>When describing the functions of government, legitimacy is irrelevant. Besides being immeasurable, it's typically defined by those with authority.
Fair enough. I hope it is obvious that it was me asserting my opinion.
>Have you considered spying on Americans is military intelligence?
Yes I have. It is a thorny issue. I can even name good reasons that Congress, high ranking gov't officials should be spied upon. I'm not sure those good reasons supersede the potentially disastrous consequences though. Without a doubt though, ubiquitous spying is not compatible with the stated principles of our gov't.
>Have you considered the military may see the public as a threat to national security that may have to be neutralized at a given moments notice?
Yes. There are probably high ranking military officers who believe that moment is now.
>Surely defending our country from anarchy is a legitimate function of the military?
It is most certainly not, at least not without specific constraints.
Fair enough. I hope it is obvious that it was me asserting my opinion.
>Have you considered spying on Americans is military intelligence?
Yes I have. It is a thorny issue. I can even name good reasons that Congress, high ranking gov't officials should be spied upon. I'm not sure those good reasons supersede the potentially disastrous consequences though. Without a doubt though, ubiquitous spying is not compatible with the stated principles of our gov't.
>Have you considered the military may see the public as a threat to national security that may have to be neutralized at a given moments notice?
Yes. There are probably high ranking military officers who believe that moment is now.
>Surely defending our country from anarchy is a legitimate function of the military?
It is most certainly not, at least not without specific constraints.