Report: Bush Mulled Sending Troops Into Buffalo

Report: Bush Mulled Sending Troops Into Buffalo (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

rulemylife -> Report: Bush Mulled Sending Troops Into Buffalo (7/25/2009 5:26:43 AM)
Report - Bush Mulled Sending Troops Into Buffalo - NYTimes.com WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Bush administration in 2002 considered sending U.S. troops into a Buffalo, N.Y., suburb to arrest a group of terror suspects in what would have been a nearly unprecedented use of military power, The New York Times reported. Vice President Dick Cheney and several other Bush advisers at the time strongly urged that the military be used to apprehend men who were suspected of plotting with al Qaida, who later became known as the Lackawanna Six, the Times reported on its Web site Friday night. It cited former administration officials who spoke on condition of anonymity. The proposal advanced to at least one-high level administration meeting, before President George W. Bush decided against it. Dispatching troops into the streets is virtually unheard of. The Constitution and various laws restrict the military from being used to conduct domestic raids and seize property. According to the Times, Cheney and other Bush aides said an Oct. 23, 2001, Justice Department memo gave broad presidential authority that allowed Bush to use the domestic use of the military against al-Qaida if it was justified on the grounds of national security, rather than law enforcement.

thishereboi -> RE: Report: Bush Mulled Sending Troops Into Buffalo (7/25/2009 5:35:59 AM)
OMFG, that bastard. Ya know I think I have had about enough. It is time this country got a new president and booted GWB right out of that office. Oh wait, he is already gone. We have a new president. So why are we talking about things Bush did 7 years ago? Why are we not discussing the things that OB is doing today? Perhaps he isn't doing anything good that the dems can talk about, so we will switch back to whining about good ole' George. Just ignore the promises that our current president made and isn't following through with. I wonder what Sarah is up to?

xBullx -> RE: Report: Bush Mulled Sending Troops Into Buffalo (7/25/2009 5:53:44 AM)
Rule your credibility for reasonable debate is slipping fast. It's well established that Bush was, wait is disliked by the left; but wait again everytime the left is caught fucking up they love Bush, that's all they want to talk about then. Fuck dude it said he decided not too. Perhaps for the same reasons as were stated. I know that other Presidents have used troops for riot control against American Civilians. In fact when I was in the 82nd that was actually training we would keep up on. Maybe Reagan had evil motives as well. He was a Republican. This left and right bashing thing is getting old, really old.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Report: Bush Mulled Sending Troops Into Buffalo (7/25/2009 6:16:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xBullx Rule your credibility for reasonable debate is slipping fast. It's well established that Bush was, wait is disliked by the left; but wait again everytime the left is caught fucking up they love Bush, that's all they want to talk about then. Fuck dude it said he decided not too. Perhaps for the same reasons as were stated. I know that other Presidents have used troops for riot control against American Civilians. In fact when I was in the 82nd that was actually training we would keep up on. Maybe Reagan had evil motives as well. He was a Republican. This left and right bashing thing is getting old, really old. Geee, wasn't it Kennedy who sent Federalized National Guard troops to Alabama for some little college scuffle with a governor? The bastard! Using Army troops in a domestic situation! I say we indict the son-uv-bitch, and haul him out of his grave, and condemn his facist ass! Oh, wait ... he was a Democrat, and it was for an issue that they agree with .... Firm

ThatDaveGuy69 -> RE: Report: Bush Mulled Sending Troops Into Buffalo (7/25/2009 6:21:15 AM)
Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it. I get pretty sick & tired of all the Bush-bashing, too. Let's move on, already. But I'm pretty sure, and I know someonw will cite the details, that there is a strong Constitutional check against the president sending troops into an area against civilians. Having a governor mobilize the National guard is one thing, but for anyone at the level of the president to even consider this gives me the chills. Makes me wonder if Chaney understood anything about the whole checks & balances thing. OK, so Bush decided no to do it. I think the real point here is that such a discussion should never have taken place. Or consider it another way: The 1st time is always the hardest. Let's say Bush/Chaney actualy DID try to send in a team to take out a group of suspected terrorists. Consider the implications. How much easier would it be the 2nd time? the 3rd? Well, it was because of "national security". You can make a case for just about anything to be in the name of national security. And what would your reaction be if you witnessed this? If you saw a bunch of armed men attacking someone's house, would you call the police? And what would happen when they arrived? Consider any casualties: the military team, the police, the terror suspects, a neighbor... I can't imagine even Bush's stongest supporters trying to defend such an action. The whole stinks like yesterday's diaper. ~Dave (D-IL)

