• 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!

Obama's Secret Kill List

TheDemSocialist

Gradualist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
34,951
Reaction score
16,311
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
The New York Times revealed this week that President Obama personally oversees a "secret kill list" containing the names and photos of individuals targeted for assassination in the U.S. drone war. According to the Times, Obama signs off on every targeted killing in Yemen and Somalia and the more complex or risky strikes in Pakistan. Individuals on the list include U.S. citizens, as well teenage girls as young as 17 years old. "The President of the United States believes he has the power to order people killed -- in total secrecy, without any due process, without transparency or oversight of any kind,"




Wow... Well civil liberties i guess is just thrown out of the door. How has this not gone to the USSC? Is our country really taking this ****ing road?

Thoughts?
Comments?
Response?
 
... individuals targeted for assassination in the U.S. drone war ...
this actually constitutes progress
it is a deliberate effort to avoid collateral casualties in the conduct of war
 
WOW. Obama's personal hit list. I wonder if Romney is on it, or the Fox news staff? Hmm...
 
I think the American people are asking for it because "stupid is cool".

Those who don't conform to mob justice democracy deserve to get drone bombed by the same American people.

What do you expect from a rat race full of sheeple?
 
this actually constitutes progress
it is a deliberate effort to avoid collateral casualties in the conduct of war

Are you SURE that you are not on that list? You wouldn't know until... Oh well, you may never hear the round that gets you. ;-)
 
Are you SURE that you are not on that list? You wouldn't know until... Oh well, you may never hear the round that gets you. ;-)

and when that happened, i wouldn't have the capacity to actually care

but i have reason to believe, since i am not at war with my country, to believe my name has no reason to appear on that list
assange, probably not so much
 
The Kill List is the new Star Chamber.

"The Star Chamber (Latin: Camera stellata) was an English court of law that sat at the royal Palace of Westminster until 1641. It was made up of Privy Counsellors, as well as common-law judges and supplemented the activities of the common-law and equity courts in both civil and criminal matters. The court was set up to ensure the fair enforcement of laws against prominent people, those so powerful that ordinary courts could never convict them of their crimes. Court sessions were held in secret, with no indictments, no right of appeal, no juries, and no witnesses. Evidence was presented in writing. Over time it evolved into a political weapon, a symbol of the misuse and abuse of power by the English monarchy and courts.

In modern usage, legal or administrative bodies with strict, arbitrary rulings and secretive proceedings are sometimes called, metaphorically or poetically, star chambers. This is a pejorative term and intended to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the proceedings. The inherent lack of objectivity of any politically motivated charges has led to substantial reforms in English law in most jurisdictions since that time..."

Star Chamber - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
I don`t like the idea of the President or ANY leader of ANY country having a kill list. The priority should be on capture, or does innocent until proven guilty in a court of law not count if an elected official doesn`t want it to?
 
I don`t like the idea of the President or ANY leader of ANY country having a kill list. The priority should be on capture, or does innocent until proven guilty in a court of law not count if an elected official doesn`t want it to?

this is war, not a domestic adversary
the enemy is the enemy
with no presumption of innocence

via the kill list, we can take out the principals who oppose our nation while better avoiding civilian collateral damage
 
Perhaps, context and a complete reading would help here...It really irritates me when people purposefully cherry pick headlines to promote opinion.

"WASHINGTON — This was the enemy, served up in the latest chart from the intelligence agencies: 15 Qaeda suspects in Yemen with Western ties. The mug shots and brief biographies resembled a high school yearbook layout. Several were Americans. Two were teenagers, including a girl who looked even younger than her 17 years.

Tribesmen protested in Islamabad, the Pakistani capital, against ties with the United States, just days after President Obama took office in January 2009.
Gerald Herbert/Associated Press

President Obama, overseeing the regular Tuesday counterterrorism meeting of two dozen security officials in the White House Situation Room, took a moment to study the faces. It was Jan. 19, 2010, the end of a first year in office punctuated by terrorist plots and culminating in a brush with catastrophe over Detroit on Christmas Day, a reminder that a successful attack could derail his presidency. Yet he faced adversaries without uniforms, often indistinguishable from the civilians around them.

“How old are these people?” he asked, according to two officials present. “If they are starting to use children,” he said of Al Qaeda, “we are moving into a whole different phase.”

