Poll finds almost a third of Americans would support a military coup

[Bethere]

Poll finds almost a third of Americans would support a military coup

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/sep/11/military-coup-some-americans-would-vote-yes

What do you think?

Please tell us why.

Thanks!


Your friend,

Bethere

[Common Sense]

Link is screwy...

[Peter1469]

Only those who served should have the privileges of citizenship (https://www.amazon.com/Starship-Troopers-Robert-Heinlein/dp/0441783589).

[Bethere]

Link is screwy...

Try it again.

Your pal,

Bethere!

[Bethere]

Only those who served should have the privileges of citizenship (https://www.amazon.com/Starship-Troopers-Robert-Heinlein/dp/0441783589).

Why? Be specific.

[Common Sense]

Only those who served should have the privileges of citizenship (https://www.amazon.com/Starship-Troopers-Robert-Heinlein/dp/0441783589).

Starship Troopers depicts a fascistic future.

[Common Sense]

http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/dddt1.gif

[del]

Only those who served should have the privileges of citizenship (https://www.amazon.com/Starship-Troopers-Robert-Heinlein/dp/0441783589).

horseshit

[Peter1469]

Starship Troopers depicts a fascistic future.
No it doesn't. I am referring to the book with is deep political science.

The movie is fun.

[Peter1469]

horseshit


You're in, Navy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-3ws7b4sZg

[Common Sense]

No it doesn't. I am referring to the book with is deep political science.

The movie is fun.
I was talking about the book.

[Bethere]

Starship Troopers depicts a fascistic future.

Actually that really is the message of starship troopers.

One of my childhood friends was in that movie, I can't wait to tell him.

He is, btw, what makes me almost unbeatable in the 6 degrees of kevin bacon game!

[del]

You're in, Navy.

https://www.amazon.com/Starship-Troopers-Robert-Heinlein/dp/0441783589

you don't get to decide.

your miscomprehension of heinlein is total.

carry on

[Peter1469]

I was talking about the book.

Read it again then. It was about citizenship. A democracy that omits the takers and promotes those who want to contribute to society.

[Bethere]

you don't get to decide.

your miscomprehension of heinlein is total.

carry on

I assume he is the one who voted for military rule.

[Bethere]

Read it again then. It was about citizenship. A democracy that omits the takers and promotes those who want to contribute to society.

So you think democracy is the worst form of government and you favor military rule--do I have that right?

[Common Sense]

I assume he is the one who voted for military rule.

Good guess...

[Bethere]

Thanks
Good guess...

Lol.

[Peter1469]

So you think democracy is the worst form of government and you favor military rule--do I have that right?

No. But it is a habit for you.

Standards for citizenship......

[Bethere]

No. But it is a habit for you.

Standards for citizenship......

You said just 20 minutes ago in another thread that democracy is the worst form of government. Should I go get it?

And someone voted for military rule.

If it wasn't you then who was it?

[Peter1469]

You said just 20 minutes ago in another thread that democracy is the worst form of government. Should I go get it?

And someone voted for military rule.

If it wasn't you then who was it?

Yes, direct democracy is the worse form of government.

[Bethere]

Yes, direct democracy is the worse form of government.
Why?

[Peter1469]

Ask our Founders. They were horrified over the concept.

I think it worked in some Greek city-states but then only certain people were giving the franchise. And they could spend time to govern the city-state.

[Bethere]

Only those who served should have the privileges of citizenship (https://www.amazon.com/Starship-Troopers-Robert-Heinlein/dp/0441783589).
That sounds like military rule to me.

Why fight it? Tell us why you oppose direct democracy and support military rule?

[Bethere]

Ask our Founders. They were horrified over the concept.

I think it worked in some Greek city-states but then only certain people were giving the franchise. And they could spend time to govern the city-state.

Green arrow would suggest that a republic is a democracy.

[Peter1469]

That sounds like military rule to me.

Why fight it? Tell us why you oppose direct democracy and support military rule?

Standards for citizenship. What is wrong with that?

[Peter1469]

Green arrow would suggest that a republic is a democracy.

Some people lump them together.

I don't.

Our Founders did not.

[exotix]

What happens if Trump croaks or the Military coups on 'em before Inauguration Day ?

[Bethere]

Standards for citizenship. What is wrong with that?

Because our constitutionI guarantees birthright citizenship.

[Bethere]

Don't forget to vote people. You do not have to have served in the military to vote in this poll.

[Peter1469]

Because our constitutionI guarantees birthright citizenship.
Not in the way you think.

You realize that the franchise was limited for much of our history?

[Bethere]

Not in the way you think.

You realize that the franchise was limited for much of our history?

Don't tell me how I think.

You do realize that the 14th amendment has been the law of the land for nearly 150 years?

[Peter1469]

Don't tell me how I think.

You do realize that the 14th amendment has been the law of the land for nearly 150 years?

I already explained the 14th Amendment and how that does not support the concept of birth right citizenship for illegals.

