View Single Post
Old 06-07-2008   #9 (permalink)
Bill of Rights
Cogito, ergo porto.

 
Bill of Rights's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Wherever the bacon is. Anywhere else is not living, just existing.
Posts: 5,111
Bill of Rights has a reputation beyond repute
Bill of Rights has a reputation beyond reputeBill of Rights has a reputation beyond reputeBill of Rights has a reputation beyond reputeBill of Rights has a reputation beyond reputeBill of Rights has a reputation beyond reputeBill of Rights has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by tmfinney View Post
I seem to recall there is a sentence in that oath that you have to defend against all enemies both foreign and domestic
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay View Post
I also swore to uphold the Constitution. And I did NOT renounce that oath upon my discharge. I will continue to do what I can to defend this country and it's Constitution.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill of Rights View Post
I cannot help but wonder, especially in light of the removal of Posse Comitatus and in light of the DC neighborhood thread, if they are being trained to do urban assaults upon our own people. I don't think it's far out of the realm of possibility, and with what amounts to a 50/50 chance for Osama er, Obama to win the Presidency, yes, I am concerned....They are required to follow orders but they also swear to uphold the Constitution of the United States; I think that these days, their training may be designed to instill the authority of the former over the latter, and I'm not sure how many would choose correctly, given that version of Hobson's Choice.
This is exactly the problem I'm worried about. The Marines (in this case, but really the current members of any military unit and for that matter, any police officer) have all sworn to uphold the Constitution and to defend against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Jay and the others who've served in the past have taken and not renounced the same oath, and those of us who have not served in uniform, while we have not been administered that oath, nonetheless would pretty much to a man hold to it.

So the question is, if they're ordered to defend the country against a domestic enemy (us) and we're defending our natural, fundamental, and Constitutional rights against a domestic enemy (them)

:do2::do2::do2:..................................... ..........................................

Who is right and who is wrong?

I think this has far oversimplified the question, and "who is wrong" is whoever's giving the orders to violate the Constitution. You know, "pay no attention to that man behind the curtain".

All I know for sure is that when TEOTWAWKI or SHTF or whatever acronym you want to use happens, there are going to be a whole bunch of good men and women dying doing what they're convinced is the right thing-on both sides of the fight. It's a sad situation, but I am hopeful that common sense may break out and yes, I dare even hope that this little line of reasoning might be read by folks on both sides and maybe I'll have a partial role in saving some lives.

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible
make violent revolution inevitable." --JFK

I pray that we can have peaceful revolution. I'm armed in case we can't.

Blessings,
B
Bill of Rights is offline   Reply With Quote