Page 12 of 21 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 208

Thread: Renditions continue under Obama, despite due-process concerns

  1. #111
    Educator
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    02-08-13 @ 10:14 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    843

    Re: Renditions continue under Obama, despite due-process concerns

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    It seems that the US, under this administration anyway, is not doing much to win the hearts and minds of terrorists.
    That is a huge, fatal misconception. It is not about winning the hearts and minds of terrorists, it is about the people that might support or even join with them and their means. On that count Al Qaeda has been steadily losing for a number of years. Refusing to back, and even standing against dictators in areas where Al Qaeda might otherwise find ground is another shovel of dirt for Al Qaeda’s grave.

  2. #112
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    23,373

    Re: Renditions continue under Obama, despite due-process concerns

    Quote Originally Posted by LowDown View Post
    Do you mean to say that since Bush did these things it's OK for Obama to do the same sort of thing? If so, then I agree. But let us please try to be consistent.
    No I would not be OK for any President to invade a country with 200,000 of our troops for no reason. No other President but Bush has ever done anything like it. It was shameful and wrong.

  3. #113
    Guru
    Diogenes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Last Seen
    10-11-13 @ 06:52 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,980

    Re: Renditions continue under Obama, despite due-process concerns

    Quote Originally Posted by Henry David View Post
    The Global War On Terror is based upon a huge and magnificent deception. For some number of years I too was deceived, but no more.

    You are still deceived, 11 years later. I would be embarrassed if that were the case for me.
    You have my sympathy.
    "We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress & the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution."
    - Abraham Lincoln

  4. #114
    Curmudgeon


    LowDown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Houston
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,566
    Blog Entries
    11

    Re: Renditions continue under Obama, despite due-process concerns

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    No I would not be OK for any President to invade a country with 200,000 of our troops for no reason. No other President but Bush has ever done anything like it. It was shameful and wrong.
    Well, of course, there was a reason, more than one reason, in fact, and Congress went along with that twice, in fact.

    What about Libya? Do you think that was done for no reason, too?

    "The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." --HL Mencken

  5. #115
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Renditions continue under Obama, despite due-process concerns

    Quote Originally Posted by Dwight View Post
    The contention has to do with International law.
    International law?

    The US is one of the very few countries in the world which acknowledges international law but of course, when there is a conflict, the sovereignty of the US government must take precedence over any international laws. And these conflicts only arise with those countries who tend to be a blister on the backside of humanity. Dictatorial hosts to terrorists would be a good example of this.

  6. #116
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Renditions continue under Obama, despite due-process concerns

    Quote Originally Posted by Dwight View Post
    That is a huge, fatal misconception. It is not about winning the hearts and minds of terrorists, it is about the people that might support or even join with them and their means. On that count Al Qaeda has been steadily losing for a number of years. Refusing to back, and even standing against dictators in areas where Al Qaeda might otherwise find ground is another shovel of dirt for Al Qaeda’s grave.
    Al Qaeda has been losing? How do you figure that?

    The US, under Obama, is fleeing Afghanistan, has abandoned Iraq, and has given up on their reliable leaders in the ME to open the door for Islamism. Why do you think that the Islamists can feel safe attacking an American 'safe house', murder an Ambassador with impunity, and put out bounties on others? They know that the American leadership will respond with confusion and finger-pointing, just as they did.

    Meanwhile, in response to terrorism, the American government introduces more body scanners at airports or sends out another drone to pretend they are doing something serious. This is typical third world stuff. Know your enemy, it's wisely stated, but the goofy leftists won't even admit they have an enemy.

    Osama bin Laden: Strategic genius | Zero Dark Thirty | National Post

  7. #117
    Educator
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    02-08-13 @ 10:14 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    843

    Re: Renditions continue under Obama, despite due-process concerns

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    Al Qaeda has been losing? How do you figure that?
    In large part because their name has steadily become dirt among the public in the arab world. The people yearn to be free, what Al Qaeda is seen for is blowing them up. *shrug*

    The other part of your post is a whole lot densely packed hackneyed nonsense. So easiest I just make a list:
    1) Iraq needs, and wants, to stand [nominally] on its own. Getting out of the way to let them operate as a country was the goal, right? It sure as hell is not abandonment.
    2) Fleeing Afghanistan? Not exactly and not fast or soon enough IMO.
    3) Which “reliable leaders” would that be? Or I should say which dictators?
    4) Islamist attacking and murdering Americans and putting out bounties isn’t something new, been going on for decades now.
    5) Islam, in various flavors, is the prominent religion in the area. Just like it is hellva tough to get elected in this country without at least giving plausible lip service as a Christian (outside of local elections in a few areas) it is going to be such in the arab world. In arab politics it makes absolutely no sense to expect to be able to cluster bomb without hitting a fairly strident Muslim who is remotely popularly electable.
    6) Body scanners? Well yeah, gotta keep alarmists [like you] placated somehow. Not everyone shares your theater tastes, there are other theater and CYA flavors dontchaknow.

