| Sep 8 @ 1:15 AM |
Soldiers vs. Lawyers: Who really keeps us free?
|
|
cosmicdebris62
Posts: 14
|
We hear so often throughout our lives that "the military is defending our freedom" that we never really question whether it's true or not. I posit that it's not true. I say our legal rights exist in a legal document and can only be defended in a court of law ... and soldiers are really only defending the financial interests of the corporatons that sponsor the two major political parties.
What say you?
|
|
  |
|
| Sep 8 @ 2:53 AM |
Soldiers vs. Lawyers: Who really keeps us free? |
|
RareQuestor
Posts: 2,652
|
The court of law only exists because soldiers maintain and defend freedom. If you doubt it, I suggest a visit to Somalia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo or Sudan.
|
| |
|
| Sep 8 @ 7:17 AM |
Soldiers vs. Lawyers: Who really keeps us free?
|
|
cosmicdebris62
Posts: 14
|
The court of law only exists because soldiers maintain and defend freedom.
Platitudes, peacock terms, catch-phrases, and buzzwords will get you absolutely nowhere.
If you doubt it, I suggest a visit to Somalia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo or Sudan.
If in order to make a definitive statement regarding this issue, one has to have visited these countries, are we to assume that you have visited them?
The OP proposes a certain argument based ostensibly on facts and logic. In order to counter the argument one has to dispute the purported facts or refute the logic.
Any response that fails to do so simply adds weight to the OP's argument, for it shows that the OP's argument does not merely stand on its own, but in fact stands up under scrutiny...
In short, I'd be a fool to argue with someone who hasn't challenged a single thing I've said.
|
|
| |
|
| Sep 8 @ 7:47 AM |
Soldiers vs. Lawyers: Who really keeps us free? |
|
burnslikethesun
Posts: 13,027
|
What couldn't find your argument the first time you posted this crap as a blog?
Why state, What say you? and then jump punch the one and pretty much only person that took time to comment?
I would say you're the fool already, for when you ask what others would say, you attack and discredit them with no other merit then your own opinion?
Are you a lawyer? Are you a solider?
Your opinions mean as much to me as mine does to you.
Ya can take your thesaurus and shove it up your proverbial ass.
Good day not so kind sir.
That's what I say.
|
| |
|
| Sep 8 @ 8:59 AM |
Soldiers vs. Lawyers: Who really keeps us free?
|
|
robodad
Posts: 7,823
|
RQ said:
If you doubt it, I suggest a visit to Somalia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo or Sudan.
OP said:
If in order to make a definitive statement regarding this issue, one has to have visited these countries, are we to assume that you have visited them? I take it that you never went to these countries. Reading about it and going twice around the Monopoly board doesn't really give you a very good insight of those countries. I've been to Afghanistan, Kosovo and Bosnia...I don't recommend those places for a vacation.
By your thread, I take it that you never served in the military. Are you involved in the legal system (profession) or were you just arrested a few times?
|
|
| |
|
| Sep 8 @ 9:14 AM |
Soldiers vs. Lawyers: Who really keeps us free? |
|
Gallows_Humor
Posts: 13,677
|
actually they both do...
unlike all the  hard ass military people who just follow orders blindly..
( as they are supposed to....)
someone with a brain has to determine that those said orders are legal..and morally justified..
good topic... 
|
| |
|
| Sep 8 @ 10:51 AM |
Soldiers vs. Lawyers: Who really keeps us free?
|
|
RareQuestor
Posts: 2,652
|
Platitudes, peacock terms, catch-phrases, and buzzwords will get you absolutely nowhere.
That is certainly true as platitudes, peacock terms, catch-phrases, and buzzwords all require a certain amount of intelligence to comprehend and understand. (Quite a few of the proverbs in the Bible, for example, are meaningless to modern readers since most people are no longer shepherds or fishermen.)
If the rule of law was sufficient, then why would we need police and jails? Murder and rape were both against the law in Rwanda, but that did not stop thousands of Hutus from butchering their fellow Tutsis and Hutus in 1994. The slaughter ended only when the Tutsi rebels--the soldiers that you disparage--drove the Hutu militias out and took control of the government. If you think that was an isolated case, then permit me to point out that the same thing occurred in Cambodia, El Salvador and Kosovo (to cite just a few examples.)
I thought it was obvious that law without force is meaningless and force without law is equally or even more dangerous, but I see that I was wrong.
I confess that I am puzzled by your implication that I must personally witness something in order to have an opinion on it. Do I truly need to witness a rape or murder to be outraged by it? Do I truly need to see my family and friends buried alive in order to understand the horror of genocide? Do I need to be Jewish to truly understand the horror of the Holocaust or Cambodian to empathize with the agony that the Khmer Rouge inflicted? Do you? 
|
|
| |
|
| Sep 8 @ 11:03 AM |
Soldiers vs. Lawyers: Who really keeps us free? |
|
eastham
Posts: 7,914
|
I would concur that they both do in their own way. Despite their bad press, since the days of Shakespeare, attorneys perform a valuable service. Without attorneys there would be no Miranda warning (a practical protection of our Constitutional rights against self-incrimination and privacy) and they ensure that our third branch of government (the Judicial branch) is an equal partner with the Executive and Legislative Branch.
|
| |
|
| Sep 8 @ 4:23 PM |
Soldiers vs. Lawyers: Who really keeps us free?
|
|
burnslikethesun
Posts: 13,027
|
Soldiers vs. Lawyers: Who really keeps us free? We do.
|
|
| |
|
| Sep 8 @ 4:35 PM |
Soldiers vs. Lawyers: Who really keeps us free? |
|
CowboyX
Posts: 613
|
Soldiers vs. Lawyers: Who really keeps us free?