FirmhandKY -> RE: Report: Bush Mulled Sending Troops Into Buffalo (7/25/2009 6:26:22 AM)
heh ... Sorry Bull, not directed specifically to you. Just the thread in general. Firm

ThatDaveGuy69 -> RE: Report: Bush Mulled Sending Troops Into Buffalo (7/25/2009 6:27:08 AM)
Geez, Firm, I can't even begin to comprehend how you can equate the 2. quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Geee, wasn't it Kennedy who sent Federalized National Guard troops to Alabama for some little college scuffle with a governor? The bastard! Using Army troops in a domestic situation! I say we indict the son-uv-bitch, and haul him out of his grave, and condemn his facist ass! Oh, wait ... he was a Democrat, and it was for an issue that they agree with .... Firm

FirmhandKY -> RE: Report: Bush Mulled Sending Troops Into Buffalo (7/25/2009 6:37:09 AM)
It's simple Dave. It's the principle. 1. Kennedy (not Wallace, the governor) activated the Alabama National Guard, and Federalized them. That made them US Army soldiers. 2. He then sent them - at Presidential direction - into a domestic situation. Therefore, a modern President has used US Army troops in a domestic situation. The principle is the same, even if the President and the situation is different. I'm not condemning Kennedy. I just find it humorous that some people evidentially think that the proposal to Bush (which was dismissed, and never carried out) is somehow seen as unique, and just another indication of "Bushitlerism." Firm

rulemylife -> RE: Report: Bush Mulled Sending Troops Into Buffalo (7/25/2009 7:08:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xBullx Rule your credibility for reasonable debate is slipping fast. It's well established that Bush was, wait is disliked by the left; but wait again everytime the left is caught fucking up they love Bush, that's all they want to talk about then. Fuck dude it said he decided not too. Perhaps for the same reasons as were stated. I know that other Presidents have used troops for riot control against American Civilians. In fact when I was in the 82nd that was actually training we would keep up on. Maybe Reagan had evil motives as well. He was a Republican. This left and right bashing thing is getting old, really old. My credibility? Sorry, but I didn't write the article. And in case you haven't noticed, it's not from some obscure left-wing blog. The story has been picked up by every major newspaper as well as the television news networks.

Starbuck09 -> RE: Report: Bush Mulled Sending Troops Into Buffalo (7/25/2009 7:09:27 AM)
I don't know any of the ins and outs of this situation nor do I know much about how the American constitution is applied [or not] in such situations. I suspect though that the reason this proposal was debated is that as the members were believed to be from a terrorist organisation that the threat of explosives in the house was high. In that case it would have been a legitimate action [certainly in Britain] to hand over jurisdiction from law enforcement to the military. The police have their own explosive ordinance disposal teams but the militaries of both Britian and America have teams that are by neccesity better trained. This seems a reasonable proposition therefore to debate and it would appear that the threat of explosives was not substantial enough to warrant a military prescence. Like I said though I am not familiar with this story this is simply my own reading of the situation presented.

