• 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!

Renditions continue under Obama, despite due-process concerns

Do you understand that these people do no qualify for treatment as prisoners of war? That they have no rights? Have you read the Geneva Conventions?

Designed for war between countries. So, it's kind of silly to pretend these are soldiers as written in the GC. However, plain criminals don't quite work either. Still, the idea us to follow some rule of law and not to treat anyone as if there were no laws. Laws largely govern our behavior as much as anything else.
 
So... you conservative lot are now against renditions but under Bush you were for them?

And for the record... I passionately believe it is a crime what the US is doing and have been doing. Obama and his administration should be ashamed .. but then again they are just using the tools that the Bush administration put in place.

No...he's pointing out that under Bush, the Libbos were foaming at the mouth about it; now that The Messiah is in charge, they don't give a ****.

Why aren't the Libbos calling for Obama's imprisonment over this, like they were when Bush was the prez? COuld it be because they didn't really give **** and were creating political dinner theater, just to try and win an election? Libbos lack principles and this is just more evidence of that.
 
However, I see nothing about rendition. Do you?

While it doesn't speak to renditions directly, as I stated in the post you just quoted, the issues and subjects are close enough that I doubt the numbers are very different.
 
No...he's pointing out that under Bush, the Libbos were foaming at the mouth about it; now that The Messiah is in charge, they don't give a ****.

Why aren't the Libbos calling for Obama's imprisonment over this, like they were when Bush was the prez? COuld it be because they didn't really give **** and were creating political dinner theater, just to try and win an election? Libbos lack principles and this is just more evidence of that.

I think I answered that earlier. :coffeepap
 
While it doesn't speak to renditions directly, as I stated in the post you just quoted, the issues and subjects are close enough that I doubt the numbers are very different.

I'm not convinced. Torture and rendition (related topics) are very different than both.
 
The article concerning closing gitmo as democrats being forgiving. I think that is right. Most understand the fear mongering that accompanied his effort to close the rishon.

as the first article makes clear, a majority support the policy
 
I think I answered that earlier. :coffeepap

You answered with lip service. Why didn't you start this thread, expressing outrage and calling for Obama's prosecution for violating international law, like I'm sure you did when Bush was doing it?
 
I'm not convinced. Torture and rendition (related topics) are very different than both.

It speaks two two issues that are deeply identified with the rendition program and that were also vehemintly opposed to by liberals under bush


If you want to simply ignore that, then there is little point in further wasting time trying to discuss the subject
 
as the first article makes clear, a majority support the policy

In the context of being forgiving, knowing what transpired. Polls are limited to begin with. A yes or no vote is always attached to some rationale.
 
You answered with lip service. Why didn't you start this thread, expressing outrage and calling for Obama's prosecution for violating international law, like I'm sure you did when Bush was doing it?

It's been discussed before, and I've spoke against it before. Not new here at all.

Btw, how many threads do I start on anything?
 
It speaks two two issues that are deeply identified with the rendition program and that were also vehemintly opposed to by liberals under bush


If you want to simply ignore that, then there is little point in further wasting time trying to discuss the subject

I'm not ignoring it at all. I just don't accept that liberals support rendition. I am highly doubtful. Nor do I think either is equivalent to rendition.

Like I said, I am distrusted by the drone strike support.
 
In the context of being forgiving, knowing what transpired. Polls are limited to begin with. A yes or no vote is always attached to some rationale.

We never see you knashing the teeth like I'm sure you did when Bush was doing the same thing. Hypocritical much?
 
I'm not ignoring it at all. I just don't accept that liberals support rendition. I am highly doubtful. Nor do I think either is equivalent to rendition.

Like I said, I am distrusted by the drone strike support.

Libbos support anything that Obama does; or at least tolerate it. They sure as hell don't hold Obama to the same standard they held Bush to.
 
Libbos support anything that Obama does; or at least tolerate it. They sure as hell don't hold Obama to the same standard they held Bush to.

He hasn't exactly done what bush did. He didn't invade and occupy two countries,one on a pretext. He has not tried to rename torture. He is leaving both Iraq and Afghanistan. So there are real differences.
 
He hasn't exactly done what bush did. He didn't invade and occupy two countries,one on a pretext. He has not tried to rename torture. He is leaving both Iraq and Afghanistan. So there are real differences.

We're talking about renditions. Wanna stick to the subject?
 
We're talking about renditions. Wanna stick to the subject?

I am. As noted earlier, Bush incited anger because if not one single issue (though Iraq was the major straw that broke the back so to speak), but a body of work that was more than deserving of sustain. Picking single issues as if they stand alone misses the point.
 
I am. As noted earlier, Bush incited anger because if not one single issue (though Iraq was the major straw that broke the back so to speak), but a body of work that was more than deserving of sustain. Picking single issues as if they stand alone misses the point.


Hmmm....Sounds like a typical responsibility shift to me...Is Bush President today? Is Bush pulling Obama's strings? All you do seemingly is blame everything on Bush, and make excuses for Obama.
 
Hmmm....Sounds like a typical responsibility shift to me...Is Bush President today? Is Bush pulling Obama's strings? All you do seemingly is blame everything on Bush, and make excuses for Obama.

Read again for comprehension. It's an explanation on why different things are not treated like they are the same. It's the topic of the thread.
 
Read again for comprehension. It's an explanation on why different things are not treated like they are the same. It's the topic of the thread.

Do us both a favor, and stop baiting people. And no, you are IMHO, just deflecting blame like so many other liberals.
 
Do us both a favor, and stop baiting people. And no, you are IMHO, just deflecting blame like so many other liberals.

Again, not baiting, but you were off again.
 
That they have no rights?

"We hold these truths to be self-evident..."

It's nice to hear you admit that you believe there are people who have no rights, though.
 
Hmmm....Sounds like a typical responsibility shift to me...Is Bush President today? Is Bush pulling Obama's strings? All you do seemingly is blame everything on Bush, and make excuses for Obama.

Here's your misreading j. I'm having a conversation as to why Obama isn't treated completely like Bush. I didn't bring up Bush, as you indicate (a misreading on your part), but merely answer the question to explain the differences. Nothing is being shifted. Nor is any excuse being made as I have noted that I believe Obama is wrong, should not still be continuing with rendition.

So you see, your response is not directed at the actual conversation, but what I can best term a misreading.
 
Back
Top Bottom