It was not a theoretical question: Mr. Obama has placed himself at the helm of a top secret “nominations” process to designate terrorists for kill or capture, of which the capture part has become largely theoretical. He had vowed to align the fight against Al Qaeda with American values; the chart, introducing people whose deaths he might soon be asked to order, underscored just what a moral and legal conundrum this could be. "

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world/obamas-leadership-in-war-on-al-qaeda.html?pagewanted=all
 
Last edited:
this is war, not a domestic adversary
the enemy is the enemy
with no presumption of innocence

via the kill list, we can take out the principals who oppose our nation while better avoiding civilian collateral damage

So you consider it ok if Saddam had tried to assasinate the President?
I see this this is an assasination list not as acts of war.
 
So you consider it ok if Saddam had tried to assasinate the President?
I see this this is an assasination list not as acts of war.

it's what we do in war
kill the enemy
nothing has changed ... except our ability to now better limit civilian casualties by selectively targeting our enemy opponents with drones
 
The idea in war is to force the other side to accept your will. Killing is part of it, so is capturing the enemy. As is understand it the order was to kill OBL, not capture or kill. The take no prisoners thing is disturbing to me.
 
The idea in war is to force the other side to accept your will. Killing is part of it, so is capturing the enemy. As is understand it the order was to kill OBL, not capture or kill. The take no prisoners thing is disturbing to me.

I am disturbed by it as well...yet I would find it more disturbing to have lost a Seal Team and captured a man who would inspire even more destruction by his lunatic fringe, while we tried to figure out where to put him, how to charge him, where to have a trial, and where the next freakin' nut job was gonna blow something up or kidnap someone demanding we let him go.

I refuse to second guess the very people we have charged with knowing the details, and what to do with them.
 
Does this mean all those secret agent novels I read my whole life were not at all based on reality and that just now, Obusha has created the first time we have used assassination as a method of cold warfare?

Personally, I've always thought we should attack leaderships instead of draftees and civilians. Not many agree with me on this.
 
and when that happened, i wouldn't have the capacity to actually care

but i have reason to believe, since i am not at war with my country, to believe my name has no reason to appear on that list
assange, probably not so much

Many on the "no fly" list thought the same thing, until they were yanked from the flight at the ripe old age of 2. ;-)
 
I am disturbed by it as well...yet I would find it more disturbing to have lost a Seal Team and captured a man who would inspire even more destruction by his lunatic fringe, while we tried to figure out where to put him, how to charge him, where to have a trial, and where the next freakin' nut job was gonna blow something up or kidnap someone demanding we let him go.

I refuse to second guess the very people we have charged with knowing the details, and what to do with them.

I don't think making him a martyr makes his followers any less dangerous.
If they said capture or kill and he got killed well it happens. The order to just kill is an order to assasinate and it bothers me greatly. As to second guessing, i'm not saying to second guess but to question is not only a good idea but necessary to a democracy. I would not second guess the actions of the members of seal team six if they had the orders to capture or kill (or even just capture) and OBL got his head blown off. Things happen and they can happen quickly. But If you think that the president has a right to order assasinations they you should never scream foul if any American citizens are assasinated by the enemy, after all it is just the way war is fought.
 
But If you think that the president has a right to order assasinations they you should never scream foul if any American citizens are assasinated by the enemy, after all it is just the way war is fought.


Personally, I do not cry foul....I expect them to be destroyed.

Oh wait....that's what we are doing.
 
Not too much further until its to:

"Who painted my roses red? Off with their head."

All that's left now is for the Crimson Prince to pave the way for the Crimson Queen. Watch for the naves.

*crawls back under rock and twists foil hat for good luck*
 
Personally, I do not cry foul....I expect them to be destroyed.

Oh wait....that's what we are doing.

Even if you could destroy them all it wouldnt change the moral dilema.
 
I don`t like the idea of the President or ANY leader of ANY country having a kill list.
Targetted political assassination is also illegal under international law enshrined in treaties to which the US is signatory.
 
Yanno, he really deserved that Nobel Peace prize.
 
Targetted political assassination is also illegal under international law enshrined in treaties to which the US is signatory.

This is the natural extension of the "unlawful enemy combatant" bull****. Legal loopholes where the enemy technically doesn't count as an "enemy soldier" and therefore doesn't get protected by various treaties.
 
I personally approve of this as I approved of Bush using similar tactics. It is also very refreshing to see Bubba and a few others A-acknowledge we are still at 'war' with terrorists and B- accepting the need to fight terrorists wherever they are hiding out. It is also not at all surprising to see the usual suspects lining up to condemn any and everything Obama does in the war on terror solely because he is a democrat. Kinda puts those folks in the same category as those who did the same thing with Bush...and will do so again when/if we ever have another republican president.

On the snarky side...its good to see Obama reducing the number of potential inmates at the black ops prisons around the world! No need worrying about those offered 'constitutional rights' and stateside trials when you can just nuke em! ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom