the Patriot Act

[texan]

Why don't you see the obvious flaws in trying to declare martial law? Even if American citizens are such puppets of the government (which is made of American citizens), and the military is such an easily wielded weapon of the government against it's people (which is comprised of those same people), why wouldn't it be easy to invoke such orders? Even if all that were true, the President is nowhere near the ultimate authority you seem to think he is. Ultimately the President has to answer to everyone, and even if he did just up and decide to declare a martial emergency, it'd take days if not weeks to put sufficient force in place to enact such rule. Meanwhile it'd take about an hour to convene a cabinet vote that would remove the President from office. Our political system has proven itself the most effective and reliable yet devised, and it's not so easy to shortcircuit that system as simply making a single decision to undermine it. Now I'm sure you'll come up with other evidence such as Singapore's oh-so-relevant mentioning here (they have never had true democracy, freedom of speech or sweeping civil rights laws) but again, whatever. I can really see how a recently appointed city-state in Asia has direct significance to American values and decision making . I live here, I know far better than you the attitudes, emotions and willpower of the American people, and I will tell you one final time: martial law is something that would bring absolute chaos to our country. We have a higher gun to people ratio, constitutionally protected political dissent, a more highly educated populace, and great history of refusing to listen to government than any nation on this planet. But I guess that doesn't matter, I guess that in your eyes once a President has made an unjust decision and backed it with real or percieved threats, we'll all just put aside what we've worked for over the last near 250 years and decide "security" is better than freedom. Riiiight.

[Milliardo]

Originally posted by texan
Why don't you see the obvious flaws in trying to declare martial law? Even if American citizens are such puppets of the government (which is made of American citizens), and the military is such an easily wielded weapon of the government against it's people (which is comprised of those same people), why wouldn't it be easy to invoke such orders?

The question would more be, why would it be easy to invoke such orders? In a normal situation, it might not. But these are not normal times, and with the President invoking threat in one form or another, it is really easy for other branches of government to give him the powers necessary to move a step towards Martial Rule, and in fact we are seeing the beginnings of such a step.

Even if all that were true, the President is nowhere near the ultimate authority you seem to think he is. Ultimately the President has to answer to everyone, and even if he did just up and decide to declare a martial emergency, it'd take days if not weeks to put sufficient force in place to enact such rule.

You have very little idea how fast events can actually move. At least in theory, any ruler must answer to all his subjects, but this rule has not been followed most of the time anyway. And in Martial Rule, the President doesn't have to answer to anyone, so that's one less worry for him. The military can be mobilized in just a matter of hours in fully securing the environs surrounding military facilities; in just a matter of day or days it can take over a large area. So it will not take weeks, unless riots break out. But like I said, between a war an security, people would rather opt for the latter than the former.

Meanwhile it'd take about an hour to convene a cabinet vote that would remove the President from office.

At this point, with the military taking direct orders from the President, and him having full control of it, I would not be surprised if the Cabinet would be neutralized effectively. Since the President in Martial Rule acts by decree, he can at will remove all Cabinet members and assume temporarily most of the vital positions, such as Defense Secretary. Or he can give those key positions to military personnel, as the nation is under military rule anyway.

Our political system has proven itself the most effective and reliable yet devised, and it's not so easy to shortcircuit that system as simply making a single decision to undermine it.

No system is foolproof or perfect. There will always be loopholes which one can get around. One of them would be to have a state of emergency declared. As you can see, the first steps have been placed with minimal opposition. These steps can be used to great lengths, and then introduce even more draconian measures by invoking more "threats". Again, you see that happening now. What would be interesting to see is whether or not it will actually come to the point of a full declaration of Martial Law, even if in a de facto manner.

Now I'm sure you'll come up with other evidence such as Singapore's oh-so-relevant mentioning here (they have never had true democracy, freedom of speech or sweeping civil rights laws) but again, whatever.

Singapore is relevant in this case because it shows us that a people does not necessarily need democracy to live well and be content. Singaporeans are more or less content with their present state, and have all the ammeneties that America has. As long as the state can take care of its people, the people do not care how repressive the state is. What people care most is that they live well, and have everything they need. Freedom becomes relative when the necessities and wants are met.

I live here, I know far better than you the attitudes, emotions and willpower of the American people, and I will tell you one final time: martial law is something that would bring absolute chaos to our country.

If it would, then I would pity you, since you would choose to have chaos than have your peace. Though more often than not Martial Law does end with the ruler being removed from power, that takes sometime to achieve, and I would see that to be no different there in the U.S. As long as the threats are invoked, then there is always that justification for more tougher measures, to the point that asking for Martial Law, or simply declaring it, would be met with approval than dissent.

We have a higher gun to people ratio, constitutionally protected political dissent, a more highly educated populace, and great history of refusing to listen to government than any nation on this planet.

All these don't matter. With the state virtually in control, and the military given a great leeway, chances of those guns being used would be almost nil. And between guns and armor and even missiles, the whole scenario favors the state by a very large margin. People would think twice before doing such things, knowing those odds.