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.
"War does not determine who is right - only who is left." - Bertrand Russell
If you want to argue that your approve of:
- secretly authorized remote control killing of terrorism suspects anywhere in the world
- with no pretense of due process (fair trial]
- with no intent to capture the suspect and put him on trial
- even when many of them are not a threat to the USA because they are only involved in their own nation's civil war
- away from a battlefield
- when they are not an imminent threat which could justify a self defense claim
- and with a probability that innocent civilians will be killed and wounded
- and there is a strong chance that the resulting death of innocent civilians will create blowback
But your false claims about my sympathies do not support your argument, they are only a distraction from the truth about your opinion.
Will you still claim that such actions are acceptable if China uses a drone or other means to kill someone residing in the USA because they claim that they are a Tibetan terrorist?
Last edited by Hard Truth; 11-05-13 at 06:11 PM.
"......The tactics used by the Sandinista government to fight the resistance have been criticized by some historians for their suppression of civil rights. On 15 March 1982, the Junta declared a state of siege, which allowed it to close independent radio stations, suspend the right of association and limit the freedom of trade unions. However, it has also been pointed out that the Human Rights Record of the Contras during the same period was far poorer, with documented cases of murder, rape, torture, used to terrorize the rural population. There is also evidence that the Contras engaged in destruction of schools, hospitals, and other infrastructure, in order to disrupt the social reform programs of the Sandinistas. 
At the 1984 general election Ortega won the presidency with 67% of the vote and took office on 10 January 1985. A report by an Irish governmentary delegation stated: "The electoral process was carried out with total integrity. The seven parties participating in the elections represented a broad spectrum of political ideologies." The general counsel of New York's Human Rights Commission described the election as "free, fair and hotly contested." A study by the US Latin American Studies Association (LASA) concluded that the FSLN (Sandinista Front) "did little more to take advantage of its incumbency than incumbent parties everywhere (including the U.S.) routinely do......"
Are there historic revisionists that don't believe Europeans wiped out tribes of Native Americans?
Are there historic revisionists that don't believe disease, starvation or exposure wiped out tribes of Native Americans?
Politically correct types make great historic revisionists. That's one of the reasons why I never believe anything they say or write.
"“If we don’t deepen our ports all along the Gulf — places like Charleston, South Carolina; or Savannah, Georgia; or Jacksonville, Florida…” -Obama