tvashtarkatena Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 If the US can target a citizen with a Hellfire, it can arrest and try him... sure can't do it as easily, and i prefer the predator approach to the take over the whole fucking country to put a base in every village idea... As I mentioned before, that is a false framing of the options, however many times it's been parroted in the media rags. There were always more than these two options available in this case. And doing what's 'most convenient' isn't that great a reason for violating our most basic rule of law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivan Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Clearly, the government invoked the 'easier to ask forgiveness' principle in this case. We all do it. We don't all do it after killing someone, however. Is that the way we want our government to operate...in the eyes of the rest of the world, no less? So much for being the beacon of liberty and all that PR rot. Countries, like people, with true balls stand by their most basic principles even when they're scared or threatened. That's real strength. That's true honor. That's playing the long game. your mistake then is thinking we ever were a nation of good and honorable people, and not a self-centered buncha pricks w/ a penchant for bullshit! tickles my heart to see you n' bill on the same page though, if only for a few seconds Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Somebody needs to kit those Predators with a 'drop net' accessory. Problem solved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 I don't look where the puck is, I look where the puck is going to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 LULZ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 I'll tell ya, Jefferson may have been kind of a back stabbing prick in a lot of ways, but he was probably right in one sense: The feds really do suck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 I'm giving a talk to about 100 high schoolers on civil liberties since 911. This should make for a spicy 'current events' topic! Give a talk to a mostly Saudi women ESL audience the other day on freedom of speech. I made them pretend they were high school principals who had to decide whether or not to allow certain T shirts to be worn at school. "Bong hits 4 Jesus" got unanimous 'no's - too offensive to religion. "George Bush: Chicken Hawk" got unanimous 'OK's I had to explain what a bong was, though. Fortunately, the word 'hookah' was a familiar synonym. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 FYI: the supreme court decided along the very same lines in those two cases. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivan Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 FYI: the supreme court decided along the very same lines in those two cases. makes sense, like saudi women, they too wear burqas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivan Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 (edited) Somebody needs to kit those Predators with a 'drop net' accessory. Problem solved. the final irony will be when the predators become self-aware and begin targeting the CIA-types operating them naw...they're mostly an evil concept - the easier we make it to kill people, the harder to resist the temptation to abuse the power to do so - that chewing cocoa leaf vs snorting coke thing... Edited October 7, 2011 by ivan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JosephH Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Which is the more treasonous abuse of executive power: a) president assassinating U.S. citizens or b) president killing thousands of U.S. citizens (troops) in a pre-emptive war started on the basis of lies and manufactured intelligence? If you're going to go after Obama for utilizing policy and powers established by Bushco, then you'd have to go after Bushco for any number of treasonous acts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Would you prefer that we risk dozens of lives to capture him, allow his to plead his case in a court wasting millions while lawyers mire the case in semantics for two years so we can put him in jail for the rest of his life in maximum security solitary confinement? YES Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Would you prefer that we risk dozens of lives to capture him, allow his to plead his case in a court wasting millions while lawyers mire the case in semantics for two years so we can put him in jail for the rest of his life in maximum security solitary confinement? YES So it's all down to money, huh? Amazing how cheap some of us will sell our Constitional principles. But we're all about the money...the rest of the world knows that by now. If the govt has a good case against him, they'll win it. If not...they shouldn't be in the biz of executing him, no? And as far as risking lives go...last time I checked, the draft was still inactive. Don't want the job? Don't sign up for it. Signed up for it and don't wanna do it? Well, cry me a river. The job you signed up for is to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. Do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akhalteke Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 And last time I checked, the US wasn't in the business of summarily executing its citizens for treason. There's usually a trial involved. If the US can target a citizen with a Hellfire, it can arrest and try him...and maintain the rule of law rather than what essentially is a monarchy. Says you. Do you have any idea the amount of dry holes we have had because of host nation leaks? How many times do you think we knew where bin Laden was before we killed him? Give you a hint, a whole lot more than 1. Speaking of bin Laden, should we have captured him instead of "assassinating" him? Have you any idea the amount of personnel/risk that an HVT capture mission presents? This is not the first and it will not be the last. