Military Courts vs. Public courts

[Shikica]

In my opinion the ability of the President to send military related prisoners and alleged criminals (anyone the government accuses, on any grounds of any type of evidence) to a private military court is simply wrong.

The result of this new system has been the expansion of military torture facilities and the indefinite imprisonment of individuals without a fair trial (lest we trust the military courts so much on faith given our history).

What are the arguments for a military court and most importantly what are some books on this specific topic? I think that a court of which its judges are appointed by the president should not be a private dominion of the executive branch. I also don't like the concept of private federal judicial hearings. I understand the arguments of "national security" but our nation is so incredibly powerful and there are no immediate threats to our security, so we should pass that argument aside for the sake of democracy and justice

 

[JakeStarkey]

We have had military court-martial and tribunal procedures from the earliest days. The legislature passes the laws, such as the UCMJ, and the president executes the law. The GOP managed to get the tribunal system passed, evading many of our legal protections, and SCOTUS made it redress and fix its system several times.

Not to worry. The system works well.

 

[Shikica]

We have had military court-martial and tribunal procedures from the earliest days. The legislature passes the laws, such as the UCMJ, and the president executes the law. The GOP managed to get the tribunal system passed, evading many of our legal protections, and SCOTUS made it redress and fix its system several times.

Not to worry. The system works well.

where can i read extensively about this system (revolving around the military courts I mean)? Sorry if I don't take your word for it or the words of my senators ;-)

 

[JakeStarkey]

We have had military court-martial and tribunal procedures from the earliest days. The legislature passes the laws, such as the UCMJ, and the president executes the law. The GOP managed to get the tribunal system passed, evading many of our legal protections, and SCOTUS made it redress and fix its system several times.

Not to worry. The system works well.

where can i read extensively about this system (revolving around the military courts I mean)? Sorry if I don't take your word for it or the words of my senators ;-)

Look it up. There is plenty online. You should not take just my word for it, though you will find it is accurate. Research.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

In my opinion the ability of the President to send military related prisoners and alleged criminals (anyone the government accuses, on any grounds of any type of evidence) to a private military court is simply wrong.

The result of this new system has been the expansion of military torture facilities and the indefinite imprisonment of individuals without a fair trial (lest we trust the military courts so much on faith given our history).

What are the arguments for a military court and most importantly what are some books on this specific topic? I think that a court of which its judges are appointed by the president should not be a private dominion of the executive branch. I also don't like the concept of private federal judicial hearings. I understand the arguments of "national security" but our nation is so incredibly powerful and there are no immediate threats to our security, so we should pass that argument aside for the sake of democracy and justice

Military courts aren't private and also they are called tribunals

Also, the President alone doesn't decide who is designated an enemy combatant and removed from the civil court system.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

In my opinion the ability of the President to send military related prisoners and alleged criminals (anyone the government accuses, on any grounds of any type of evidence) to a private military court is simply wrong.

The result of this new system has been the expansion of military torture facilities and the indefinite imprisonment of individuals without a fair trial (lest we trust the military courts so much on faith given our history).

What are the arguments for a military court and most importantly what are some books on this specific topic? I think that a court of which its judges are appointed by the president should not be a private dominion of the executive branch. I also don't like the concept of private federal judicial hearings. I understand the arguments of "national security" but our nation is so incredibly powerful and there are no immediate threats to our security, so we should pass that argument aside for the sake of democracy and justice

Also, you are stupid.

In MANY of these cases the way we in which we collected data to even make an arrest would be compromised if made public.

IE an undercover CIA agent might end up dead because you thought you had a right to know his name.

 

[Shikica]

In my opinion the ability of the President to send military related prisoners and alleged criminals (anyone the government accuses, on any grounds of any type of evidence) to a private military court is simply wrong.

The result of this new system has been the expansion of military torture facilities and the indefinite imprisonment of individuals without a fair trial (lest we trust the military courts so much on faith given our history).

What are the arguments for a military court and most importantly what are some books on this specific topic? I think that a court of which its judges are appointed by the president should not be a private dominion of the executive branch. I also don't like the concept of private federal judicial hearings. I understand the arguments of "national security" but our nation is so incredibly powerful and there are no immediate threats to our security, so we should pass that argument aside for the sake of democracy and justice

Also, you are stupid.

In MANY of these cases the way we in which we collected data to even make an arrest would be compromised if made public.

IE an undercover CIA agent might end up dead because you thought you had a right to know his name.

Well if the CIA agent wasnt trying to otherthrow a moderate, democratic regime then he wouldn't be in a position to die anyway now would he? But we, as a people, deserve to be aware of our governments evil actions, regardless of the adverse affects on its apparatus of terrorism.