Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 678910 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 97

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

  1. #71
    Sage


    Thoreau72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    20,285

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Perotista View Post
    Their leaders hated us before we even stepped into their country.
    Really?

    Colin Powell hand carried a check to the Taliban for $43 million in April 2001. I would say gratitude and joy might describe that relationship better than hatred.

    Saddam was our fair-haired son for about a decade, getting all sorts of Commerce Dept loans and weapons including biological and chemical weapons. That doesn't really sound like hatred to me.

  2. #72
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Last Seen
    11-11-15 @ 03:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,523

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

    Quote Originally Posted by TobyOne View Post
    Did anyone read the memo? And if so, can they describe in concise language how they tried to get around the 4th amendment?
    Even if anyone did, it was redacted so no one can know its details. It's the 5th, 9th and 14th Amendments that they're violating (even without the memo), not the 4th. No memo can override the Bill of Rights or any part of the Constitution.

  3. #73
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,938
    Blog Entries
    25

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Henry David View Post
    Really?

    Colin Powell hand carried a check to the Taliban for $43 million in April 2001. I would say gratitude and joy might describe that relationship better than hatred.

    Saddam was our fair-haired son for about a decade, getting all sorts of Commerce Dept loans and weapons including biological and chemical weapons. That doesn't really sound like hatred to me.
    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.
    This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

  4. #74
    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 Bob0627 View Post
    Even if anyone did, it was redacted so no one can know its details. It's the 5th, 9th and 14th Amendments that they're violating (even without the memo), not the 4th. No memo can override the Bill of Rights or any part of the Constitution.
    How about an executive order? Can that override the Bill of Rights or the Constitution?
    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. #75
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Last Seen
    11-11-15 @ 03:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,523

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Ockham View Post
    How about an executive order? Can that override the Bill of Rights or the Constitution?
    Not legally. If that were true, why couldn't the POTUS issue an executive order to assassinate his political opponents under pretext that they're a danger to national security? There's only one mechanism that can override the Constitution, an Amendment, but then it becomes part of the Constitution.

  6. #76
    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 Bob0627 View Post
    Not legally. If that were true, why couldn't the POTUS issue an executive order to assassinate his political opponents under pretext that they're a danger to national security? There's only one mechanism that can override the Constitution, an Amendment, but then it becomes part of the Constitution.
    What I'm questioning is this, and it's because I don't know the inner details of how executive orders are issued or redacted legally.

    Say the President issues an executive order that forbids and makes illegal the sale of any gun or the carrying of any gun by a citizen in a 50 mile radius of every state capital. That executive order is then presented to the DoJ which follows the executive order and enforces with Federal agents the removal of all weapons in that 50 mile radius as well as puts check points at all ingress and egress points of every capital city in America. Yes I'm making this up and yes it's over the top but for a purpose.

    Who over rides that Executive order and revokes it's legitimacy? How is it done?
    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.


  7. #77
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Last Seen
    11-11-15 @ 03:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,523

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Ockham View Post
    What I'm questioning is this, and it's because I don't know the inner details of how executive orders are issued or redacted legally.

    Say the President issues an executive order that forbids and makes illegal the sale of any gun or the carrying of any gun by a citizen in a 50 mile radius of every state capital. That executive order is then presented to the DoJ which follows the executive order and enforces with Federal agents the removal of all weapons in that 50 mile radius as well as puts check points at all ingress and egress points of every capital city in America. Yes I'm making this up and yes it's over the top but for a purpose.

    Who over rides that Executive order and revokes it's legitimacy? How is it done?
    IMO, it's up to Congress to put a check on the President via the impeachment mechanism. Unfortunately, it's not an immediate override and I'm not sure if there is one.

  8. #78
    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 Bob0627 View Post
    IMO, it's up to Congress to put a check on the President via the impeachment mechanism. Unfortunately, it's not an immediate override and I'm not sure if there is one.
    So the only option is impeachment?

    That means that, just like now, if the President has political control over one house in congress, he can over ridge the Bill of Rights and Constitution and survive being President. That to me, is an egregious amount of power given to the President which should be removed immediately. No political party should have that much power in one portion of the government without a clear balance of that power within the other two. The SCOTUS should have the power to over turn executive orders and the Congress should be able to negate executive orders without both House and Senate agreeing.
    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.


  9. #79
    Sage
    Unitedwestand13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Sunnyvale California
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    14,985

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Ockham View Post
    So the only option is impeachment?

    That means that, just like now, if the President has political control over one house in congress, he can over ridge the Bill of Rights and Constitution and survive being President. That to me, is an egregious amount of power given to the President which should be removed immediately. No political party should have that much power in one portion of the government without a clear balance of that power within the other two. The SCOTUS should have the power to over turn executive orders and the Congress should be able to negate executive orders without both House and Senate agreeing.
    blame the rise of the imperial 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

  10. #80
    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
    blame the rise of the imperial presidency.
    And how does one revoke an imperial presidency?
    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.


Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 678910 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
  •