That's funny....I don't see Germany or Japan doing what middle easterners are doing to us, and we literally destroyed their entire countries.
And yes, we should have the option for total war. Either submit or we destroy everything in our path, period. Not sure if you had the intestinal fortitude to actually go into combat during the war on terror, because if you did you would understand why our modern approach to war does nothing but put service members in harms way, and bolsters the enemies resolve because they know we won't retaliate withe extreme prejudice.
And I don't see why you are applying 4th amendment rights to foreigners. Citizens of other countries are not entitled to US constitutional rights, so your point makes no sense. You are attempting to justify your point by going off on a random tangent that has nothing to do with what Trump is talking about, which tends to be what people who will vote for Hillary tend to do.
Japan and Germany were a different type of enemy. They were an enemy based on a country, not an ideology. They were an enemy with uniforms and clearer battle lines. In WW2, we didn't have smart bombs, stealth technology, or satellites. This is a different war in a different time with a different type of enemy.
The argument of "well we did it in the past and it worked fine" is about as thoughtless as can be. We also did slavery in the past, perhaps we should apply your logic to that too?
You are operating on assumptions, specifically the assumption that a ruthless war will scare people out of fighting. How do you know it won't just make them fight harder? How do you know if won't just make them have more recruits? I think your premise is flawed, especially when dealing with an enemy of this type.
The bill of rights recognizes what are supposed to be innate human rights, they could be said to exist even if there was no amendment guaranteeing it. Having said that, this means we, as the leader of the free world, needs to abide by the ideals which make us great. Either we are moral and strong, or the whole greatest nation is a facade. The supreme court did rule that the prisoners in Guantanamo do have the right to due process. Again, this is because we are, or at least try to be, a just nation, and try to prevent the innocent from being killed.
Or do you operate under the belief that the right to free speech exists only because it is written on paper?
Do you believe the phrase that it is better that 10 guilty men go free than 1 innocent man go to jail? (in general)