouldn't be ****ting bricks because it's all fake and why you should be buying Windows Vista..."
Fixor3d.
-
holy **** I'm glad I live in Michigan. No one really cares about us, you see. We're just sorta here on our own. And even if someone somehow has problems with us, there is lots of unemployed people to sign up for a military :drevil: .