DomKen -> RE: Report: Bush Mulled Sending Troops Into Buffalo (7/25/2009 7:14:34 AM)
The Posse Comitatus act specifically prohibits the use of federal forces for law enforcement. This is what Cheney and others claimed Bush could ignore. It is deeply troubling and has to be examined. Kennedy came very close to the line but he did have a situation where a governor was threatening to use the power of his office to defy a federal court order and to incite mob violence. Using US troops to quell insurrection, real or threatened, is legal and has been since Washington put down the Whiskey Rebellion.

xBullx -> RE: Report: Bush Mulled Sending Troops Into Buffalo (7/25/2009 7:16:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDaveGuy69 Or consider it another way: The 1st time is always the hardest. Let's say Bush/Chaney actualy DID try to send in a team to take out a group of suspected terrorists. Consider the implications. How much easier would it be the 2nd time? the 3rd? Well, it was because of "national security". You can make a case for just about anything to be in the name of national security. Howdy Dave, You hit on a brilliant point... [sm=threadhijack.gif] Big Government! Income tax was as we all know non-existent at one time, in fact was by all rights not even legal. It started out small and easy to deal with and the emergency that was the Civil War fueled its need, one percent, hell that's simple enough isn't it. One percent! I think it is being discussed that our highest income earners could be theoretically levied 60 percent if things move forward as hoped by some. What about health care? Sure it's simply an option as purposed, but what will it grow into. If the Federal Government wants to do something you can bet it's about a power grab, always has been, always will be. And this Cap and Steal program, I've actually seen some paperwork about the carbon credit management system, that is by the way patent pending or approved most likely by now. Some dude from Chicago, some dude from Lexington and another dude from Florida are the beneficiaries of this brainstorm, well along with their supporters. It's not designed simply to manage electric companies and such. It's designed to own us all. If it was truly about a greener planet I'd be all for it. But this is America, most are motivated by money first, that's a fact. Whenever I expand my business I do it small and inconspicuous in order to not alarm my competitors, but I have motives well beyond my start point, as do our "elected" officials. The difference is that I have competition to keep me "honest and within my means", the government doesn't. I suggest we all (left, right or centrist) evaluate how easy it has become to lie and dismiss lies in the modern political paradigm. It is our responsibility as voters to hold these self important elitist accountable.

rulemylife -> RE: Report: Bush Mulled Sending Troops Into Buffalo (7/25/2009 7:17:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi OMFG, that bastard. Ya know I think I have had about enough. It is time this country got a new president and booted GWB right out of that office. Oh wait, he is already gone. We have a new president. So why are we talking about things Bush did 7 years ago? Unfortunately, as much as conservatives now want to try and distance themselves from his policies, his actions are hardly "old news". Funny that we keep hearing about how Obama is trying to take away our freedoms while ignoring the abuses of the Bush administration. And for the record, I give Bush credit for deciding against it. What scares me is that it was ever brought up at all.

Starbuck09 -> RE: Report: Bush Mulled Sending Troops Into Buffalo (7/25/2009 7:21:23 AM)
Domken what if the situation was deemed too dangerous for law enforcement though? Surely in such a case a military response is justified if they have a better chance of saving lives? I would be interested to know what units the president was debating sending.

ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: Report: Bush Mulled Sending Troops Into Buffalo (7/25/2009 7:27:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi OMFG, that bastard. Ya know I think I have had about enough. It is time this country got a new president and booted GWB right out of that office. Oh wait, he is already gone. We have a new president. So why are we talking about things Bush did 7 years ago? Unfortunately, as much as conservatives now want to try and distance themselves from his policies, his actions are hardly "old news". Funny that we keep hearing about how Obama is trying to take away our freedoms while ignoring the abuses of the Bush administration. And for the record, I give Bush credit for deciding against it. What scares me is that it was ever brought up at all. It was Cheney. The whole thing was apparently his idea, and he brought in his trained monkey "lawyer" John Yoo (the same guy who advocates crushing the testicles of a suspected terrorist's child in order to persuade the suspect to confess) to write a memo saying it was legal. Which is no surprise; if Cheney decided he wanted to make cannibalism the national religion, it would take Yoo about 5 minutes to find some reason it's supported by the Constitution. But at any rate, I do give Bush credit for knowing better. I'm quite shocked, but still, you have to give credit where credit is due. If only he'd have had a few more such moments of clarity during that 8 years of lunacy.