SCOTUS agrees. Or at least has never said otherwise.

[del]

I already explained the 14th Amendment and how that does not support the concept of birth right citizenship for illegals.

SCOTUS agrees. Or at least has never said otherwise.
scotus has never ruled on it, i believe.

why lie about it?

[Grizz]

Poll finds almost a third of Americans would support a military coup

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/sep/11/military-coup-some-americans-would-vote-yes

What do you think?

Please tell us why.

Thanks!


Your friend,

Bethere

Why rely on the Military?
You don't have the balls to try it yourself?

[del]

the stupid is strong in this one

[Peter1469]

scotus has never ruled on it, i believe.

why lie about it?

Cite the case.

Please don't cite the case most uninformed people post. It doesn't say that illegals can drop a baby inside the US and the baby gets US citizenship. US v. Wong Kim Ark is about people in the US legally.

[Bethere]

Read it again then. It was about citizenship. A democracy that omits the takers and promotes those who want to contribute to society.

It sounds like utopia.

Lol.

[Bethere]

Cite the case.

Please don't cite the case most uninformed people post. It doesn't say that illegals can drop a baby inside the US and the baby gets US citizenship. US v. Wong Kim Ark is about people in the US legally.
No, it is about the "permanently domiciled."

It says nothing about "legally. "

This lesson in law is a brought to you cheerfully by your friend, bethere.

[Bethere]

Why rely on the Military?
You don't have the balls to try it yourself?
I would slash the military budget so fast your head would spin.

[resister]

the stupid is strong in this one
^ DeL^

[Ravens Fan]

I can't vote in Tapatalk, but at this juncture, I would be against any kind of coup. I would rather give Trump some rope and see what he does. Things can't get much worse, so we will see.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[del]

I already explained the 14th Amendment and how that does not support the concept of birth right citizenship for illegals.

SCOTUS agrees. Or at least has never said otherwise.


scotus has never ruled on it, i believe.

why lie about it?



Cite the case.

Please don't cite the case most uninformed people post. It doesn't say that illegals can drop a baby inside the US and the baby gets US citizenship. US v. Wong Kim Ark is about people in the US legally.

herp, derp

public schoolboy

[Ravens Fan]

Only those who served should have the privileges of citizenship (https://www.amazon.com/Starship-Troopers-Robert-Heinlein/dp/0441783589).

I respectfully disagree. Not everybody is cut out for the military. You yourself have alluded to that before.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bethere]

herp, derp

public schoolboy

Are you claiming that he asked you to cite a case he acknowledges doesn't exist?

[Bethere]

I can't vote in Tapatalk, but at this juncture, I would be against any kind of coup. I would rather give Trump some rope and see what he does. Things can't get much worse, so we will see.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Duly noted.

[del]

Are you claiming that he asked you to cite a case he acknowledges doesn't exist?
the posts are right there.

i don't know what other construct one could put on it.

[Peter1469]

No, it is about the "permanently domiciled."

It says nothing about "legally. "

This lesson in law is a brought to you cheerfully by your friend, bethere.

The Court specifically says up front that the family was inside the US legally....

[Bethere]

I respectfully disagree. Not everybody is cut out for the military. You yourself have alluded to that before.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And therefore he supports taxation without representation.

[Bethere]

The Court specifically says up front that the family was inside the US legally....
The holding says "permanently domiciled. "

It says nothing about legality.

[Bethere]

the posts are right there.

i don't know what other construct one could put on it.

Good times!

[Ravens Fan]

And therefore he supports taxation without representation.

Meh... I understand his reasoning, just don't think it would work.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Peter1469]

The holding says "permanently domiciled. "

It says nothing about legality.
false

[Peter1469]

"That, at the time of his said birth, his mother and father were domiciled residents of the United States, and had established and enjoyed a permanent domicil and residence therein at said city and county of San Francisco, State aforesaid. (https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/169/649/case.html)"

The family was not in the US illegally.

[Bethere]

false Our fellow posters can explore your folly for themselves:


Children born in the United States of foreigners permanently domiciled and resident in the U.S. at the time of birth automatically acquire U.S. citizenship via the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.


​https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark

[Peter1469]

Our fellow posters can explore your folly for themselves:


Children born in the United States of foreigners permanently domiciled and resident in the U.S. at the time of birth automatically acquire U.S. citizenship via the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.



​https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark
Agree. That is what I said.

The case however does not support the concept that a child born to illegals is a US citizen.

Got another case?

[Bethere]

The family was not in the US illegally.

You are discovering why utley never argues with me. It's not that I am better than he is, it's because I always pick the winning argunent. I never have to defend the indefensible.

[Bethere]

Agree. That is what I said.

The case however does not support the concept that a child born to illegals is a US citizen.
Got another case?

I don't need one. I took your strawman/case and won.

There is precious little other case law on this subject because the case YOU cited was so damn definitive.

[Captain Obvious]

You are discovering why utley never argues with me. It's not that I am better than he is, it's because I always pick the winning argunent. I never have to defend the indefensible.

Yet you supported Rodham.

You're positions are "indefensible" because you're a fucking fruitcake incapable of coexisting in reality with the rest of us.

[del]

The family was not in the US illegally.

the court didn't address that nor seem to care.

[Bethere]

the court didn't address that nor seem to care.

Gosh, he's on quite a roll.

[Peter1469]

I don't need one. I took your strawman/case and won.

There is precious little other case law on this subject because the case YOU cited was so damn definitive.
Every state says it is illegal to practice law without a license.

You demonstrate way that is.

There is no Supreme Court case that says illegals in the US get birth right citizenship for their children born in the US.

The Ark case holds that the child of people in the US legally has US citizenship even though the parents were citizens of China.

[Peter1469]

the court didn't address that nor seem to care.

I cited to it.

[Grizz]

Psssst, the Military will not fire on American's, the only people that think they will never served.

[Common Sense]

Psssst, the Military will not fire on American's, the only people that think they will never served.

Does that include the National Guard?

[Bethere]

false


Agree. That is what I said.


Make up your mind.

[Bethere]

Every state says it is illegal to practice law without a license.

You demonstrate way that is.

There is no Supreme Court case that says illegals in the US get birth right citizenship for their children born in the US.

The Ark case holds that the child of people in the US legally has US citizenship even though the parents were citizens of China.
Ark says "permanently domiciled. "

It says nothing about legality.


This is a good example of what I said earlier. I know you think it is wrong, but birthright citizenship has been the law for 150 years. There are millons of examples.

You are arguing with the courts, reality, and 150 years of jurisprudence.

I'm good, but truly, there was zero chance I was going to lose this debate.

[Peter1469]

His father and mother were persons of Chinese descent, and subjects of the Emperor of China; they were at the time of his birth domiciled residents of the United States, having previously established and still enjoying a permanent domicil and residence therein at San Francisco; they continued to reside and remain in the United States until 1890, when they departed for China, and during all the time of their residence in the United States, they were engaged in business, and were never employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of China. Wong Kim Ark, ever since his birth, has had but one residence, to-wit, in California, within the United States, and has there resided, claiming to be a citizen of the United States, and has never lost or changed that residence, or gained or acquired another residence, and neither he nor his parents acting for him ever renounced his allegiance to the United States, or did or committed any act or thing to exclude him

The bolded terms are legal terms of art.

It means they were in the US legally.

[Captain Obvious]

Psssst, the Military will not fire on American's, the only people that think they will never served.

4 dead in Ohio

[Peter1469]

Does that include the National Guard?
Why not?

[Grizz]

Does that include the National Guard?

It does indeed, they are not professional military. Sorry.

[del]

Psssst, the Military will not fire on American's, the only people that think they will never served.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/65/Kent_State_massacre.jpg

tell her

[MisterVeritis]

Read it again then. It was about citizenship. A democracy that omits the takers and promotes those who want to contribute to society.
Sparta. One did not become a citizen until one "graduated" from the agoge. Essentially one had to earn his shield and be descended from an original member of the city.

Military service is one way. In my opinion, a better way involves who pays the taxes. If one can prove to be a net taxpayer at a given level of government and is a citizen, then one may vote. I pay city and county taxes. I get to vote. I pay state taxes. I get to vote. I pay federal taxes. I get to vote.

I could see several, overlapping categories. I think the goal should be to break the stranglehold the takers have on our system.

[DGUtley]

Does that include the National Guard?

Objection. Remember May 4, 1970.

https://youtu.be/68g76j9VBvM

[Subdermal]

Poll finds almost a third of Americans would support a military coup

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/sep/11/military-coup-some-americans-would-vote-yes

What do you think?

Please tell us why.

Thanks!


Your friend,

Bethere

You are not my friend. You are a smarmy arrogant leftist.

And of course the option of a military coup could be supported - like the survey says - in certain instances. The Founders did as well, which is why they said that the Tree of Liberty must occasionally be refreshed with the blood of tyrants and patriots.

Military members are citizens. They are patriots. Do you think Jefferson's proclamation would have excluded them?


Regardless: no one should be surprised that you mischaracterize the poll, and the sentiment behind it. Your own poll speaks of "military rule", but there is no requirement for a 'military coup' to end in "military rule" at all. You suffer from a lack of honesty.

A military coup would likely end in a Convention of States, and a re-establishment of the Constitution, which I can see as the only reason to justify such an action with which to begin. I trust any leaders within the military capable of executing a coup understand the Constitution far better than I trust that you do.

[Peter1469]

In law, domicile is the status or attribution of being a lawful permanent resident (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Residency_(domicile)) in a particularjurisdiction (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurisdiction_(area)).

[Common Sense]

Objection. Remember May 4, 1970.

https://youtu.be/68g76j9VBvM
That's what I was getting at.

