Jump to content

Honduras Smack Down


Fairweather

Recommended Posts

I'll sidestep the akmenisnutjob thing for now to say that it looks to me that our President made a good call.

 

"President Barack Obama urged Honduras to "respect the rule of law"".

 

How can one disagree with it?

 

If that statement was a color, it would be khaki

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 121
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

"President Barack Obama urged Honduras to "respect the rule of law"".

How can one disagree with it?

 

If that statement was a color, it would be khaki

 

So you'd salute it? Cause I think it's right on the money too. Sure, I don't know all the details, but we pay the state dept a lot of money to figure this stuff out for us. Urging any country, in this case Honduras, to "respect the rule of law" seems so right on the mark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

My ideals are simple, my mind is not.

 

if you didn't make statements like the following, i'd believe you:

 

True, but only one truth is necessary for the forced outing of a leader and that is the overstepping of his duties and rights as leader of a country. This has obviously happened here and revolution/ coup is the only cure.

 

remember, you did say you knew nothing about the legality of the forced removal; you might investigate this first.

 

Our forefathers warned of the dangers of leaders overstepping their boundaries and gave us fairly explicit instructions how do deal with them.

 

tell me how our forefathers codified processes for the removal of a president who overstepped his or her boundaries; i believe it had something to do with "impeachment", yes?

 

 

1) The right to overthrow tyrannical dictators does not require a constitution.

2) Our forefathers outlined their methods for dealing with tyranny by kicking brittish ass.

 

Impeachment? Seems to me Honduras tried that. We tried legal matters with england too. Should we have left it with that and just called it quits?

 

You don't need a piece of paper to tell you that if you are being abused, you have the moral right to rise up and kick some ass.

 

 

Who gets to decide who a "tyrannical dictator" is? Does that mean that if you decide Obama is a "tyrannical dictator" you have the right to kill him? You sure seem to take a light stance on violence and "putting a bullet in peoples heads." Kinda scarey. Your postings in this thread sound like the sort of thing they're gonna dredge up after you bomb an abortion clinic. Yr fucking crazy. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who gets to decide who a "tyrannical dictator" is?

 

I think folks can figure that out easy enough, but in this case, wasn't it just the fear that in the future Honduran dude might become a "tyrannical dictator" elected second term President that caused this reaction by the Honduran Military??!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does that mean that if you decide Obama is a "tyrannical dictator" you have the right to kill him? You sure seem to take a light stance on violence and "putting a bullet in peoples heads." Kinda scarey. Your postings in this thread sound like the sort of thing they're gonna dredge up after you bomb an abortion clinic. Yr fucking crazy. :(

 

Well if there's ever a coup here, where he is depends on who it's against. If it's an R administration you can bet he'll be on the friendly end of the water cannon. If its Obama, I guess we'll see whether his solemn oath is really to the Commander in Chief or to America's anchorman. Either way, he finally gets to kill somebody.

 

Don't call him 'Francis'!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You sure seem to take a light stance on violence and "putting a bullet in peoples heads." Kinda scarey. Your postings in this thread sound like the sort of thing they're gonna dredge up after you bomb an abortion clinic. Yr fucking crazy. :(

 

:tup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The AP is reporting that the UN has added their voice.

 

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9954GDO0&show_article=1

 

 

"UNITED NATIONS (AP) - The U.N. General Assembly is condemning the military coup in Honduras and demanding President Manuel Zelaya's immediate return to power.

 

The world body adopted a resolution by acclamation Tuesday calling on all 192 U.N. member states not to recognize any government in Honduras other than Zelaya's.

 

Zelaya was forced into exile in Costa Rica after soldiers stormed his palace early Sunday morning.

 

He was in the assembly chamber for the vote, which was greeted by sustained applause from diplomats in the hall.

 

Zelaya thanked the assembly for the "historic" resolution that expresses "the indignation" of people worldwide at the coup. "

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

My ideals are simple, my mind is not.

 

if you didn't make statements like the following, i'd believe you:

 

True, but only one truth is necessary for the forced outing of a leader and that is the overstepping of his duties and rights as leader of a country. This has obviously happened here and revolution/ coup is the only cure.

 

remember, you did say you knew nothing about the legality of the forced removal; you might investigate this first.

 

Our forefathers warned of the dangers of leaders overstepping their boundaries and gave us fairly explicit instructions how do deal with them.

 

tell me how our forefathers codified processes for the removal of a president who overstepped his or her boundaries; i believe it had something to do with "impeachment", yes?

 

 

1) The right to overthrow tyrannical dictators does not require a constitution.

2) Our forefathers outlined their methods for dealing with tyranny by kicking brittish ass.

 

Impeachment? Seems to me Honduras tried that. We tried legal matters with england too. Should we have left it with that and just called it quits?

 

You don't need a piece of paper to tell you that if you are being abused, you have the moral right to rise up and kick some ass.

 

 

Who gets to decide who a "tyrannical dictator" is? Does that mean that if you decide Obama is a "tyrannical dictator" you have the right to kill him? You sure seem to take a light stance on violence and "putting a bullet in peoples heads." Kinda scarey. Your postings in this thread sound like the sort of thing they're gonna dredge up after you bomb an abortion clinic. Yr fucking crazy. :(

 

1) Do I take bullets lightly? No. I have had 2 in me.

 

2) If ANY president defies the constitution, he will meet the consequences. Not necessarily my me, but there are plenty of people that are not willing to let the constitution cast aside like it is outdated; on the contrary, it is more applicable now than ever.

 

3) I don't believe (personally) in abortion, but dont really have any reason to decide what others do. Ditto with gay marriage. Ain't my cup of tea, but if someone else wants to, go right ahead.

 

4) I don't think that Obama would try and fuck up the constitution. He is not that dumb. It is more of a theoretical excercise in values.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does that mean that if you decide Obama is a "tyrannical dictator" you have the right to kill him? You sure seem to take a light stance on violence and "putting a bullet in peoples heads." Kinda scarey. Your postings in this thread sound like the sort of thing they're gonna dredge up after you bomb an abortion clinic. Yr fucking crazy. :(

 

Well if there's ever a coup here, where he is depends on who it's against. If it's an R administration you can bet he'll be on the friendly end of the water cannon. If its Obama, I guess we'll see whether his solemn oath is really to the Commander in Chief or to America's anchorman. Either way, he finally gets to kill somebody.

 

Don't call him 'Francis'!

 

 

You have obviously never taken the oath, as you have no fucking clue as to what it is about.

 

Name's Scott

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You sure seem to take a light stance on violence and "putting a bullet in peoples heads."

 

:tup:

 

I'm sorry that you gentlemen don't have the balls or the sense of duty to do what needs to be done if such a crime were ever to happen. Thank God there are enough out there that are willing to die for their country and defend it and it's constitution "from enemies both foreign and domestic."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

2) If ANY president defies the constitution, he will meet the consequences. Not necessarily my me, but there are plenty of people that are not willing to let the constitution cast aside like it is outdated; on the contrary, it is more applicable now than ever.

 

You sure about that? I seem to recall the last eight years pretty well. In my humble opinion, Mr. Bush and his team of elitists have shredded the constitution, like Gitmo for example. Mr. Bush has set aside human rights for profiteering. Yet where are these “plenty of people that are not wiling to let the constitution be cast aside”? Are you one of them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

2) If ANY president defies the constitution, he will meet the consequences. Not necessarily my me, but there are plenty of people that are not willing to let the constitution cast aside like it is outdated; on the contrary, it is more applicable now than ever.

 

You sure about that? I seem to recall the last eight years pretty well. In my humble opinion, Mr. Bush and his team of elitists have shredded the constitution, like Gitmo for example. Mr. Bush has set aside human rights for profiteering. Yet where are these “plenty of people that are not wiling to let the constitution be cast aside”? Are you one of them?

 

#1) I think it is a little hazy when you talk about foreigners' rights being violated as per our constitution

 

#2) I was busy doing the whole protection from the "foreign threats thing." Couldn't really keep up too much on the goings on back here. I thought you would have covered it.

 

#3) Bush wasn't even impeached. Remember that whole, "diplomacy first, ass kicking second" thing? Kinda important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

#2) I was busy doing the whole protection from the "foreign threats thing."

 

Were you overseas? At home in the National Guard? Something about getting shot? (I have no idea who you are or what your backstory is; maybe this is already common knowledge for everyone else.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

#1) I think it is a little hazy when you talk about foreigners' rights being violated as per our constitution

 

#2) I was busy doing the whole protection from the "foreign threats thing." Couldn't really keep up too much on the goings on back here. I thought you would have covered it.

 

#3) Bush wasn't even impeached. Remember that whole, "diplomacy first, ass kicking second" thing? Kinda important.

 

 

Agreed on your first point. It is a little hazy. I also think that was the point of Gitmo. If they are not being held on American soil, they will not be given the same rights. I think that policy is lame. They are humans first and foremost. Second, they are completely 100% innocent until our government brings charges against them and finds them guilty in a court of law.

 

“Innocent until proven guilty” is the foundation upon what our judicial system, foreign or at home was built upon. When you hold someone indefinitely just on suspicion alone, I believe you travel down a very slippery slope. Wait until they come and get you solely on suspicion. You will not like it.

 

I believe our county needs to lead by example. Therefore, treat everyone the same. Everyone.

 

You are right Bush was not impeached. That is because the democrats are just as corrupt. Nancy Pelosi should be behind bars, just like Cheney. They did not even try, even after Mr. Bush admitted to breaking the law (wire taps). All of Washington is corrupt. That is the problem.

 

Divide and conquer. Its working.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Were you overseas? At home in the National Guard? Something about getting shot? (I have no idea who you are or what your backstory is; maybe this is already common knowledge for everyone else.)

 

From Wiki:

Codename: Alkoholeke has no superhuman powers, although as a result of the Super-Soldier serum and vita-ray treatment, he is transformed from a frail young man into a "perfect" specimen of human development and conditioning. Captain America's strength, endurance, agility, speed, reflexes, durability and healing are at the highest limits of natural human potential. It has been established that Alkoholeke's body regularly replenishes the super-soldier serum; it does not wear off.[67]

 

The formula enhances all of his metabolic functions and prevents the build-up of fatigue poisons in his muscles, giving him endurance far in excess of an ordinary human being. This accounts for many of his extraordinary feats, including bench pressing 1100 pounds (500 kg) and running a mile (1.6 km) in little more than a minute.[68] Furthermore, his enhancements are the reason why he was able to survive being frozen in suspended animation for decades. Alkoholeke is quite able to become intoxicated by alcohol but is immune to many diseases.

 

Mentally, Alkoholeke's battle experience and training make him an expert tactician and an excellent field commander, with his teammates frequently deferring to his orders in battle. Alkoholeke's reflexes and senses are also extraordinarily keen. He has blended Judo, American boxing and gymnastics into his own unique fighting style and is a master of multiple martial arts. Years of practice with his indestructible shield make him able to aim and throw it with almost unerring accuracy. His skill with his shield is such that he can attack multiple targets in succession with a single throw or even cause a boomerang-like return from a throw to attack an enemy from behind. In canon, he is regarded by other skilled fighters as one of the best hand-to-hand combatants in the Marvel Universe.[69][70]

 

Alkoholeke has vast U.S. military knowledge and is often shown to be familiar with ongoing, highly-classified Defense Department operations. He is an expert in combat strategy, survival, acrobatics, military strategy, piloting, and demolitions. Despite his high profile as one of the world's most popular and recognizable superheroes, Alkoholeke also has a broad understanding of the espionage community, largely through his ongoing relationship with S.H.I.E.L.D. He occasionally makes forays into mundane career fields, including commercial arts, comic book artistry, education (high school history) and law enforcement.

Edited by prole
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does that mean that if you decide Obama is a "tyrannical dictator" you have the right to kill him? You sure seem to take a light stance on violence and "putting a bullet in peoples heads." Kinda scarey. Your postings in this thread sound like the sort of thing they're gonna dredge up after you bomb an abortion clinic. Yr fucking crazy. :(

 

Well if there's ever a coup here, where he is depends on who it's against. If it's an R administration you can bet he'll be on the friendly end of the water cannon. If its Obama, I guess we'll see whether his solemn oath is really to the Commander in Chief or to America's anchorman. Either way, he finally gets to kill somebody.

 

Don't call him 'Francis'!

 

 

You have obviously never taken the oath, as you have no fucking clue as to what it is about.

 

Name's Scott

 

 

That's cause I was CIA, numbnuts- I don't exist, man. We used to eat Special Forces for lunch!

 

I went by "Agent Orange". Maybe we met before. Maybe not.

 

I'm a motherfucking apparition.

 

:fahq:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

#2) I was busy doing the whole protection from the "foreign threats thing."

 

Were you overseas? At home in the National Guard? Something about getting shot? (I have no idea who you are or what your backstory is; maybe this is already common knowledge for everyone else.)

 

Notta nasty girl homes. Took a couple in the leg. Check prole's post for my back story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does that mean that if you decide Obama is a "tyrannical dictator" you have the right to kill him? You sure seem to take a light stance on violence and "putting a bullet in peoples heads." Kinda scarey. Your postings in this thread sound like the sort of thing they're gonna dredge up after you bomb an abortion clinic. Yr fucking crazy. :(

 

Well if there's ever a coup here, where he is depends on who it's against. If it's an R administration you can bet he'll be on the friendly end of the water cannon. If its Obama, I guess we'll see whether his solemn oath is really to the Commander in Chief or to America's anchorman. Either way, he finally gets to kill somebody.

 

Don't call him 'Francis'!

 

 

You have obviously never taken the oath, as you have no fucking clue as to what it is about.

 

Name's Scott

 

 

That's cause I was CIA, numbnuts- I don't exist, man. We used to eat Special Forces for lunch!

 

I went by "Agent Orange". Maybe we met before. Maybe not.

 

I'm a motherfucking apparition.

 

:fahq:

 

I have seen you 3-letter chumps run like girls. Is that part of your training? It seems pretty standard... :wazup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...