|
".........Command and control issues of officers and soldiers in the field and at fixed locations is a very different set of situations."
Would this situation then be called "morale relativism"?
Some opine that the mere act of being incarcerated on suspicion qualifies one for the title of "terrorist" and thus a justification to wring out the "truth" from that individual by any means authorized. Would any of the military and/or intelligence forces be so wise as to know that 100% of their detainees are terrorists; recent history doesn't back this up. But there are those who don't care about the distinction and that's worrisome.
I'd imagine that planted evidence placed in someone's home and an anonymous phone call to the authorities might result in a visit by the suits, then perhaps some interrogation and even jail time. For all you constitutionalists, how about some torture to reveal the real truth? BTW, try extracting yourself from these circumstances without access to legal support. Just as morality can be relative, so can the side you're on be relative to who's holding that cattle prod close to your family jewels.
Sherwood
|