• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Jimmy Carter Accuses U.S. of 'Widespread Abuse of Human Rights'[W:110]

American

American

Trump Grump Whisperer
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
96,085
Reaction score
33,411
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Jimmy Carter Accuses U.S. of 'Widespread Abuse of Human Rights' - Yahoo! News

A former U.S. president is accusing the current president of sanctioning the "widespread abuse of human rights" by authorizing drone strikes to kill suspected terrorists.

Jimmy Carter, America's 39 th president, denounced the Obama administration for "clearly violating" 10 of the 30 articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, writing in a New York Times op-ed on Monday that the "United States is abandoning its role as the global champion of human rights."

"Instead of making the world safer, America's violation of international human rights abets our enemies and alienates our friends," Carter wrote.
Click to expand...

Is there any question that Jimmy Carter has either an agenda or is a loon?
 
American said:
Jimmy Carter Accuses U.S. of 'Widespread Abuse of Human Rights' - Yahoo! News



Is there any question that Jimmy Carter has either an agenda or is a loon?
Click to expand...

LOL he is actually right haha..

If you look at the complaints the US State Department has against other countries on human rights, ... then many of those "abuses" the US commits as well. And then there is of course... GITMO and "enhanced interrogation". The US is no angel when it comes to human rights.. far far far far from it.
 
PeteEU said:
LOL he is actually right haha..

If you look at the complaints the US State Department has against other countries on human rights, ... then many of those "abuses" the US commits as well. And then there is of course... GITMO and "enhanced interrogation". The US is no angel when it comes to human rights.. far far far far from it.
Click to expand...

Well I guess Obama doesn't deserve a second term.
 
megaprogman said:
You are aware that Jimmy Carter has done extensive work in the area of human rights and peace since being president and thus is in a good position to make such a judgement, right?
Click to expand...

Yeah, but this is Americah! No one criticizes Americah!
 
whysoserious said:
Yeah, but this is Americah! No one criticizes Americah!
Click to expand...

Tribalism is one of the facets of conservative thinking. The problem is that this form of loyalty can get in the way of objective analysis and it often does.
 
I have mixed views on the former President's op-ed.

On the issue of FISA and detentions, I generally agree with him. First, the FISA framework for wiretapping is adequate. One should need reasonable evidence before proceeding with a wiretap. If such evidence does not exist, one is more likely than not wasting resources in a very low probability of finding some incriminating evidence. At the same time, privacy is eroded on account of the watered-down standard for wiretapping. I realize some would make the argument that perhaps there's a small chance that some actual terrorist might not be caught. However, the same exists in all cases. There has long been a presumption of innocence. No society can ever be risk free.

In terms of detentions of non-combatants, again I believe evidence is important. If one has evidence that an individual is involved in some way with acts of terrorism, then one should proceed with the appropriate judicial process (probably military tribunals in the case of suspects captured overseas). If a non-combatant suspect is detained, allowing a reasonable window of time to collect evidence would be all right. But detaining someone in cases where no evidence is available should not be acceptable. In this case, I'm talking about non-combatants. Combantants, by their actions, are in a different class and a legal framework exists for dealing with them.

Finally, I disagree with the former President on the drone strikes. The proper threshold is not zero civilian casualties or no drone strikes. The operative legal requirement under U.S. obligations under the Geneva Conventions is to avoid harm to civilians that would be excessive relative to the military advantage expected to be obtained.

I do believe that the U.S. needs to compare actual civilian casualties with expected ones to determine whether its estimates going into the operations have been reasonable. The U.S. should incorporate this information into future planning. For example, let's say the U.S. in the past year expected a given number of civilian casulties per operation, but actual civilian casualties were 50% higher. Then, that 50% increase should be applied to all future operations. That might mean some operations would need to be canceled, because the expected civilian casualties would be excessive relative to the expected military advantage. The numbers--forecast vs. actual--could be refined after each operation with a statistically relevant period of time used for the overall projection.
 
American said:
Well I guess Obama doesn't deserve a second term.
Click to expand...

On this? hell no, but he has made it better.. under Bush it was far far far worse. But on their own grading scale, no American politician presently running for office deserves a first nor a second term.
 
American said:
Is there any question that Jimmy Carter has either an agenda or is a loon?
Click to expand...

I vote loon.

Now I will read the rest of the thread and probably have a good laugh at people that will defend one of the worst presidents we have ever had, showing their partisanship...
 
Carter has a long history of supporting terror organizations like Hamas against Israel, he has also had a history of projecting some fictitious guilt of being American.

Maybe he is sad that Obama is overtaking his crown as the Chamberlin of our times, and is trying desperately to make sure that his legacy of stupidity is carried on.

j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Carter has a long history of supporting terror organizations like Hamas against Israel, he has also had a history of projecting some fictitious guilt of being American.

Maybe he is sad that Obama is overtaking his crown as the Chamberlin of our times, and is trying desperately to make sure that his legacy of stupidity is carried on.

j-mac
Click to expand...



:lamo . . . . that's funny!
 
j-mac said:
Carter has a long history of supporting terror organizations like Hamas against Israel, he has also had a history of projecting some fictitious guilt of being American.

Maybe he is sad that Obama is overtaking his crown as the Chamberlin of our times, and is trying desperately to make sure that his legacy of stupidity is carried on.

j-mac
Click to expand...

Ahh another typical right wing attack when you dont like the facts... attack attack attack!
 
Carter is remembered for being an absolute failure as potus. He has slowly but surely been losing his mind from the pressure of being considered one of, if not THE worst president we ever had. Nothing he says surprises me anymore, he is just a pathetic old man lashing out at everyone as he sinks farther and farther into his black hole of despair and shame.
 
PeteEU said:
Ahh another typical right wing attack when you dont like the facts... attack attack attack!
Click to expand...

No see, you have it wrong....Again....The first part of my post is fact, and the second part is speculation for conversation....

You could have saved us all the pain of your posting attempt, we know how you feel.

j-mac
 
Jimmy Carter is running out of time to salvage his legacy. At this point, it is just to try to not be the door-mat of Presidencies. He wants that honor to be all Obama's. Jimmy is content to just be the door-sill. ;)
 
Oh, c'mon. Carter is a nice guy and bein' a peanut farmer is cool in my book, but he's been wacked-out for a long time. The UNDHR is a very good reason to carry out the drone strikes.
 
Arbo said:
Now I will read the rest of the thread and probably have a good laugh at people that will defend one of the worst presidents we have ever had, showing their partisanship...
Click to expand...

How could partisanship possibly play into this? Carter is attacking the policies of a current Democratic President running for re-election. If we were to be partisan we would be making excuses for Obama. But in this case, Carter is absolutely right.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
Carter is remembered for being an absolute failure as potus. He has slowly but surely been losing his mind from the pressure of being considered one of, if not THE worst president we ever had. Nothing he says surprises me anymore, he is just a pathetic old man lashing out at everyone as he sinks farther and farther into his black hole of despair and shame.
Click to expand...

Lol, remembered by whom? People in their 50s? That's how old you'd have to be to even begin to grasp the political climate of the late 70s. Even if this country was made up entirely of 50 year olds, you're probably more likely to find Nixon/Bush as being the worst president than you are of finding Carter. At worst Carter is considered to be mediocre. Something like his predecessor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom