General Tommy Franks doubts the U.S. constitution would survive a major WMD attack!

[Chewbacca]

Huh????

Link

Gen. Franks Doubts Constitution Will Survive WMD Attack John O. Edwards, NewsMax.com Friday, Nov. 21, 2003 Gen. Tommy Franks says that if the United States is hit with a weapon of mass destruction that inflicts large casualties, the Constitution will likely be discarded in favor of a military form of government. Franks, who successfully led the U.S. military operation to liberate Iraq, expressed his worries in an extensive interview he gave to the men’s lifestyle magazine Cigar Aficionado. In the magazine’s December edition, the former commander of the military’s Central Command warned that if terrorists succeeded in using a weapon of mass destruction (WMD) against the U.S. or one of our allies, it would likely have catastrophic consequences for our cherished republican form of government. Discussing the hypothetical dangers posed to the U.S. in the wake of Sept. 11, Franks said that “the worst thing that could happen” is if terrorists acquire and then use a biological, chemical or nuclear weapon that inflicts heavy casualties. If that happens, Franks said, “... the Western world, the free world, loses what it cherishes most, and that is freedom and liberty we’ve seen for a couple of hundred years in this grand experiment that we call democracy.” Franks then offered “in a practical sense” what he thinks would happen in the aftermath of such an attack. “It means the potential of a weapon of mass destruction and a terrorist, massive, casualty-producing event somewhere in the Western world – it may be in the United States of America – that causes our population to question our own Constitution and to begin to militarize our country in order to avoid a repeat of another mass, casualty-producing event. Which in fact, then begins to unravel the fabric of our Constitution. Two steps, very, very important.” Franks didn’t speculate about how soon such an event might take place. Already, critics of the U.S. Patriot Act, rushed through Congress in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, have argued that the law aims to curtail civil liberties and sets a dangerous precedent. But Franks’ scenario goes much further. He is the first high-ranking official to openly speculate that the Constitution could be scrapped in favor of a military form of government. The usually camera-shy Franks retired from U.S. Central Command, known in Pentagon lingo as CentCom, in August 2003, after serving nearly four decades in the Army. Franks earned three Purple Hearts for combat wounds and three Bronze Stars for valor. Known as a “soldier’s general,” Franks made his mark as a top commander during the U.S.’s successful Operation Desert Storm, which liberated Kuwait in 1991. He was in charge of CentCom when Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda attacked the United States on Sept. 11. Franks said that within hours of the attacks, he was given orders to prepare to root out the Taliban in Afghanistan and to capture bin Laden. Franks offered his assessment on a number of topics to Cigar Aficionado, including: President Bush: “As I look at President Bush, I think he will ultimately be judged as a man of extremely high character. A very thoughtful man, not having been appraised properly by those who would say he’s not very smart. I find the contrary. I think he’s very, very bright. And I suspect that he’ll be judged as a man who led this country through a crease in history effectively. Probably we’ll think of him in years to come as an American hero.” On the motivation for the Iraq war: Contrary to claims that top Pentagon brass opposed the invasion of Iraq, Franks said he wholeheartedly agreed with the president’s decision to invade Iraq and oust Saddam Hussein. “I, for one, begin with intent. ... There is no question that Saddam Hussein had intent to do harm to the Western alliance and to the United States of America. That intent is confirmed in a great many of his speeches, his commentary, the words that have come out of the Iraqi regime over the last dozen or so years. So we have intent. “If we know for sure ... that a regime has intent to do harm to this country, and if we have something beyond a reasonable doubt that this particular regime may have the wherewithal with which to execute the intent, what are our actions and orders as leaders in this country?” The Pentagon’s deck of cards: Asked how the Pentagon decided to put its most-wanted Iraqis on a set of playing cards, Franks explained its genesis. He recalled that when his staff identified the most notorious Iraqis the U.S. wanted to capture, “it just turned out that the number happened to be about the same as a deck of cards. And so somebody said, ‘Aha, this will be the ace of spades.’” Capturing Saddam: Franks said he was not surprised that Saddam has not been captured or killed. But he says he will eventually be found, perhaps sooner than Osama bin laden. “The capture or killing of Saddam Hussein will be a near term thing. And I won’t say that’ll be within 19 or 43 days. ... I believe it is inevitable.” Franks ended his interview with a less-than-optimistic note. “It’s not in the history of civilization for peace ever to reign. Never has in the history of man. ... I doubt that we’ll ever have a time when the world will actually be at peace.”

[Azred]

If pieces of repugnant "lesiglation" like the Patriot Act can be passed through Congress without massive unrest from the American people he is probably correct. If sentiments like the one where, when polled, a majority of people would gladly surrender some freedoms (such as protection from unreasonable search and seizure) in order to win the War on Drugs he is probably correct. As long as a majority of American people continue to be swayed more by fear than reason he is probably correct.

In short, he is probably correct--in such a scenario the Constitution would be suspended in its entirety.

A friendly suggestion: you might want to download and print a copy of the Constitution for yourself today, if you haven't already done so. [img]graemlins/beigesmilewinkgrin.gif[/img]

[Chewbacca]

I dunno, with so many communities passing resolutions against the Patriot act and major backlash from both the left and right against it, I don't think it has *that much* widespread support. Of course people who are afraid make poor decisions, and with enough fear they may very well give up their freedoms.

We have already lost so much with the fear-mongering propaganda pushed concerning the war on drugs, I guess we could lose alot more in the facing the fear of terrorism. Especially if those fears manifest.

Still, we have faced many national dilemas in our short history, including a civil war, without giving up our constitutional rights. It seems to me we would be letting the terrorists win if we gave up our Bill of Rights as a response to an attack. In that regard, perhaps we have already lost something due to the Patriot act and the way we have treated certain foriegn visitors since 9-11.

[Azred]

I agree with you here. We've not lost our basic foundation yet, which is a good thing.

*sigh* Perhaps it is cynicism on my part, but I think that so many of our fellow citizens are so coddled and, excuse my bluntness, so weak-willed that they will shut themselves into their houses and cower in the closet if they hear "terrorists are coming". Whenever the alert status hits "orange" the grocery stores in this area still run out of duct tape, bottled water, plastic drop cloths, etc. because people buy into the hysteria. They even pull their kids out of school. [img]graemlins/saywhat.gif[/img] No, I'm not joking....

[Timber Loftis]

The constitution need not be scrapped for military rule to occur. The President has broad power to take emergency measures, including martial law. The constitution would be "put on hold," not scrapped.

[pritchke]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: The constitution need not be scrapped for military rule to occur. The President has broad power to take emergency measures, including martial law. The constitution would be "put on hold," not scrapped.

Of course if something is put on hold long enough, it will eventually fall to the back of the filing cabnet and be forgotten.

[Link]

HOW did he 'succesfully liberate' Iraq? Why is that mentioned? Another piece of American chauvinism if you ask me.

[Sir Taliesin]

Pretty gloomy outlook... but I tend to agree with most of it and I really agree with the last paragraph. I don't think there will ever be peace among men until God (or whoever you happen to believe in) comes. We are not a peace loving species.