re: #150 avanti

Did you guys read the story about the discussion of using troops in the USA to arrest terrorist suspects ? I’d like a conservatives take on on that test of the constitution.

troops.

Complicated, and depends upon the underlying assumptions. Remember that this is an event which was considered and did NOT occur.
We seem now to be prosecuting the Overseas Contingency Operation as on article, and the rest is all law enforcement, which I thought had been thoroughly discredited on morning in New York City.
Oh, well, there’s always next time to get serious.
If domestic terrorism with international (overtones, connections, communications, confluence of effort) is to be a law enforcement matter, then of course PC forbids the employment of troops. If it is insteead a matter of war, then it becomes possible but problematic. And I don’t think it gets any less problematic until the bad guys are on the move, weapons up. At which point it becomes pretty simple, if taken on a wartime footing.
It is the sensitive dependence upon the underlying assumptions which caused us to shift from a criminal to a military model for dealing with terrorism, especially after seeing clearly the effects of the Gorelick wall, even if the report she co-authored didn’t exactly reflect it.