[Grizz]

Does that include the National Guard?

For the sake of clarity here, I am telling you that the US Military will not follow an order telling them to fire on American's.

[Bethere]

The bolded terms are legal terms of art.

It means they were in the US legally.

Those were the same terms I have been beating you over the head with for the last two pages.

your citation never once says the word "legally."

It does say he claimed to be a citizen, but apparently no one checked--or the citation would have said "he's a citizen" rather than he claimed to be.

[Captain Obvious]

So, the moral of the story.

The left may become militant (see FARC) because, well - they're not getting their way.

To hell with the Constitution, to hell with the Republic, we're going to take it regardless.

Maybe the conservatively controlled everything needs to take this into consideration over the next 4 years.

[DGUtley]

That's what I was getting at.

i know. Great minds think alike.

[Peter1469]

There is no SCOTUS case that says if illegals are in the US, their child born here is a US citizen.

[Common Sense]

so, the moral of the story.

The left may become militant (see farc) because, well - they're not getting their way.

To hell with the constitution, to hell with the republic, we're going to take it regardless.

Maybe the conservatively controlled everything needs to take this into consideration over the next 4 years.
lol...

[Bethere]

For the sake of clarity here, I am telling you that the US Military will not follow an order telling them to fire on American's.
We ohioans know better.

I suspect our friends at Jackson state do, too.

[del]

For the sake of clarity here, I am telling you that the US Military will not follow an order telling them to fire on American's.


The National Guard of the United States, part of the reserve components of the United States Armed Forces, is a reserve military force

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Guard_of_the_United_States

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/65/Kent_State_massacre.jpg

[DGUtley]

Those were the same terms I have been beating you over the head with for the last two pages. your citation never once says the word "legally." It does say he claimed to be a citizen, but apparently no one checked--or the citation would have said "he's a citizen" rather than he claimed to be.
I go to a partners meeting and miss some legal arm wrestling? Even without a degree or a license, my experience is that you'll more than carry your own.

[del]

There is no SCOTUS case that says if illegals are in the US, their child born here is a US citizen.
i told you that already

try to keep up, public schoolboy

[Peter1469]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Guard_of_the_United_States

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/65/Kent_State_massacre.jpg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkg-bzTHeAk

[Bethere]

There is no SCOTUS case that says if illegals are in the US, their child born here is a US citizen.

Obviously they deferred to a lower court ruling, say, Ark?

Surely you know that the supremes say as much by the cases they don't take as they do with the ones they do?

[del]

So, the moral of the story.

The left may become militant (see FARC) because, well - they're not getting their way.

To hell with the Constitution, to hell with the Republic, we're going to take it regardless.

Maybe the conservatively controlled everything needs to take this into consideration over the next 4 years.
that's nice, honey

you almost have a point

[Peter1469]

Obviously they deferred to a lower court ruling, say, Ark?

Surely you know that the supremes say as much by the cases they don't take as they do with the ones they do?
You don't know what you are talking about.

[Bethere]

I go to a partners meeting and miss some legal arm wrestling? Even without a degree or a license, my experience is that you'll more than carry your own.
It's like betting on secretariat. I argue nothing but cases that are already decided in my favor.

[Captain Obvious]

that's nice, honey

you almost have a point

This shit writes itself.

I just connect the dots for the lacking of wit.

[Bethere]

You don't know what you are talking about.
I was about to say the same about you.

[del]

This shit writes itself.

I just connect the dots for the lacking of wit.


well you're halfway right

it's shit

[Captain Obvious]

well you're halfway right

it's shit

You got one right, peanut.

Tightened that helmet a bit I see.

[Bethere]

It does indeed, they are not professional military. Sorry.

Most of our deployed soldiers since the first iraq war have, in fact, been the national guard.

Now you know.

[Newpublius]

No it doesn't. I am referring to the book with is deep political science.

The movie is fun.

The movie IS fun, but it is clearly a male fantasy with mockumentary newsreels on a 'utopian' fascist system, one that, at least seemingly seems to eschew human racism because it externalizes hatred to the arachnid threat. Its so easy they have no need to even dehumanize the enemy, one clip shows the kids at home stomping on bugs 'doing their part'

[del]

You got one right, peanut.

Tightened that helmet a bit I see.

whooooooooooooooosh

lawlz

tick... tick...

:biglaugh:

[Peter1469]

The movie IS fun, but it is clearly a mockukentary on a 'utopian' fascist system, one that, at least seemingly seems to eschew human racism because it externalize hatred to the arachnid threat. Its so easy they have no need to even dehumanize the enemy, one clip shows the kids at home stomping on bugs 'doing their part'

Although I loved the movie because it reminds me of basic and AIT, the book is very different.
It is actually very serious and could be part of the syllabus for political philosophy course alongside Plato's Republic.

[Newpublius]

Although I loved the movie because it reminds me of basic and AIT, the book is very different.
It is actually very serious and could be part of the syllabus for political philosophy course alongside Plato's Republic.

