Why? We'll be bankrupt. The terrorists are “leveraging” us into fiscal oblivion. We must begin to “fight” smart.
posted by War_Monger
“ . . the controversy over President Bush's actions to defend the country from another terror attack on the United States, I wonder what others
think of the following measures taken by past wartime Presidents in an effort to defend the nation during perilous times.
On April 27th, 1861, President Lincoln suspended the Writ of Habeas Corpus in some parts of the U.S. His actions were prompted by civil uprising and
threat of Maryland seceding from the Union. [Edited by Don W]
Right off the bat, I think any analogy between Lincoln and Bush43 is a reach, a strain. Nine Eleven Event is chicken feed to what Lincoln faced. This
is not even apples and oranges, this is gnats and elephants. That won’t fly with me. IMO, you’ve explained it well enough W/M.
In the early 1870's, President Grant also suspended Habeas Corpus in 9 South Carolina counties in action against th Ku Klux Klan.
The Ku Klux Klan was America’s first multi-state terrorist organization. History proved Grant was correct in trying to suppress the KKK. The Union
coddled those racists gangsters who knew how to pull decent peoples strings to their everlasting shame and disgrace. So-called decent folks tolerated
wrongs inflicted on blacks they would never have tolerated if done to whites.
Let’s not forget during most of that reign of terror happened under the approving eye of the local Christian churches. For a 100 years! Say Hello,
clergymen. Where are you?
The President does have constitutional authority to suspend Habeas Corpus. Article 1 section 9 of the U.S. constitution says this: The privilege of
the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.”
I do not believe Bush43 can claim either of those conditions obtained “ . . rebellion or invasion . . “ in 2001 or in 2006. That’s the
difference in Bush43 and Lincoln. Bush43 is a wanna-be but can’t be. Lincoln was a had-t0-be and did!
Another Issue is the signing of Executive Order 9066 by President Roosevelt that forced approximately 112,000 people of Japanese descent into
internment camps soon after the attack on Pearl Harbor. President Roosevelt later overturned executive Order 9066 . .
On February 19, 1942, President Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066 authorizing the Secretary of War to designate parts of the country as "military
areas" from which any and all persons might be excluded . . the relocation program, in which 110,000 men, women and children were sent to what were
in essence prison camps . . “the old saying goes, In wartime, law is silent . . “ In the Hirabayashi v. United States (1943) case, the Court
upheld the legitimacy of a curfew, but evaded ruling on the implications of relocation. In the Korematsu v. United States case, the Supreme Court
faced the issue whether loyal citizens could be summarily relocated to detention camps solely on the basis of their race. A majority with Justice
Black's that -military necessity- justified the relocation.
Justice Murphy's dissent dealt with what he termed a "legalization of racism." I dissent, he said, therefore from this legalization of racism.
Racial discrimination in any form and in any degree has no justifiable part whatever in our democratic way of life. It is unattractive in any setting
but it is utterly revolting among a free people who have embraced the principles set forth in the Constitution of the United States. They must
accordingly be treated at all times as the heirs of the American experiment and as entitled to all the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the
Constitution. 323 U.S. 214 (1944).
Again, the purpose of this tread is to discuss what others think of the measures taken by past wartime Presidents and secondly, why should President
Bush be treated as harshly as he is when considering the fact that Lincoln and Roosevelt critics were also proved to be wrong in the long run.
Didn’t your mother ever tell you W/M, “two wrongs do not make a right?” Haven’t you heard it said, “those who do not know their history are
doomed to repeat it?” There were other things Lincoln did you have not mentioned, but it is generally accepted that if Maryland had seceded, thereby
forcing the removal of the capital, that European nations would have flocked to support the South which was their main source of cotton, the 19th
century’s equal to today’s oil.
Lincoln alone faced a revolt of nearly overwhelming proportions. Himself a 39% popular vote president, he was faced with a singular moment in our
nations’s history. I fault him not. The only parallel to Lincoln is George Washington. Co-founders of the Republic.
FDR. You should know that I rank FDR next to God. He is my icon. I am a child of the New Deal. But, he did wrong. FDR did something not consistent
with either his political acumen or his benevolent concerns for the downtrodden.
I put his mistake to be the fault of too many adverse things taking place around the world. FDR did not want one more piece of bad news. One
substantial act of sabotage by one person of Japanese descent could have been disastrous to the war effort. Hong Kong fell Dec. 18, 1941. Wake Island
fell Dec. 21, 1941. Bataan was under heavy attack and surrender was imminent. It came on April 3. MacArthur was ordered to Australia. The Doolittle
raid on Japan was yet to come April 18, 1942. This is the context in which FDR let himself slip. He was wrong. He stumbled, my hero is human after
However one may feel towards Bush43 and the Patriot Act, Guantanamo Bay the unlawful renditions, Abu Ghraib, the quagmire in Iraq, the slipping back
in Afghan, and the most recent Attila the Hun type attack on Lebanon. It has been 1,120 days since the Nine Eleven Event and Bush43 cannot claim to
be acting under the exigencies of the moment.
He needs to go to Congress. A long time ago. He cannot continue to claim the same “unlimited” powers he could get away with if used intelligently
thoughtfully and with discretion for a few days, or weeks, and maybe a moth or so, but now, more than three years after the fact, he is still acting
in the same authoritarian way.
To paraphrase the late Senator Bentsen, when debating with Dan Quayle, but now to Bush43, “You sir, are no Lincoln, you sir, are no Roosevelt.”
Bush43 is an undeniable autocrat. And because of his demonstrated love of the rich and famous, a plutocrat. He has made more serious blunders in
foreign policy than anyone since Franklin Pierce or Herbert Hoover. IMO.
[edit on 8/16/2006 by donwhite]