• 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 Bombs Yemen Hours After Winning Reelection

Wiggen said:
Yeah, because as we all know he didn't kill any terrorists before the election. He got us out of Iraq, like he promised, and we'll be out of Afghanistan by 2014 - just like he promised. I know, it's unusual for you guys to find a President who does what he says. Like killing Bin Laden. Something George Bush talked about and Barack Obama did.
Click to expand...

Like closing gitmo, cutting the deficit in half, not hiring lobbyists... Oh wait, these are all promises he didn't keep.
 
Luna Tick said:
Killing "terrorists" in Yemen is a dumb thing to do. First, we don't know they're terrorists. Second, we kill many more innocent people than those who might be terrorists. We're just helping al Quaida to recruit. You kill one or two (maybe) and then they recruit hundreds. There will be another 9/11 and we'll be asking, "Why do they hate us?" They hate us because we kill their fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers -- and their children. You would hate another country too if they flew drones here and killed your family members.

This is why we need a real left in American politics. The Greens would stop this nonsense. The Democrats are on the right and therefore won't. The Republicans are on the extremist far right and certainly won't stop and will probably start a war with Iran.
Click to expand...

But Obama got a nobel peace prize. It's not like they just hand those out because you are a minority and they need to increase their prize gifts to minorities...
 
Wiggen said:
Yeah, because as we all know he didn't kill any terrorists before the election. He got us out of Iraq, like he promised, and we'll be out of Afghanistan by 2014 - just like he promised. I know, it's unusual for you guys to find a President who does what he says. Like killing Bin Laden. Something George Bush talked about and Barack Obama did.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately your side of the aisle over-values abstract democracy and undervalues hardline authoritarian leadership in the region at keeping a lid on some of this stuff. Too much too fast and the stuff spreads like cancer because there are no strong government structures to fill the economic gaps in fledgling democracies which ultimately throws gas on the fire of radicalism.
 
The Muslim terrorists need to bear responsibility for their own deaths and the deaths of their children and family members. Were they to renounce terrorism and their hatred for the United States, there might not be a need for us to continue killing them. On the other hand, we might still want to fire a few rounds on the anniversary of 9/11.

As a matter of course, it's probably best not to attack a country and then expect to have anyone care when the attackees start shooting back.
 
Fisher said:
Leftist do not question the Chosen One. Would have thought everybody knows that by now....
Click to expand...

Perhaps you meant to say "Democrats". Plenty of Leftists call him out on a regular basis. Hell, some of us didn't even vote for the guy.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
:lamo

"Leftists do not question the chosen one"? Really? :roll:
Click to expand...

I doubt you would have these numbers under Bush

And get this: Depressingly, Democrats approve of the drone strikes on American citizens by 58-33, and even liberals approve of them, 55-35. Those numbers were provided to me by the Post polling team.

It’s hard to imagine that Dems and liberals would approve of such policies in quite these numbers if they had been authored by George W. Bush.
Click to expand...

The poll shows that 53 percent of self-identified liberal Democrats — and 67 percent of moderate or conservative Democrats — support keeping Guantanamo Bay open, even though it emerged as a symbol of the post-Sept. 11 national security policies of President George W. Bush, which many liberals bitterly opposed.

...But fully 77 percent of liberal Democrats endorse the use of drones, meaning that Obama is unlikely to suffer any political consequences as a result of his policy in this election year.

Support for drone strikes against suspected terrorists stays high, dropping only somewhat when respondents are asked specifically about targeting American citizens living overseas, as was the case with Anwar al-
Awlaki, the Yemeni American killed in September in a drone strike in northern Yemen.
Click to expand...

Liberals, Dems approve of drone strikes on American citizens abroad - The Plum Line - The Washington Post

Poll finds broad support for Obama’s counterterrorism policies - The Washington Post
 
Luna Tick said:
Killing "terrorists" in Yemen is a dumb thing to do. First, we don't know they're terrorists. Second, we kill many more innocent people than those who might be terrorists. We're just helping al Quaida to recruit. You kill one or two (maybe) and then they recruit hundreds. There will be another 9/11 and we'll be asking, "Why do they hate us?" They hate us because we kill their fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers -- and their children. You would hate another country too if they flew drones here and killed your family members.

This is why we need a real left in American politics. The Greens would stop this nonsense. The Democrats are on the right and therefore won't. The Republicans are on the extremist far right and certainly won't stop and will probably start a war with Iran.
Click to expand...

What makes you think that we don't know they are terrorist? Do you think the military do not research and vet targets? It's not as if we randomly flip through a phone book and pick people to attack. I may disagree with the president on many things but I'm not going to fault him on trying to capture/kill terrorist.
 
MAcc2007 said:
But Obama got a nobel peace prize. It's not like they just hand those out because you are a minority and they need to increase their prize gifts to minorities...
Click to expand...

