Utopia Talk / Politics / Biden Betrays the Troops Again

Renzo Marquez Member	Thu Jan 21 20:00:49 http://www...d-troops-vacate-capitol-461220 Not as bad as giving his son brain cancer and then exploiting his death for sympathy but still pretty bad.
hood Member	Thu Jan 21 20:58:56 "Capitol Police asked the troops to move their rest area"
jergul large member	Thu Jan 21 21:12:30 Congress is in session, bro. It may actually be a violation of the 3rd amendment given that 50-100 congress persons live in the capitol when not in their districts. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engblom_v._Carey In any event, it is pretty unseemly to have soldiers quartered in the legislative buildings. Banana republicy. A more worthy question is why the US military has not set up facilities. There has been ample time.
Wrath of Orion Member	Thu Jan 21 21:23:37 Goddamn, Repubtards are seriously butthurt. This is fucking hilarious.
Forwyn Member	Thu Jan 21 22:56:17 "In any event, it is pretty unseemly to have soldiers quartered in the legislative buildings. Banana republicy." Kind of like chilling in parking garages with two bathroom stalls for a brigade-sized unit. But if they're not needed, send them home.
jergul large member	Fri Jan 22 00:49:46 Forwyn Blame military logistics for that. I suggest they start setting up required facilities.
kargen Member	Fri Jan 22 02:19:55 or do as Forwyn suggested and send them home. A few troops at each entrance would be more than enough. Hell at this point the police could handle things like they normally would.
jergul large member	Fri Jan 22 02:49:42 Kargen Well, its not quite normal yet. You still have troops in afghanistan because 9-11. 2 weeks and two days is not that long. But certainly review a troop drawdown as the capitol police are vetted and insurrection investigations move forward.
patom Member	Fri Jan 22 04:30:13 There is Fort Belvoir a hop skip and a jump away. They could bus the changing of the guard troops every 8 hrs. But I believe that the danger has passed. Send them home.
Rugian Member	Fri Jan 22 04:38:28 "It may actually be a violation of the 3rd amendment given that 50-100 congress persons live in the capitol when not in their districts." Rofl, no. The Third Amendment protects against *involuntary* quartering of troops in a person's home. Which doesn't apply here, because 1) the troops aren't involuntarily occupying anyone's residence, and 2) the Capitol is not a residential building anyway.
Senor Marquez Member	Fri Jan 22 04:41:07 I enjoy the drama attached to it. "I feel betrayed" -One of the less than a handful of soldiers interviewed. Btw, did you know I still pretend to be a lawyer on the internet?
jergul large member	Fri Jan 22 04:51:54 Ruggy Depends on how residence is defined. 50-100 congress persons are living in the capitol building. Frankly, it should be an issue. A single people's representative uncomfortable with soldiers quartered in the legaslative building should be enough for them not to do that. Because banana republic. `============= Turns out it was the capital police that kicked them out. I get it. Off duty soldiers milling about in an area under heightened alert is messy. They have been giving the visitor's center as a short term solution. The solution drawing down troops and those left having 8 hour shifts so the soldiers can leave the green zone.
Rugian Member	Fri Jan 22 05:11:35 "50-100 congress persons are living in the capitol building." If they are, they're squatters. The Capitol is not a residential property. And even if you want to argue that squatters have 3A rights (I would say they shouldn't), the NG is not forcibly quartering itself in any congressional offices. That means Engblom v. Carey has no relevance here. Bottom line, 3A is not applicable.
Rugian Member	Fri Jan 22 05:19:42 I do agree that the decision to turn DC into a militarized ghost town is very banana republicy. But there's nothing new about the government using fear as an excuse to stamp down on the peoples' rights. The DC occupation just happens to be an unusually overt manifestation of that.
jergul large member	Fri Jan 22 05:30:59 They are not squatters. Mind the ad absurdium fallacy. There is more to a residence than the room where the cot is. If you might meet someone in their housecoat (which does happen in the halls), then chance are, you are in their residence. 3A is the closest thing that can protect minority legislators from having soldiers quartered in the legislatures.
Rugian Member	Fri Jan 22 05:46:23 "They are not squatters" Yes they are. Unless you can link a source demonstrating the Capitol is a residential property, I consider this debate closed.
Habebe Member	Fri Jan 22 05:57:35 Is Jergul using his new yerm again? "absurdium fallacy. " He never sees the other side of a story, amd its absurdities.
delude Member	Fri Jan 22 08:53:31 Well, if anything, people come up with conclusions based on headlines. So, capitol police requested the guardsmen to move due to logistical issues. Lawmakers found out, expressed their disagreement and anger, mind you it was a bi-partisan expression. Then the issue got resolved. Oh my, controversy!
jergul large member	Fri Jan 22 09:54:59 Ruggy Not, drama queen. Habebe Nah, I regularly remind posters what debating fallacy they are using.
Habebe Member	Mon Jan 25 06:31:53 http://youtu.be/ef0T2ZgXKFk
Habebe Member	Mon Jan 25 06:32:23 It actually seems a little worse than I thought initially.
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: