Quote:
Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck
“The CAP is merely an agreement between the U.S. and Canada where Canadian troops will assist the states when asked,” said LTC Cornelio. “They are not intended to be used for law enforcement purposes.”
|
Just a quick comment on this:
This line of thinking is in my opinion stupid, ignorant of history and as such extremely dangerous. (Unfortunately it's also common.)
First of all, you can never know what the intentions of others are. History is full of examples where deals or laws were made supposedly without Intent X, and immediately or soon after used exactly and specifically for X.
As an example, an internet censorship law was recently passed here in Finland. It was sold on the premise of fighting child pornography in the internet, in a truly classical "think of the children" tactic. Those for the law were adamant that the law was not intended to be used to suppress uncomfortable criticism or censor legal material.
Yet it was immediately used to shut down websites that critiqued the actions of the Finnish central police, plus numerous gay sites.
Second, if you make an agreement or a law for an extended period of time, there's no way to be sure what the next people in power will use them for, or the ones after that. Loosely written laws are especially dangerous, because if you write enough of them, over time you create a system where anything is legal for those with money and power.
Anyone talking about what a law or an agreement is intended or not intended for is basicly counting on the goodness of men. We all know this is foolish, and laws and international agreements are written specifically because people have learned that you can't trust intentions.
Everything needs to be written down, specifically, as intended, and so that it can not be (easily) used for other purposes. It sucks, but that's life.