rulemylife -> RE: Report: Bush Mulled Sending Troops Into Buffalo (7/25/2009 7:37:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Geee, wasn't it Kennedy who sent Federalized National Guard troops to Alabama for some little college scuffle with a governor? The bastard! Using Army troops in a domestic situation! I say we indict the son-uv-bitch, and haul him out of his grave, and condemn his facist ass! Oh, wait ... he was a Democrat, and it was for an issue that they agree with .... Firm Not the same thing in any sense. Kennedy sent troops ostensibly to maintain order, just as Bush did after Katrina. The proposal put forth by Cheney was to use the military to arrest U.S. citizens, which was blatantly unconstitutional.

Starbuck09 -> RE: Report: Bush Mulled Sending Troops Into Buffalo (7/25/2009 7:45:32 AM)
Rulemylife but to be fair the constitution was drawn up when the technology to kill large amounts of people via sophisticated explosive devices was simply not a consideration. Surely there is scope for sending in military E.O.D. teams [or at least discuss the possibility] where law enforcement would simply not be as effective. This is not an attempt to knock law enforcement explosive handlers they do an excellent job but the military teams are better trained and equipped for these situations.

ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: Report: Bush Mulled Sending Troops Into Buffalo (7/25/2009 7:47:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife Not the same thing in any sense. Kennedy sent troops ostensibly to maintain order, just as Bush did after Katrina. The proposal put forth by Cheney was to use the military to arrest U.S. citizens, which was blatantly unconstitutional. But won't it be entertaining as hell watching Firm spend 15 pages explaining why it's exactly the same thing?

xBullx -> RE: Report: Bush Mulled Sending Troops Into Buffalo (7/25/2009 7:48:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: xBullx Rule your credibility for reasonable debate is slipping fast. It's well established that Bush was, wait is disliked by the left; but wait again everytime the left is caught fucking up they love Bush, that's all they want to talk about then. Fuck dude it said he decided not too. Perhaps for the same reasons as were stated. I know that other Presidents have used troops for riot control against American Civilians. In fact when I was in the 82nd that was actually training we would keep up on. Maybe Reagan had evil motives as well. He was a Republican. This left and right bashing thing is getting old, really old. My credibility? Sorry, but I didn't write the article. And in case you haven't noticed, it's not from some obscure left-wing blog. The story has been picked up by every major newspaper as well as the television news networks. I'm not debating the credibility of the article. I'm not even debating your intellect or ideology. I'm just an American searching for truth, and it's become increasingly clear that truth takes on various definitions as you move right or left too far. It's just that your motives and talking points appear so, corrupted, slanted, bias and politically skewed it appears you don't look at subject matter objectively, even to the extent you try and discredit good ideas and views of the opposition, whether they'd be beneficial or not. You are always bringing negative attacks against Bush, Palin or anyone you politically dislike back into the center of conversation to serve as an excuse or distraction and it's growing old; old to the point that when you are justified in resurrecting past indiscretions against your politically contemptuous it rings repetitive, hollow and meaningless. You see all of America is starting to notice this 5th grade mentality that is everyday practice in Washington. Take note of the polls, you're guy is killing himself. It's not just those fear mongering idiots Cheney, Palin, Gingrich, Hannity and Limbaugh; it's those other fear mongering idiots Obama, Pelosi, Reed and others that may be guilty of sedition or maybe worse. It's come to the point that I've named this emote "[sm=club.gif]" Rule, he fails about as wildly ridiculous as you.

Starbuck09 -> RE: Report: Bush Mulled Sending Troops Into Buffalo (7/25/2009 8:23:50 AM)
Surely those who drew up the constitution would have not wanted people to adhere to it simply because it was there. It has been a long time since the constitution was drafted and while much/most of it is still applicable to the every day lives of Americans there are now some situations that the creators of the constitution did not make provision for as they were not applicable in that time period. This appears to be a situation where the rulings of the constitution could end up doing far more harm than good. This was obviously an exceptional circumstance and for exceptional circumstances exceptions must be made.

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.296875E-02