Page 14 of 15 FirstFirst ... 412131415 LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 144

Thread: NATO Uses Attack Helicopters for First Time in Libya

  1. #131
    Guru
    GPS_Flex's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    02-11-17 @ 11:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,719

    Re: NATO Uses Attack Helicopters for First Time in Libya

    Quote Originally Posted by Gargantuan View Post
    No I do not. That was a counter terrorism operation by an elite special operations force. OSS/CIA has been doing things like that since the 40s under every single President. These are not prolonged combat operations involving the deployment of divisions of troops.

    As for disaster relief, that was not sending troops into combat.
    Prolonged combat operations have nothing to do with whether it is constitutional.

    "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."
    John F. Kennedy
    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    It would seem that the constitution is just a god damn piece of paper, to be trotted out when expedient.

  2. #132
    Guru
    GPS_Flex's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    02-11-17 @ 11:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,719

    Re: NATO Uses Attack Helicopters for First Time in Libya

    I’ll be AFK for at least 2 months.

    When I return, I’m sure the hot issues will be completely dirrerent.

    Just don’t want anyone to think my non-response to the BS some of you will post while I am gone in any way reflects on your superb debate skills or common sense. I just won’t be in a position to respond for a few months.

    Godspeed

    "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."
    John F. Kennedy
    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    It would seem that the constitution is just a god damn piece of paper, to be trotted out when expedient.

  3. #133
    Guru
    celticwar17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    4,886

    Re: NATO Uses Attack Helicopters for First Time in Libya

    i dont know what it is about them, but war helicopters look really terrifying and are intimidating... even more then planes/tanks/people/ships ... id say battleships are a close second to being most scary b/c of their size

  4. #134
    global liberation

    ecofarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Miami
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    66,313

    Re: NATO Uses Attack Helicopters for First Time in Libya

    It's because they look like giant insects - with various probes.


    Quote Originally Posted by GPS_Flex View Post
    Just don’t want anyone to think my non-response to the BS some of you will post while I am gone in any way reflects on your superb debate skills or common sense. I just won’t be in a position to respond for a few months.

    Godspeed
    Sir Robin, come back!
    Last edited by ecofarm; 06-06-11 at 04:40 AM.

  5. #135
    Educator

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    07-08-11 @ 01:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    1,235

    Re: NATO Uses Attack Helicopters for First Time in Libya

    Quote Originally Posted by GPS_Flex View Post
    As it wasn’t an attack on a sovereign nation, but an attack on an enemy at war with the US, I think killing OBL in Pakistan without informing Pakistan was constitutional.
    When did we declare war on Osama Bin Laden? Did congress issue an actual declaration of war? No they did not. My justification is that this was a covert counterterrorism operation. This was not a mobilization of US forces.

  6. #136
    Advisor shades's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Last Seen
    07-28-16 @ 03:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    322

    Re: NATO Uses Attack Helicopters for First Time in Libya

    Quote Originally Posted by Gargantuan View Post
    When did we declare war on Osama Bin Laden? Did congress issue an actual declaration of war? No they did not. My justification is that this was a covert counterterrorism operation. This was not a mobilization of US forces.
    the story within the story is how Obama and his minions have been so outspoken against torture of "innocents until proven guilty" but were ok with an assasination of same.
    but alls well that ends well, so moving on.

    I wish everyone would quit with this NATO BS..Its the US acting under the cover of the NATO moniker.

    And yes he has to get congressional approval to send our children into harms way.
    I'M VOTING FOR THE WHITE GUY THIS TIME

  7. #137
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,262

    Re: NATO Uses Attack Helicopters for First Time in Libya

    Quote Originally Posted by Gargantuan View Post
    Prove that US choppers are involved. I have shown you that the only choppers involved are French & British. If you have any proof US choppers are involved, go ahead and post it, otherwise, admit you're wrong.

    Oh my god. Are you REALLY going to even start with a president violating the constitution and making an "empirical" executive branch? Look at the previous administration. Lying to congress about torture, saying they don't have to answer to the legislative, etc.