I did NOT read the book but I am aware of it. You can look at Starship Troopers as a superficial B movie.

It reminds you of basic and AIT because of the military training scenes with Michael Ironside who goes from being high school teacher to basic training instructor to platoon leader in short order.

[Cthulhu]

I respectfully disagree. Not everybody is cut out for the military. You yourself have alluded to that before.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Even if people hadn't served, I think there should be something that must be done in order to earn the right/privilege to vote.

I strongly believe in a meritocracy.

Fear profits a man nothing.

[Ravens Fan]

Even if people hadn't served, I think there should be something that must be done in order to earn the right/privilege to vote.

I strongly believe in a meritocracy.

Fear profits a man nothing.

10 years in the local volunteer fire department count? It is service to the community.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bethere]

Although I loved the movie because it reminds me of basic and AIT, the book is very different.
It is actually very serious and could be part of the syllabus for political philosophy course alongside Plato's Republic.

Lol.

So here is your scorecard vis a vis this thread as far as we've been told:

1. You support military rule.
2. You oppose birthright citizenship.
3. You consider democracy to be the worst form of government.

Do I have that right? If not, how so?

[Bethere]

16725
Even if people hadn't served, I think there should be something that must be done in order to earn the right/privilege to vote.

I strongly believe in a meritocracy.

Fear profits a man nothing.

My view, and the view of the courts as well, is that unless you are under 18 or a felon, you have the right to vote if you are naturalized or born in this country (or property under federal control).

[Bethere]

10 years in the local volunteer fire department count? It is service to the community.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sounds fair. But the truth is your birthright citizenship is all that you need.

[Peter1469]

Lol.

So here is your scorecard vis a vis this thread as far as we've been told:

1. You support military rule.
2. You oppose birthright citizenship.
3. You consider democracy to be the worst form of government.

Do I have that right? If not, how so?
1. No. I suggested military service as a test for citizenship.
2. No. Said you don't know what the phrase means. Legal parents. Not illegals.
3. You got one out of three right. That is good for you.

[Bethere]

1. No. I suggested military service as a test for citizenship.
2. No. Said you don't know what the phrase means. Legal parents. Not illegals.
3. You got one out of three right. That is good for you.



Only those who served should have the privileges of citizenship (https://www.amazon.com/Starship-Troopers-Robert-Heinlein/dp/0441783589).

You appear to be at odds with yourself again.

Shouldn't we add "favors taxation without representation" to that list?

[Peter1469]

You appear to be at odds with yourself again.

Shouldn't we add "favors taxation without representation" to that list?
Why does taxation without representation enter the topic.

Just because under my system only the worthy could vote does not mean that the others are not represented. Those who have served are familiar with picking of the slack of those who don't.

[Bethere]

You are not my friend. You are a smarmy arrogant leftist.

And of course the option of a military coup could be supported - like the survey says - in certain instances. The Founders did as well, which is why they said that the Tree of Liberty must occasionally be refreshed with the blood of tyrants and patriots.

Military members are citizens. They are patriots. Do you think Jefferson's proclamation would have excluded them?


Regardless: no one should be surprised that you mischaracterize the poll, and the sentiment behind it. Your own poll speaks of "military rule", but there is no requirement for a 'military coup' to end in "military rule" at all. You suffer from a lack of honesty.

A military coup would likely end in a Convention of States, and a re-establishment of the Constitution, which I can see as the only reason to justify such an action with which to begin. I trust any leaders within the military capable of executing a coup understand the Constitution far better than I trust that you do.

Lol.

[Peter1469]

Most of our deployed soldiers since the first iraq war have, in fact, been the national guard.

Now you know.
That statement is false.

[Bethere]

Why does taxation without representation enter the topic.

Just because under my system only the worthy could vote does not mean that the others are not represented. Those who have served are familiar with picking of the slack of those who don't.

Unable to vote, the unworthy would be taxed without representation.

[Peter1469]

Unable to vote, the unworthy would be taxed without representation.
But good people of merit will consider you when they vote.

Don't be a charge of the state and earn your right to vote.

[Bethere]

That statement is false.
My bad, I should have looked that up.

I should have said 36%.

https://www.thebalance.com/deployment-rates-3356917

[Bethere]

But good people of merit will consider you when they vote.

Don't be a charge of the state and earn your right to vote.

That's not representation.

You aren't a big fan of freedom are you?

[Peter1469]

My bad, I should have looked that up.

I should have said 36%.

https://www.thebalance.com/deployment-rates-3356917

All you had to do was ask me.

[Peter1469]

That's not representation.

You aren't a big fan of freedom are you?


English words seem to confuse you.

I am against direct democracy. You should be able to figure out the rest based on that.

[Bethere]

All you had to do was ask me.

You should have asked me about birthright citizenship.

[Peter1469]

You should have asked me about birthright citizenship.

Why would I? You can't legally provide legal advice.

