Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 8910
Results 91 to 97 of 97

Thread: U.S. Memo Outlines Rationale for Drone Strikes on Citizens

  1. #91
    Sage
    Unitedwestand13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Sunnyvale California
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    14,909

    Re: U.S. Memo Outlines Rationale for Drone Strikes on Citizens

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    Elect an independent constitutionalist that isn't establishment, impeachment, revolution..........
    Pretend that World War One, World War Two, and the Cold War did not transform the role of the presidency.
    "If you can't stand the way this place is, Take yourself to higher places!"
    Break, By Three days grace

    Hilliary Clinton/Tim Kaine 2016

  2. #92
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: U.S. Memo Outlines Rationale for Drone Strikes on Citizens

    Quote Originally Posted by Unitedwestand13 View Post
    Pretend that World War One, World War Two, and the Cold War did not transform the role of the presidency.
    Pretend that WW1, WW2 and the Cold War were unavoidable.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  3. #93
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: U.S. Memo Outlines Rationale for Drone Strikes on Citizens

    Funny how some accept the imperial presidency as inevitable.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  4. #94
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: U.S. Memo Outlines Rationale for Drone Strikes on Citizens

    Quote Originally Posted by Unitedwestand13 View Post
    Sedition is a crime
    Only if those committing the sedition lose.
    I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on whats being proposed here, hed agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute. - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


  5. #95
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: U.S. Memo Outlines Rationale for Drone Strikes on Citizens

    Quote Originally Posted by Ockham View Post
    Only if those committing the sedition lose.
    Too funny!
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  6. #96
    Sage


    Thoreau72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 09:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    20,267

    Re: U.S. Memo Outlines Rationale for Drone Strikes on Citizens

    Quote Originally Posted by Perotista View Post
    I know and that was all before 9-11. you're talking the 1980's, the USSR had invaded Afghanistan, we were the enemy of the USSR and we were giving weapons to any and all the tribes of Afghanistan to counter that. Giving them to all 18 tribes which the taliban was but one. The largest for sure, but just one. The enemy of Afghanistan enemy was not Afghanistan's friend. But the Taliban's attitude changed later on when they allied with 3 other tribes trying to bring all of Afghanistan and its other 14 tribes which became the Northern Alliance under the rule on one tribe. For a thousand years if not more the tribes in Afghanistan ruled their own little area of that country, not wanting any other tribal leader to rule over but one of their own. Each tribe maintained their independence by a series of shifting alliances with other tribes to combat any tribe who tried to rule over them. Also the Taliban gave UBL and AQ a safe heaven, sanctuary, and a place to train his group to wage their jihad against the west. By 2000 Afghanistan and her people, the tribal leaders attitude toward us had changed drastically.

    After 9-11 when the Taliban refused to hand over UBL or cease in letting him and AQ use Afghanistan as a sanctuary and training facility, we sent feelers to the tribal leaders which made up the Northern Alliance offering our help. Naturally all 14 leaders accepted. For the Northern alliance, once again the enemy of their enemy was their friend. But today we have turn around half of the 14 tribal leaders and their people against us, but that is another subject for another day on another thread as to why.

    Sure we were back Saddam, another case where the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Iran, the U.S. hadn't forgot the hostage situation and anyone who opposed Iran automatically became our friend. It was like we trusted Saddam or even like him, but he was in a war with Iran and we helped him. He was by no means our fair haired boy. He was more of a convenience, a way to strike back at Iran and we really did little to support him outside of some intel and perhaps some minor weapons, no CBR or NBC type weapons. The USSR did most of the weapons supplying. The really sad thing is a misunderstanding between Gillipse if I spell her name right, our Ambassador to Iraq and Saddam is what lead to his invading Kuwait. Saddam had thought Gillipse had said basically that the differences Iraq and Kuwait was having was their problem, not the U.S.'s. Hence Saddam thought he had the green light from the U.S. to do what ever he wanted to do with Kuwait.

    This is about the same as Truman when identifying our sphere of influence in Asia while visiting Japan left the country of Korea off his list. The North Korean's then thought the U.S. wouldn't care if they invaded South Korea, after all Truman just said that Korea wasn't in our sphere of influence or in this case, defense.
    Other than repeating the official party line of the GWOT, I'm not sure what your point is.

    What caused those in the ME to hate us was the same thing that caused the Vietnamese people to hate us--we committed military aggression against their country, and destroyed it in the process. That is illegal under international law, and those responsible for it are guilty of war crimes.

  7. #97
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: U.S. Memo Outlines Rationale for Drone Strikes on Citizens

    Quote Originally Posted by Henry David View Post
    Other than repeating the official party line of the GWOT, I'm not sure what your point is.

    What caused those in the ME to hate us was the same thing that caused the Vietnamese people to hate us--we committed military aggression against their country, and destroyed it in the process. That is illegal under international law, and those responsible for it are guilty of war crimes.
    Very true. Unfortunately patronising Americans won't hold their leaders accountable.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 8910

Posting Permissions

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