At what point does an 'opinion' become treason? How many more people must die for the democrats to be traitors

Question

The Democrat actions are treasonous. Their political posturing prolongs the war and the death count and their pandering to our enemies helps to embolden out enemies and undermine the war effort.

Liberals, how do YOU define treason? If the democrats aren't committing treason, than I don't know what else to call it. Liberal cowards hide behind the mantle of freedom of speech, but how much longer will we allow them to use that as a shield. Someday, they will have to be brought to justice for their treasonous actions.

Again, how do democrats define treason?

Answer 1

Treason is a very serious matter. It involves openly working against the US government, as in supplying the enemy with weapons, etc. It is defined in the Constitution - perhaps the ONLY crime defined specifically - because it is such a serious offense.

Sedition, on the other hand, could cover less direct actions, such as constantly denigrating the war effort and saying Bush lied, for oil. Our country has crimalized this from time to time. Whether it should, and how far it should go, is of course subject to debate.

I support the war effort.

Answer 2

Treason is an act which puts the safety of the host nation at risk, usually by willful co-operation with an enemy. This is not a liberal definition - this is a dictionary one. The democrats are not helping the enemy any more than the republicans are. They are not sending weapons to the insurgency, they are not supplying the insurgency with money or troops. Almost all democrats vehemently oppose the violence going on in Iraq thanks to them.

One could say that the war in Iraq is treasonous - Iraq had very few terrorists who wanted the US to be destroyed in it before the war, now it's absolutely infested with them. This is putting the US in danger from all these radicals. If the democrats are to be called traitors because they 'prolong the war' (how is wanting to bring troops home prolonging the war?) - I will ignore your 'pandering to the enemy' because it's simply not true - then the republicans are also guilty of treason because they were the ones who put the troops there in the first place.

Before you start the age-old "the democrats supported the war" - yes they did, because the war was a completely different beast 4 years ago. Then Sadam Hussein actually possessed WMD, which could be used against US interests within 45 minutes. Sadam Hussein also co-operated with the terrorists that perpetrated 911. Now it has been proven beyond reasonable doubt (in the US, by a US investigation) that Sadam Hussein did not posses WMD in any large quantity, and he had nothing whatsoever to do with 911. The war has since been unveiled to be based on lies - or at best misinformation - and since then those who do not blindly support the president have woken up to the nightmare that is the Iraq war, and have voiced their opposition to it.

Answer 3

Instead of worrying about opinions as treason, look directly at the white house and the current administration to see actual ACTS of treason and war. Words are words and just that.

You obviously are getting paid to be here. You are not doing that great of a job. The PR firm you get your checks from should let you go.

Answer 4

Regardless of party affiliation, does it not make you uncomfortable when politicians - a week after unanomously endorsing our new commander in the Iraq theater (Petreus)-, then pass a 'non-binding' resolution as a sign of 'no faith' in his mission?
Reprehensible IMO.
If - in your heart - you believe that it is a waste of American lives to go to Iraq, is it not morally repugnant to send them into harms way anyway, because you know it is not politicly expedient to cut off the funding and make a stand on principle?
The answer is , of course, these people put their own political well-being over that of anything else.Including the good of the nation.
Pure and simple.
Is that 'treason'?...whether it is or not, it certainly is despicable.

Answer 5

properly it would not any further you are able to say or do what you like. Whaaa hooo! i don't in basic terms like the belief of miraculous, drawing and quartering yet i think of it may well be super if British people who devote acts of Terror against their own human beings have been charged with treason and deported by skill of catapult! (Sling shot for the individuals interior the objective audience)

Answer 6

Same as the constitution, and speaking outy against the government is NOT treason, and is the very reason that the first amendment was written. How do YOU define it? Seems like you have a different definition, and I would expect that is is different from president to president...

Answer 7

Opinions all fall under free speech..
I may not agree with liberal opinions but they have the right to say what they want.
But liberals also need to accept the repercussions of their free speech.
Thats something most don't seem to understand.

The only democrats that are treasonous are the far left anti American communist sympathizers in my opinion.

Answer 8

Treason in reality is supporting the enemy over your own country.

Treason defined by the Democrat Party is protecting America and achieving victory in the war on terror. That's why Democrats consider Bush a "traitor".

Answer 9

I completely agree. Axis Sally, Tokyo Rose, and Hanoi Jane all over again. Hang em high. And maybe they could have a lottery for who gets to pull the lever. Send the proceeds to our troops and their families.

BTW, libocrats define treason as anyone who says "under God" during the pledge of allegiance or respects our President.

Answer 10

Y'know - most folks would agree that the politicians who send troops into harm's way are more responsible for their deaths than those who think they shouldn't have gone there.