For one that seem to be versed in logic, I assume that you are aware of the fact that your question is a false dilemma.
|
| |
|
| Sep 11 @ 1:23 AM |
Soldiers vs. Lawyers: Who really keeps us free?
|
|
Angel54214
Posts: 18,201
|
It's all in the U.S. Constitution...
Article II; Section II:
The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States; he may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices, and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.
And in "Legal" formation; the Supreme Court's duty is to support and see to that the Constutution is upheld.
|
|
| |
|
| Sep 11 @ 5:26 PM |
Soldiers vs. Lawyers: Who really keeps us free? |
|
Loreli
Posts: 25,413
|
Soldiers defend your freedom.
Lawyers defend your innocence.
Even when you aren't.
|
| |
|
| Sep 14 @ 11:10 AM |
Soldiers vs. Lawyers: Who really keeps us free?
|
|
twotall911
Posts: 13,048
|
I keep myself free
|
|
| |
|
| Sep 14 @ 11:35 AM |
Soldiers vs. Lawyers: Who really keeps us free? |
|
Gallows_Humor
Posts: 13,677
|
 ,,,, actually..this is not true...
Lawyers defend your innocence.
Even when you aren't.
it is not a lawyers job to set a guilty man free or decide innocence or guilt..... but to make sure that a person accused ... has due process...and is not being tarred and feathered...
that is why a defense lawyer never asks...
"did you do it...?:
and never tries to prove innocence.. but instead tries to explain away the accusations to where there was no laws broken......
(and the DA is supposed to be representing..the people's interest..and not his own...)
|
| |
|
| Sep 14 @ 11:51 AM |
Soldiers vs. Lawyers: Who really keeps us free?
|
|
Loreli
Posts: 25,413
|
Lawyers defend your innocence. Even when you aren't. it is not a lawyers job to set a guilty man free or decide innocence or guilt..... but to make sure that a person accused ... has due process...and is not being tarred and feathered... that is why a defense lawyer never asks... "did you do it...?: and never tries to prove innocence.. but instead tries to explain away the accusations to where there was no laws broken......
You just reworded what I said
I said DEFEND, and I have heard of attorneys asking "did you do it", then they drop the case, or move forward to see that has due process...and is not being tarred and feathered...
|
|
| |
|
| Sep 14 @ 6:16 PM |
Soldiers vs. Lawyers: Who really keeps us free? |
|
Gallows_Humor
Posts: 13,677
|
............
|
| |
|
| Sep 14 @ 6:24 PM |
Soldiers vs. Lawyers: Who really keeps us free?
|
|
Loreli
Posts: 25,413
|
If an attorney is told "yes I did it", they can walk, or defend that person, innocent or not. In a different manner, at that point.
|
|
| |
|
| Sep 14 @ 6:34 PM |
Soldiers vs. Lawyers: Who really keeps us free? |
|
SweetNapaGuy
Posts: 8,528
|
They can't, however, knowingly put someone on the stand if the witness will have to lie. They can get in serious trouble suborning perjury. (At least, if "Law & Order" is any guide to actual courtroom procedures.  )
|
| |
|
| Sep 14 @ 6:41 PM |
Soldiers vs. Lawyers: Who really keeps us free?
|
|
Loreli
Posts: 25,413
|
I know...but if they find out one is guilty, then they plea bargain, or settle out.
|
|
| |
|
| Sep 14 @ 7:53 PM |
Soldiers vs. Lawyers: Who really keeps us free? |
|
bardnsage
Posts: 1,171
|
.,,,, to defend the constitution against all enemies, forgin and domestic,,,,
......seems like both are required.
If in order to make a definitive statement regarding this issue, one has to have visited these countries, are we to assume that you have visited them?
No you don't. The news accounts are adequate for the purpose of your arguement.
But,,, if you really need that first hand account,, I've been there. 1991 through 2008 on various projects. Somalia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Sudan, Etheopia, Uganda, Sierra Leone,,,,
and I can tell you, the news accounts fall far short of painting the entire picture. It's highly sanitized, highly censored, and highly edited,,,, but it still hints to horrors that occured there.
But to your argument,,, even on a domestic front,,, a lawyer can keep another law abiding entity from taking your individual freedoms, but a wife beater will walk right through a restraining order. They tend to pause at a member of the armed forces or the law enforcement community,,,, or even a pissed off relative with a shotgun.
In addition, the military has a variety of missions,,, of which some are domestic, such as riot control and natuural dissaster response,,, which can effect the freedoms of an individual.
As to your argument about defending the interests of corporations,,, ask anyone on the unemployment line if the loss of their personal corporate sponser has effected their "freedoms".
|
| |
|
|
|
|