- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The final word on Bergdahl...from the guys in his platoon
Posted on 6/6/14 at 7:26 pm to Yat27
Posted on 6/6/14 at 7:26 pm to Yat27
quote:
I concur. But come on, Tuba... You don't really care about the Constitution, brah.
I love it.
I've also actually read it, so its not at all surprising I have a different understanding of it from the Tea Party.
This post was edited on 6/6/14 at 7:26 pm
1
Posted on 6/6/14 at 7:27 pm to SpidermanTUba
quote:
That's not really how the Constitution works
And what THE frick WOULD YOU KNOW about the Constitution?
Posted on 6/6/14 at 7:28 pm to JazzyJeff
quote:
JazzyJeff
I thought you were going away.
You certainly made a big enough deal out of doing so.
Posted on 6/6/14 at 7:28 pm to SpidermanTUba
quote:
We haven't hung anyone for desertion since Eddie Slovik. Scores have been convicted of desertion since then, not one execute. You want to execute Bergdahl as a proxy for the President. Its pretty obvious.
Slovik was shot not hung.
Well, if it would make you feel better. We can put them both on trial for treason, and use the same gallows. No proxy needed
Posted on 6/6/14 at 7:29 pm to SpidermanTUba
quote:
We haven't hung anyone for desertion since Eddie Slovik.
We didn't hang him, either.
Posted on 6/6/14 at 7:30 pm to Godfather1
quote:I changed my mind. I do that sometimes.
I thought you were going away.
You certainly made a big enough deal out of doing so.
Posted on 6/6/14 at 7:30 pm to SpidermanTUba
quote:
I've also actually read it, so its not at all surprising
Good! I'll bet you agree 100% with that "shall not be infringed" part.
Posted on 6/6/14 at 7:31 pm to JazzyJeff
quote:
I changed my mind. I do that sometimes
Ah. Drama queen. Got it.
Posted on 6/6/14 at 7:32 pm to SpidermanTUba
quote:
That's not really how the Constitution works, sorry.
Constitution doesn't really apply to members of the military, btw.
Posted on 6/6/14 at 7:33 pm to SavageOrangeJug
quote:
Good! I'll bet you agree 100% with that "shall not be infringed" part.
That part always get overlooked in these type discussions.
Posted on 6/6/14 at 7:33 pm to Godfather1
quote:
I changed my mind. I do that sometimes
quote:
Drama queen. Got it
Posted on 6/6/14 at 7:38 pm to SavageOrangeJug
quote:
Slovik was shot not hung.
It's like these people have never seen the movie...
Posted on 6/6/14 at 7:40 pm to Revelator
quote:
That part always get overlooked in these type discussions.
Not "ignored" - they just somehow believe it means the government reserves the right to employ armed bodies of men - (I mean, they use the word "militia" right there.)
Posted on 6/6/14 at 7:40 pm to Vols&Shaft83
quote:
And what THE frick WOULD YOU KNOW about the Constitution?
I know this is a law under the authority Constitution:
quote:
(a) Any member of the armed forces who—
(1) without authority goes or remains absent from his unit, organization, or place of duty with intent to remain away therefrom permanently;
Intent?
So you've interviewed Bergdahl to ascertain his intent?
I guess it doesn't matter. THe only authority that matters is FOX News.
This post was edited on 6/6/14 at 7:41 pm
Posted on 6/6/14 at 7:41 pm to C
quote:
Constitution doesn't really apply to members of the military, btw.
Yes. It does. They actually take an oath to uphold it. This post was edited on 6/6/14 at 7:42 pm
Posted on 6/6/14 at 7:43 pm to SpidermanTUba
Freedom of speech? Nope
Right to bear arms? Nope
search and seizure? Nope
Shall I go on?
Right to bear arms? Nope
search and seizure? Nope
Shall I go on?
Posted on 6/6/14 at 7:46 pm to SavageOrangeJug
quote:
Good! I'll bet you agree 100% with that "shall not be infringed" part.
I don't think the Constitution has any incomplete sentences in it.
Posted on 6/6/14 at 7:48 pm to SpidermanTUba
It doesn't matter his side of the story. He deserted his fellow American troops in a war zone.
Posted on 6/6/14 at 7:49 pm to C
quote:
Freedom of speech? Nope
Right to bear arms? Nope
search and seizure? Nope
Shall I go on?
Go on all you like. The UCMJ was passed under the authority granted Congress to regulate the land and naval forces under Article I Section 8 of that which you have clearly not read. Its 100% Constitutional. Your assertion that the Constitution "does not apply" to the military is thus rendered moronic, as 100% of the authority of the UCMJ derives FROM the Constitution.
This post was edited on 6/6/14 at 7:50 pm
Posted on 6/6/14 at 7:51 pm to roguetiger15
quote:
It doesn't matter his side of the story. He deserted his fellow American troops in a war zone.
You can't really know if his act qualifies as desertion without knowing his side. Desertion requires intent to leave permanently.
But hey, don't let facts get in the way of your hate.
This post was edited on 6/6/14 at 7:53 pm
Page 2 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News