[Bethere]

English words seem to confuse you.

I am against direct democracy. You should be able to figure out the rest based on that.

You become condescending when you are angry. You really are in no position to be so.

[Peter1469]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k26hmRbDQFw

[Bethere]

Why would I? You can't legally provide legal advice.
You confuse legal scholarship with the practice of law.

lol.

If I asked you, you would have provided your fantasy world opinion rather than the settled law of the land.

Millions of Americans with birthright citizenship prove your error.

[Peter1469]

You become condescending when you are angry. You really are in no position to be so.

I am not angry. I don't take legal advice from people unable to provide it. And if you continue to misuse the English language I will correct you.

[Bethere]

Poll finds almost a third of Americans would support a military coup

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/sep/11/military-coup-some-americans-would-vote-yes

What do you think?

Please tell us why.

Thanks!


Your friend,

Bethere

We return to our regularly scheduled program.

[Peter1469]

Lol.

Your grammar, as we've seen all day, is nothing to write home about.
oh

[Cthulhu]

16725

My view, and the view of the courts as well, is that unless you are under 18 or a felon, you have the right to vote if you are naturalized or born in this country (or property under federal control).
Lovely.

When you learn to think for yourself, contact me.

Submitting to the mad whims of a government is in no way impressive.

Fear profits a man nothing.

[Cthulhu]

10 years in the local volunteer fire department count? It is service to the community.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It is a good idea. But at the same time that is a long time being unable to vote.

Me thinks there should be a citizen's academy that you should have to undergo to earn the right.

It should include assume basic things like a knowledge of proper civics. Along with some other basic things to help one be useful in life - prepping taxes, first aid training, rudimentary combat training, disaster response etc...

Honestly it is a good idea for an entire thread, maybe a couple actually.

Fear profits a man nothing.

[Cthulhu]

Sounds fair. But the truth is your birthright citizenship is all that you need.
Ah yes... Having a pulse. Such a noble accomplishment.

Fear profits a man nothing.

[Bethere]

Ah yes... Having a pulse. Such a noble accomplishment.

Fear profits a man nothing.

It shouldn't be an accomplishment. It is, instead, your right as an American.

We don't need people setting themselves up as the voting authorities.

According to the SAT, if we measured everyone's worth against mine, 99.9% of you wouldn't be allowed to vote.

Such is the burden of the merit scholar. But rejoice! You'd be represented! I'd be thinking of your best interests.

[Bethere]

Lovely.

When you learn to think for yourself, contact me.

Submitting to the mad whims of a government is in no way impressive.

Fear profits a man nothing.

Of course, this thread is not about citizenship.

Are you in favor of military rule?

yes or no?

[Cthulhu]

Of course, this thread is not about citizenship.

Are you in favor of military rule?

yes or no?
Obviously not.

But neither am I in favor of idiot rule.

Fear profits a man nothing.

[Cthulhu]

It shouldn't be an accomplishment. It is, instead, your right as an American.

We don't need people setting themselves up as the voting authorities.

According to the SAT, if we measured everyone's worth against mine, 99.9% of you wouldn't be allowed to vote.

Such is the burden of the merit scholar. But rejoice! You'd be represented! I'd be thinking of your best interests.
No it isn't a right - having a pulse that is.

Were it a right, abortion wouldn't be legal. But that's another topic.

And the thought of you looking out for my best interests is diabolical.

Fear profits a man nothing.

[Dr. Who]

No it isn't a right - having a pulse that is.

Were it a right, abortion wouldn't be legal. But that's another topic.

And the thought of you looking out for my best interests is diabolical.

Fear profits a man nothing.
For someone who rejects authoritarianism, these are incredibly authoritarian ideas.

[Cthulhu]

For someone who rejects authoritarianism, these are incredibly authoritarian ideas.
I don't reject authoritarianism. I reject corruption.

The faith I adhere to is very authoritarian, but it is also by consent.

Governments...not so much. But if they are be, they may add well be run and built by somebody who doesn't have cement betwixt their ears.

Fear profits a man nothing.

[Bethere]

No it isn't a right - having a pulse that is.

Were it a right, abortion wouldn't be legal. But that's another topic.

And the thought of you looking out for my best interests is diabolical.

Fear profits a man nothing.

That's how I feel about pete's reassurances that patriot warrior heroes would look out for all of our interests--diabolical.

if that is what you and pete want then move to Turkey.

Meanwhile birthright citizenship is the law of the land in this country, and the topic of this thread is military rule.

Please try to stay on topic.

[Bethere]

Why rely on the Military?
You don't have the balls to try it yourself?
I'm not interested in America being in a perpetual state of war.
I don't think all soldiers are heroes.
I don't want us to spend trillions on defense.
I don't want us to be ruled by the military.
I would cut the miitary budget so fast your head would spin.

It takes more balls to oppose militarization than it does to embrace fear and demand military rule.