    As for this President, like I said, I believe that the war powers act is unconstitutional. No President has ever followed it since its enactment. That includes Reagan, your messiah. As for the constitution, I totally agree with you. I think Presidents should consult congress and a declaration of war should be passed before engaging in any foreign military operation. I do believe what he is doing is not constitutional, same thing with any other President who sent us overseas without a formal declaration of war.
    Look, you need to settle down on that kind of rhetoric. If Bush had lied to Congress, and there was sufficient proof, you can bet your ass that impeachment hearings would have ensued. Getting bad advice or the existence of dubious definitions does not translate into lying to Congress. The Dems were still plenty sore about Clintons impeachment, so you can bet your ass if they had had anything real and substantial, they would have gone after him. So rest assured, they had nothing.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  8. #138
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,603

    Re: NATO Uses Attack Helicopters for First Time in Libya

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    Look, you need to settle down on that kind of rhetoric. If Bush had lied to Congress, and there was sufficient proof, you can bet your ass that impeachment hearings would have ensued. Getting bad advice or the existence of dubious definitions does not translate into lying to Congress. The Dems were still plenty sore about Clintons impeachment, so you can bet your ass if they had had anything real and substantial, they would have gone after him. So rest assured, they had nothing.
    The historical documents showed that Harry Reid, nancy Pelosi and many other prominent democrats not only knew about waterboarding but went so far as to ask if there wasnt more they could do to extract info. Their fiegned outrage over 'torture' is pure BS.

  9. #139
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,254

    Re: NATO Uses Attack Helicopters for First Time in Libya

    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty Deuce View Post
    Actually, it's "combat arms" and "combat support arms". Just "support arms" as you attempt to use it is so infrequent that it is not readily understood in that way, and has more relevance as noted by others, that being more as part of a chair, or as a description (and command) as to how a weapon can be carried in a non-aiming position.

    I think you'd be better off with just "combat units" and "support units", or "logistical support" etc.
    I think it would be better for some people--GPS-Flex--to educate themselves a little more on the subject, so as to be familiar with basic military nomaclature.

  10. #140
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,254

    Re: NATO Uses Attack Helicopters for First Time in Libya

    Quote Originally Posted by GPS_Flex View Post
    I see, you called me a hypocrite for no reason, came up with new definitions for "arms” to support your political blood thirst and I’m the one with zero knowledge of how the military works.

    I’ll let you wallow in the muddy hole you have dug. The Army produces some very talented intelligence personnel but you obviously don’t fit that class. Only grunts like you would refer to air sorties as “support arms” and most grunts easily recognize the difference between logistics and combat. You sure you were in the Army?




    I see, you once again prove that you value your conclusions first and follow up by seeking evidence later. You also give evidence that your reading comprehension isn’t very good as I made clear that the first bomb dropped was unconstitutional. Who is the real hypocrite here apdst?


    Obviously you have an integrity problem or a reading comprehension problem but if you are into mental masturbation, go for it.
    It's an age old definition.

    Com·bat Arms


    plural noun
    Definition:

    units engaged in combat: in the U.S. Army, the units that actually engage the enemy in combat, e.g. the infantry, armored vehicle units, or field artillery
    arm 2 (ärm)
    n.
    1. A weapon, especially a firearm: troops bearing arms; ICBMs, bombs, and other nuclear arms.
    2. A branch of a military force: infantry, armor, and other combat arms.
    3. arms
    a. Warfare: a call to arms against the invaders.
    b. Military service: several million volunteers under arms; the profession of arms.
    I'm sorry that you're not familiar with the term, "arm", as it is used in the military. Perhaos you should expend more mental power learning and less insulting and you would be able to comprehend what I'm telling you.

    If you trust that US attack missions ended 2 weeks into the operation, you are more of a tool than I thought. You have 2 more hours to redeem yourself from the dregs of political zombie because I won’t care what you post after 12:00 PST and won’t be available to respond.
    I'm not trusting anything. I'm simply going on the information that is available. If you have evidence that proves that U.S. combat missions are being conducted in Libya, then now would be a good time to post it. If U.S. units are engaged in combat mission, at this time, then I would agree that O'Bama could be be in violation of the WPA. I've yet to see any evidence to suggest that that is so, therefore I'm not going to agree that he's breaking the law.

Page 14 of 15 FirstFirst ... 412131415 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •