The military operation into Venezuela was indeed moral, just, and constitutional. Under Article II powers of the Constitution, the President, as Commander-in-Chief of our Armed Forces, is charged with the protection of our Country.
19 April 1775. On that day, there was no American Army, Navy, or Marine Corps; matter of fact, there was no America. However, there was an understanding that armed individuals could be free citizens who attain liberty; disarmed individuals can only be subjects.
How does the United States deal with non-state, non-uniform unlawful combatants? Those who are part of a defined state's armed services, who wear a common uniform, and openly carry their weapons and arms are recognized by the Law of Land Warfare as "lawful combatants.” And, as lawful combatants, they are afforded what is termed "combatant privilege.” Go back and read about the Geneva Convention protections. However, non-state, non-uniform belligerents on the battlefield, terrorists, are not afforded combatant privilege because they are unlawful combatants.
Greetings y'all, I am praying that everyone will enjoy a blessed Thanksgiving with family and friends. This is one of those special American celebrations, traditions, but it is also imperative that we understand the real nature of why we should be giving thanks.
When an enemy tells you who they are and their strategic objectives, you have two choices: reduce the threat or stupidly allow it to thrive.
What is law to the Marxist left? To the rest of us, the law is the law. To the Marxists, it is whatever they want it to be to maintain control.
I have often said that when tolerance becomes a one-way street, it leads to cultural suicide.
The border is secured, and so shall our seas be, and this hemisphere, of the infiltration and intervention of bad guys into America. This is not some law enforcement operation. It is a combat deterrent operation.
It is racist to construct congressional representation based solely upon race.
How many of you remember the tarmac standoff moment between then AZ Governor Jan Brewer and President Barack Obama? It was about illegal immigration and the fact that the Obama administration was telling Gov. Brewer that it was a federal issue and the State had no jurisdiction. Hypocrisy now?