[Peter1469]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKc2ygXagdg

[donttread]

Poll finds almost a third of Americans would support a military coup

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/sep/11/military-coup-some-americans-would-vote-yes

What do you think?

Please tell us why.

Thanks!


Your friend,

Bethere


Not a good poll to answer

[Ransom]

I've actually had to school Peter on this American reality for some time. The military....has civilian bosses in this country for a reason. The new Defense Secretary hung his boots years ago, resigned from the Marine Corps...but his new civilian role will command our entire military. The Secretary of Defense and the President give the military direct orders and they are followed without question. Our government designed whereupon the highest ranking military official......answers to a civilian. Pete consistently misunderstands.

[Peter1469]

I've actually had to school Peter on this American reality for some time. The military....has civilian bosses in this country for a reason. The new Defense Secretary hung his boots years ago, resigned from the Marine Corps...but his new civilian role will command our entire military. The Secretary of Defense and the President give the military direct orders and they are followed without question. Our government designed whereupon the highest ranking military official......answers to a civilian. Pete consistently misunderstands.

No neocons please.

[Ransom]

No neocons please.

Congress declares war or engage the War Powers Act, Peter. They fund and facilitate the military. The Pentagon's buck stops at a civilian desk.
The military has a boss, carries out the orders of their civilian leaders, has as it's commander.....a civilian. By design.

No Neocons please Sir.......is your edited correction above, Pete. They answer to you now, not the other way around. You do get that.....right?

[TimeLord962]

Starship Troopers depicts a fascistic future.

The movie does not the books.

[Adelaide]

Well, I guess a third of Americans are fucking crazy.

[Cletus]

Our fellow posters can explore your folly for themselves:


Children born in the United States of foreigners permanently domiciled and resident in the U.S. at the time of birth automatically acquire U.S. citizenship via the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.



​https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark

You can't be permanently domiciled here if you are here illegally because you are subject to deportation.

Permanently domiciled refers to legal resident aliens.

[Bethere]

Well, I guess a third of Americans are $#@!ing crazy.

Absolutely.

[Bethere]

You can't be permanently domiciled here if you are here illegally because you are subject to deportation.

Permanently domiciled refers to legal resident aliens.
Argue that with the courts. This has been settled law for generations.

It's fun to argue, but know in advance that your argument is futile.

[Bethere]

I've actually had to school Peter on this American reality for some time. The military....has civilian bosses in this country for a reason. The new Defense Secretary hung his boots years ago, resigned from the Marine Corps...but his new civilian role will command our entire military. The Secretary of Defense and the President give the military direct orders and they are followed without question. Our government designed whereupon the highest ranking military official......answers to a civilian. Pete consistently misunderstands.

Good for you.

[Dr. Who]

I don't reject authoritarianism. I reject corruption.

The faith I adhere to is very authoritarian, but it is also by consent.

Governments...not so much. But if they are be, they may add well be run and built by somebody who doesn't have cement betwixt their ears.

Fear profits a man nothing.
Your attitude toward law enforcement and their legal remedies would suggest otherwise.

[resister]

http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/dddt1.gif
​murica...f@ck yeah!!!

[Adelaide]

Your attitude toward law enforcement and their legal remedies would suggest otherwise.
There are fairly legitimate reasons to suspect that law enforcement and legal institutions are at least a bit corrupt. Obviously, that isn't going to apply to every law enforcement officer or every legal case, but corruption is a serious issue. Then there are serious issues like institutional racism. There is quite a bit of evidence that suggests serious issues with law enforcement in the United States.

[Cletus]

Argue that with the courts. This has been settled law for generations.

No, it hasn't or you could provide case law to support it.


It's fun to argue, but know in advance that your argument is futile.

Of course it is futile. Arguing with you is like arguing with a cinder block.

[Peter1469]

You can't be permanently domiciled here if you are here illegally because you are subject to deportation.

Permanently domiciled refers to legal resident aliens.

Many fail to understand because they refuse to believe that words matter.

The Ark case in no way covers illegals.

[Cletus]

Psssst, the Military will not fire on American's, the only people that think they will never served.

I am not sure I agree with that. The Cunningham survey indicates that some would fire on Americans if ordered to do so. However, the respondents to the survey who answered they would if ordered, were all junior enlisted who are conditioned to follow orders. When the same survey was given to senior enlisted personnel and members of the Special Operations community, the reaction to the questions about firing on Americans if so ordered got a unanimously negative response.

So, I agree that on a large scale, you are correct. It just wouldn't happen. It might however, occur in isolated incidents, especially with young, green troops.

[Cletus]

Objection. Remember May 4, 1970.

https://youtu.be/68g76j9VBvM

As far as I know, there was no order to fire given at Kent State. The first shots were fired in panic and once the shooting started, others fired reflexively.

That is what happens when you use poorly trained and poorly disciplined troops.

[Cletus]

Many fail to understand because they refuse to believe that words matter.

The Ark case in no way covers illegals.

I agree.