  8. #118
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Renditions continue under Obama, despite due-process concerns

    Quote Originally Posted by Dwight View Post
    In large part because their name has steadily become dirt among the public in the arab world. The people yearn to be free, what Al Qaeda is seen for is blowing them up. *shrug*
    Do you have any evidence to support your theory? Certainly the "Arab Spring" was thought by the naive to bring in peace and democracy to the Middle East but we can see that is not happening.

    The other part of your post is a whole lot densely packed hackneyed nonsense. So easiest I just make a list:
    1) Iraq needs, and wants, to stand [nominally] on its own. Getting out of the way to let them operate as a country was the goal, right? It sure as hell is not abandonment.
    Iraq is not stable enough to stand on its own. It will fall to Islamism also.

    2) Fleeing Afghanistan? Not exactly and not fast or soon enough IMO.
    Thats right. they should have bombed the hell out of it and left. Repeat as necessary.
    3) Which “reliable leaders” would that be? Or I should say which dictators?
    Mubarak in Egypt and Gaddafi in Libya. While not ideal from a western point of view they were manageable and know quantities. Nowboth these countries will become Islamic.
    4) Islamist attacking and murdering Americans and putting out bounties isn’t something new, been going on for decades now.
    Then this WOT isn't being too effective, is it? But perhaps you can outline some of the history of these bounties on American Ambassadors.

    6) Body scanners? Well yeah, gotta keep alarmists [like you] placated somehow. Not everyone shares your theater tastes, there are other theater and CYA flavors dontchaknow.
    Im an alarmist? You're not making sense.

  9. #119
    Educator
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    02-08-13 @ 10:14 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    843

    Re: Renditions continue under Obama, despite due-process concerns

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    Do you have any evidence to support your theory? Certainly the “Arab Spring” was thought by the naive to bring in peace and democracy to the Middle East but we can see that is not happening.
    A sampling, although the wider picture entails a lot more:

    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/worl...cials-say.html

    Al Qaeda popularity as been waining for some time, even pre-Obama. Still problem areas, backwoods of Pakistan for example still is of some concern (although they are not really globally concerned). Yemen has been an up-and-comer for a while, it was especially serious concern when that southern province had effectively broken independent. Some places in Africa. It’ll take time but we are doing OK.
    Iraq is not stable enough to stand on its own. It will fall to Islamism also.
    Then we had absolutely NO business going in there. Which may be the case. But it sure as hell was never the [publicly stated] plan to stay, and Iraq people/government want us out. So what do you propose? Invasion and subjugation of the government we help get in place????
    Thats right. they should have bombed the hell out of it and left. Repeat as necessary.
    Don’t you mean “bombed the hell out of it and fled”?
    Mubarak in Egypt and Gaddafi in Libya. While not ideal from a western point of view they were manageable and know quantities. Nowboth these countries will become Islamic.
    Mubarak that had lost any semblance of popular support and Gaddafi the guy with the history of blowing up passenger airlines were not ‘ideal’? They were not our government, we had little to no business putting the effort to propping them up. Although Mubarak we had been helping with aid, even during the Obama years.
    Oh and news flash! They have been Islamic countries for centuries.
    Then this WOT isn't being too effective, is it?
    A data point is not a trend, especially when they are not a direct measure of what you suppose it measures. In short, your metrics are simplistic suck.
    Im an alarmist?
    Absolutely. Likely even a blind bigot.

    Islamist does NOT equal terrorist. Even if they have that wrong tint of skin and a 5 o’clock shadow.
    Last edited by Dwight; 01-09-13 at 03:04 PM.

  10. #120
    Sage
    OldWorldOrder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    10-12-15 @ 12:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,820

    Re: Renditions continue under Obama, despite due-process concerns

    Quote Originally Posted by LowDown View Post
    I am sensitive to the fact that the use of drones saves American lives, but raids don't necessarily result in a lot of people being killed. How many were killed in the raid on Bin Laden, for example.
    In general, though, raids result in more casualties on both sides as compared to drone strikes. Which is the biggest part of why the US engages in them.

    And you have the potential of having someone to interrogate, but they'd have to go to rendition, as I understand it, since they aren't accepting new guests at Gitmo.
    I see where you're coming from, and the assumption isn't bad, but it's incorrect. The reason why Guantanamo was even a thing was because after NATO deposed the Taliban, there was no Afghan government. Once the next government was put in place, though, that stopped being an issue. Dozens of Afghans (the people) are interrogated or debriefed every day and no rendition or Guantanamo is required. Because they're not American prisoners at all, they're Afghan (the nation) prisoners.
    The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected.
    -GK Chesterton

Page 12 of 21 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... 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
  •