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 A lawyer's primer: If you don't have the law, you argue the facts; if you don't have the facts, you argue the law; if you have neither the facts nor the law, then you argue the Constitution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akhalteke Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 So, the man who was the regional commander to Al Qaeda, you know, our enemy is not fair game because he was an American? I am sure Walker was just a tourist in Southern Afghanistan partying it up for spring break too. Why have you not argued for other Al Qaeda commanders that were killed? What is the difference? Al Qaeda is an international terrorist agency with no regards to sovereignty or international law. By assuming such a high role in this agency is and of itself an act of war and a statement that surely negates protection as an American. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 So, the man who was the regional commander to Al Qaeda, you know, our enemy is not fair game because he was an American? I am sure Walker was just a tourist in Southern Afghanistan partying it up for spring break too. Why have you not argued for other Al Qaeda commanders that were killed? What is the difference? Al Qaeda is an international terrorist agency with no regards to sovereignty or international law. By assuming such a high role in this agency is and of itself an act of war and a statement that surely negates protection as an American. there were plenty of morons whining about OBL's assassination as well Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akhalteke Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Would you prefer that we risk dozens of lives to capture him, allow his to plead his case in a court wasting millions while lawyers mire the case in semantics for two years so we can put him in jail for the rest of his life in maximum security solitary confinement? YES So it's all down to money, huh? Amazing how cheap some of us will sell our Constitional principles. But we're all about the money...the rest of the world knows that by now. If the govt has a good case against him, they'll win it. If not...they shouldn't be in the biz of executing him, no? And as far as risking lives go...last time I checked, the draft was still inactive. Don't want the job? Don't sign up for it. Signed up for it and don't wanna do it? Well, cry me a river. The job you signed up for is to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. Do it. Its not money, capturing an enemy HVT is a huge operation usually necessitating the leaders of the country the mission will take place. This means leaks are likely and the chance for the mission even going is unlikely and success a great improbability. I, for one, am glad that I wasn't called to conduct that raid. Dissapointment or death would be the only two options that I would face. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivan Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Speaking of bin Laden, should we have captured him instead of "assassinating" him? Have you any idea the amount of personnel/risk that an HVT capture mission presents? uh, the scene that was so thoroughly described of his execution made it seem pretty damn clear they could have just as easily invited the bearded gentleman onto the chopper and left his porn stash behind instead Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivan Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 there were plenty of morons whining about OBL's assassination as well it's moronic to be concerned your government might be abusing its power to take away the most important right its citizens enjoy, the right to life? it IS possible to disagree w/ someone for reasons other than that they're stupid, right? i haven't been up in arms over osama's death or this new guy either, but i do think it's troubling and the folks of this country should keep an eye on it and keep discussing it, if for no other reason than to forestall the danger we all must sense, that the government do these things routinely, w/ no oversight, and to our own citizens for less than perfect reasons. you can, after all, walk a long time on a slippery slope w/ crampons and an axe, and get cocky as hell about the old adage and warninig, only to suffer the fate you thought so silly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 it IS possible to disagree w/ someone for reasons other than that they're stupid, right? ask your best buddy - you never seem to call him on this point Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivan Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 it IS possible to disagree w/ someone for reasons other than that they're stupid, right? ask your best buddy - you never seem to call him on this point nonsense - i told that ole'boy plenty of times, but more commonly in person 'cuz he's actually pretty restrained 'round these parts - he listens about as well as everybody else around here at any rate, tvash's argument is a strong one, and the purest. i'm not sold on it heart and soul, mostly b/c i'm deep cynic, but i'm plenty willing to accept that my world-view is fucked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 it IS possible to disagree w/ someone for reasons other than that they're stupid, right? ask your best buddy - you never seem to call him on this point nonsense - i told that ole'boy plenty of times, but more commonly in person 'cuz he's actually pretty restrained 'round these parts - he listens about as well as everybody else around here at any rate, tvash's argument is a strong one, and the purest. i'm not sold on it heart and soul, mostly b/c i'm deep cynic, but i'm plenty willing to accept that my world-view is fucked. For me OBL's assassination was anticlimatic. Why now? On a human/emotional level I felt sadness for a life he chose and having to die a miserable, dog's death. But, OTOH, I am not going to go on some crusade about how this action is somehow beneath the US, unconstitutional, or some huge tragedy indicating our nation's abandonment of some pure, idealistic principles (that, as you pointed out, we never adhered to) or imminent demise and descent into totalitarianism (as Bill alludes to). This latest killing falls in the same category as OBL's in my view - not much difference, really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Al Qaeda is an international terrorist agency with no regards to sovereignty or international law. Did you get this right from Fox News? Do you really believe there is such thing as Al Qaeda? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 For me OBL's assassination was anticlimatic. Me too....especially since he died 10 years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.