[Tahuyaman]

Link is screwy...

The OP is screwy.

[Cthulhu]

Your attitude toward law enforcement and their legal remedies would suggest otherwise.
I have a realistic view of law enforcement. Most either worship them or hate them.

I contend that neither view is correct.

Fear profits a man nothing.

[Dr. Who]

I have a realistic view of law enforcement. Most either worship them or hate them.

I contend that neither view is correct.

Fear profits a man nothing.
Let's put it this way, when faced with what was in your view senseless authoritarianism on the parts of some LEO's, you rebelled. Imposing the requirement to learn how to use weapons and take combat courses as a condition of citizenship would be seen as senseless authoritarianism to a great many people, particularly those who are either religiously or ideologically opposed to using weapons.

[Bethere]

Many fail to understand because they refuse to believe that words matter.

The Ark case in no way covers illegals.

Yeah, right.

How do you explain all of our fellow birthright citizens who are children of illegal aliens?

Once again you are caught arguing against reality.

That's why you can never beat me.

[Peter1469]

Yeah, right.

How do you explain all of our fellow birthright citizens who are children of illegal aliens?

Once again you are caught arguing against reality.

That's why you can never beat me.

There is no SCOTUS case that agrees with you.

[Bethere]

There is no SCOTUS case that agrees with you.

Lol.

[MisterVeritis]

What happens if Trump croaks or the Military coups on 'em before Inauguration Day ?
Now we know President Barack Hussein Obama was on top of the coup business.

[MisterVeritis]

Our fellow posters can explore your folly for themselves:


Children born in the United States of foreigners permanently domiciled and resident in the U.S. at the time of birth automatically acquire U.S. citizenship via the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.



​https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark
"In law, domicile is the status or attribution of being a lawful permanent resident in a particular jurisdiction."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domicile_%28law%29

[Ransom]

Uh. We already experienced a military coup of sorts. And it inflicted destruction and death on the southern United States, something not tenable today.

We're talking biblical proportion destruction here. I just walked a battlefield telling it's story. That cannot happen again.

[MisterVeritis]

Uh. We already experienced a military coup of sorts. And it inflicted destruction and death on the southern United States, something not tenable today.

We're talking biblical proportion destruction here. I just walked a battlefield telling it's story. That cannot happen again.
We had one civil war we called the revolutionary war because it's primary focus was separation from Great Britain. We had a war between nation states we called a civil war, although it was not. Neither one was a coup. Attempting to topple President Trump using Democrats in the permanents bureaucratic State was a coup attempt. Every bad actor should be destroyed, bankrupted, and then either be executed or die in a federal prison.

[Ransom]

We had one civil war we called the revolutionary war because it's primary focus was separation from Great Britain. We had a war between nation states we called a civil war, although it was not. Neither one was a coup. Attempting to topple President Trump using Democrats in the permanents bureaucratic State was a coup attempt. Every bad actor should be destroyed, bankrupted, and then either be executed or die in a federal prison.

Well, that's f'n different! I'm all in! Cept for the executions. :wink:

I am still adrift on this Obama being in on this coup. I am seeing......not confirmed mind you....that Obama was aware of a wiretap on General Flynn by he FBI. As part of a broader coup to bring down Trump. Now.....if that is true......and I ain't saying it is, I'm waiting for more information......then we got a big f'n problem, we do have a Deep State and that Swamp does have to be drained. Siphon away, Donald.

[MisterVeritis]

Well, that's f'n different! I'm all in! Cept for the executions. :wink:

I am still adrift on this Obama being in on this coup. I am seeing......not confirmed mind you....that Obama was aware of a wiretap on General Flynn by he FBI. As part of a broader coup to bring down Trump. Now.....if that is true......and I ain't saying it is, I'm waiting for more information......then we got a big f'n problem, we do have a Deep State and that Swamp does have to be drained. Siphon away, Donald.
If we do not execute the coup plotters then we have failed to protect the Republic. There are about thirty of them, the Dirty Thirty. The head of the snake was Obama.

[usaf81]

I spent 18 mos in a country where the Military over threw the Govt. . The Turkish army literally arrested 650,000 people. They put 230,000 on trial in front of military tribunals, hanged a bunch, and thousands simply went <poof> never to be heard from again. I remember driving into town and seeing a tank in the middle of the highway swinging its turret around. A tank! with dozens of soldiers and cops pulling people out of vehicles to search them, and they didn't ask permission first.

Soldiers everywhere. And you can tell these were their best units cause the best carried Fal FNs. No civil rights to speak of, in fact if you even mentioned them you'd get a blank stare. They might even let you go thinking your nuts for even believing you had any.

I imagine its these idiot nevertrumpers playing with military coup's now. It would actually be worth it just to see the look on their faces when they saw what it actually means.

[bulletbob]

http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/dddt1.gif



here you go common look at the truth how liberals feel


https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/leading-democrat-warns-gun-owners-the-government-has-nukes