Funny how you say Obama supporters are quick to pull out the race card when Obama's actions are questioned, yet here you are, using the race card. Well done.

Wiggen said:
I'm saying we have an absolute right to bomb and kill terrorists wherever we can find them. Especially if the country in which they are living is either unable or unwilling to do so. Personally, I'd rather kill them in Yemen than here.
Click to expand...

And how many innocent people in Middle East have to die before we stop bombing them? The fact that we are so willing as a nation to kill innocent people under the guise of protecting our own (gee, kinda sounds like the reason Osama's reasons for attacking us) is a travesty and it is no surprise that we have no credibility.
 
Chaddelamancha said:
And how many innocent people in Middle East have to die before we stop bombing them? The fact that we are so willing as a nation to kill innocent people under the guise of protecting our own (gee, kinda sounds like the reason Osama's reasons for attacking us) is a travesty and it is no surprise that we have no credibility.
Click to expand...


there is a clear difference between targeting explicitly targeting civilians and targeting enemy combatants and causing collateral damage. Not saying you need to agree with either process, but to try and equivocate the two is simply misguided
 
Luna Tick said:
For me this is one of the biggest frustrations about our "Democracy." These immoral and illegal attacks were going to continue regardless of whether Obama or Romney got in. There should be protests in the streets over this injustice and stupidity. Do you know of any organizations that plan to raise hell over this?
Click to expand...

Killing a terrorist is injustice?
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
there is a clear difference between targeting explicitly targeting civilians and targeting enemy combatants and causing collateral damage. Not saying you need to agree with either process, but to try and equivocate the two is simply misguided
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to imply that we are killing innocent people. I am merely questioning how many innocent people (collateral damage, sure, why not) do we need to kill before we stop?
 
liblady said:
Killing a terrorist is injustice?
Click to expand...

How many innocent bystanders lives are worth that one terrorist? Or is killing them, while still getting the terrorist, justice?
 
Chaddelamancha said:
How many innocent bystanders lives are worth that one terrorist? Or is killing them, while still getting the terrorist, justice?
Click to expand...

I have become quite pragmatic about this. We can not defeat terrorism by being a bunch of ******s. I don't want innocent people killed, but it happens.
 
liblady said:
I have become quite pragmatic about this. We can not defeat terrorism by being a bunch of ******s. I don't want innocent people killed, but it happens.
Click to expand...

What a delightful hallmark card to send to those who have lost loved ones because we aren't ******s.
 
Luna Tick said:
Killing "terrorists" in Yemen is a dumb thing to do. First, we don't know they're terrorists. Second, we kill many more innocent people than those who might be terrorists. We're just helping al Quaida to recruit. You kill one or two (maybe) and then they recruit hundreds. There will be another 9/11 and we'll be asking, "Why do they hate us?" They hate us because we kill their fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers -- and their children. You would hate another country too if they flew drones here and killed your family members.

This is why we need a real left in American politics. The Greens would stop this nonsense. The Democrats are on the right and therefore won't. The Republicans are on the extremist far right and certainly won't stop and will probably start a war with Iran.
Click to expand...

That is totally unsubstantiated and weighs strongly against the facts that have been collected. The claim that we kill more innocents than terrorists is probably the least supported of all, and in fact drones probably have some of the greatest militant to civilian casualty ratios of any comparable weapon or tactic in our arsenal, they have been rather remarkable tools. The Long War Journal and the New America Foundation two of the more prominent think tanks and news outlets that cover drone strikes have created detailed and meticulous data on US drone strikes, with a specific focus on Pakistan. In particular the Long War Journal is critically acclaimed for its contacts among Pakistani and Waziri media. They both have estimates for militant lows and highs and civilian lows and highs, they break down as 1,600-2,800 and 150-190 respectively. This makes sense if you think about it because drones have the capacity to loiter on a target for an enormous period of time which over the past decade has vastly increased our capacity for observing and discerning militant and civilian targets and allowed us to deliver much smaller warheads to targets with an increased degree of confidence.

The notion that we are killing hundreds of civilians in drone strikes is a myth pushed along by elements of the Pakistani media, and a self-flagellating narrative. It is totally unsupported by the facts. This was particularly supported by the Associated Press which did wide ranging research and interviews inside FATA which massively discredited Pakistani media and civil society groups: AP IMPACT: New light on drone war's death toll - Boston.com

The Long War Journal - Charts on US Strikes in Pakistan
The Year of the Drone | NewAmerica.net

Moreover lets move to the next argument which involves their efficacy and their impact on civilians. The first and most salient point is that since so few civilians are killed it actually has had an incredibly reduced impact on the civilian population at large compared to lets say the Pakistani Army offensives which aimed to accomplish the same thing. In fact drone strikes are more opposed outside FATA than inside them eight times more supportive, and only a minority 48% think they are killing civilians frequently which is in stark contrast to the rest of the country ("Four Myths about Drone Strikes" by By Shehzad H. Qazi & Shoaib Jillani). Many journalists have substantiated this point in field research, with several Afghani/Pakistani native journalists working for FP going to Waziristan and reporting on the efficacy of drone strikes and the fact that many in the tribal belt actually support them as a superior means than the Pakistani military or air strikes.

Finally the most repeated claim, and the one with almost no evidence to support it is that we are merely creating new terrorists or militants. This trope has become pervasive over the last decade, but it rarely has any evidence in fact and shows no understanding for the demographics of militant groups, their recruitment pools, or the situation they are involved in. A detailed study by the RAND corporation between 2004-2010 found that there was a negative correlation between drone strikes and militant recruitment. In other words there is no evidence at all that drone strikes or the lack thereof had an impact on recruitment and that other factors as is usual contributed to this (http://patrickjohnston.info/materials/drones.pdf).

To sum up my position I'll quote Zmarak Yousefzai, a US based Afghan and Pakistani national security expert writes: "Nevertheless, by yet another comparison of hypocrisy, those who are loudest about casualties from U.S. drone strikes have rarely protested the far higher numbers of civilian casualties as a result of Pakistan Army operations or Taliban violence in the Swat Valley and FATA. Silenced in this double standard are the varying motives of different parties as well as the voice of the Pashtun people in these tribal areas. At least one voice -- that of this native Pashtun -- is speaking out to say that there are serious downsides to these drone strikes, but they may be a necessary evil and the lone option to combat those who are responsible for the severe suffering of our people - like Malala Yousafzai."

Voice of a native son: Drones may be a necessary evil - by Zmarak Yousefzai | The AfPak Channel
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
I doubt you would have these numbers under Bush





Liberals, Dems approve of drone strikes on American citizens abroad - The Plum Line - The Washington Post

Poll finds broad support for Obama’s counterterrorism policies - The Washington Post
Click to expand...

Uhh actually you knew anything on how i post you would find that i do criticize many dems and the Obama administration for this. Hell just yesterday i started a thread about Obama and drones and criticizing him.. And you will find many progressives on here and many leftists here and in this country that condemn these kind of attacks.
 
Wiggen said:
I'm saying we have an absolute right to bomb and kill terrorists wherever we can find them.
Click to expand...
We do?
What about Russia? Canada? Mexico? How about North Korea? China? Iran?

Especially if the country in which they are living is either unable or unwilling to do so. Personally, I'd rather kill them in Yemen than here.
Click to expand...
All of this is against international law.
You also know that these drones strikes also increase terrorist recruitment?
 
Chaddelamancha said:
Funny how you say Obama supporters are quick to pull out the race card when Obama's actions are questioned, yet here you are, using the race card. Well done.



And how many innocent people in Middle East have to die before we stop bombing them? The fact that we are so willing as a nation to kill innocent people under the guise of protecting our own (gee, kinda sounds like the reason Osama's reasons for attacking us) is a travesty and it is no surprise that we have no credibility.
Click to expand...

Oh, I think we have a ton of credibility with every terrorist in the Middle East. I am very pleased than all of them go to bed at night with the understanding that they may well be visited by a drone. No matter how many of you post threads essentially saying 'Lo the poor terrorist', it's not working with me. To hell with them and the people that shelter them.
 
Wiggen said:
Oh, I think we have a ton of credibility with every terrorist in the Middle East. I am very pleased than all of them go to bed at night with the understanding that they may well be visited by a drone. No matter how many of you post threads essentially saying 'Lo the poor terrorist', it's not working with me. To hell with them and the people that shelter them.
Click to expand...

You seem to have misplaced where my sympathies are. Point to where I feel bad for the terrorist. It's okay, I'll wait. Meanwhile, how about a little compassion for those innocent lives lost.
 
Here's a simple question for you. Do you support the current policy of attacking terrorists with drones, or do you not? From reading your post, and the post of others, I would assume none of you support those actions and instead you would prefer we just leave them alone.
 
Well done, Brother O!
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Uhh actually you knew anything on how i post you would find that i do criticize many dems and the Obama administration for this. Hell just yesterday i started a thread about Obama and drones and criticizing him.. And you will find many progressives on here and many leftists here and in this country that condemn these kind of attacks.
Click to expand...

I wasn't aware I was speaking to the sentient will of liberal america. But I'm going to assume that for some unknown reason you confused my comments on the shift within the liberal demographic with comments specifically directed at you
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
so did this awakening magically happen after Bush left office?
Click to expand...

Pragmatism? Before, of course. Doesn't mean I approved of the war in Iraq, or that I now approve of unlimited detention. I don't automatically like or dislike everything a president does based on his party.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom