• 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!

CNO: US Navy Needs Foreign Help Against Russia, China, ISIS, Iran

DaveFagan said:
I am a disgusted, patriotic USA citizen that has worked hard to find the truth of what the USA is doing in its' citizen's names. I tell the truth. You have to research the Federal Reserve, the Plunge Protection Team, the Exchange Stabilization Fund, the MIC, Energy Policy, the history of CIA influence and covert operations, the real Drug policies, the power of CORPORATISM in US foreign policy, analyze the USA debt burden and how it is manipulated, deduce the real reasons for foreign alliances, analyze world economies and currency controls/manipulations, analyze Reserve Bank alliances and cause and effect relationships of the alliances, and recognize wars as tools of the status quo. Read news from around the World because all Nations promote an agenda and attempt to control news. The USA has revealed CIA operatives in hundreds of news rooms in the USA. Those are nice starting points to analyze your news. Here'a a little truth for you. Benghazi was the shipping point for Libyan weapons shipped to Turkey to be supplied to Syrian terrorists. CIA operation.
Click to expand...

Prove it. First off, prove that your not a CIA mole and then prove that your interpretation is more correct then that of pretty much every other analyst. :roll:

Obviously all that stuff is just a cover for the real activity. Duh.

While it's shocking that a Libyan port with a massive Islamist prescience could be used by said Islamists to ship Libyan weapons to Syrian Islamists, it's a little weak on the wow factor.
 
Simpleχity;1065873072 said:
CNO: US Navy Needs Foreign Help Against Russia, China, ISIS, Iran

The Chief of Naval Operations explains why he's working to expand and strengthen the fleet's network of partners....


defense-large.JPG

US CNO Adm. John Richardson (R) and Vice-Adm Tim Barrett of the Royal Australian Navy
Click to expand...

What a crap headline... Ne where in that entire article did I see where Richardson states that we need foreign help. He made it clear that we are stronger with a strong network supporting us and that includes foreign allies, but also includes private industry and tech companies but never said we NEED foreign allies to oppose China, Russia, ISIS. The thing to remember is that if it comes down the US vs everyone else - we win. There isn't one nation on this planet that can stop our high altitude stealth bombers dropping smart bombs, our drone technology and our submarine fleet. We have the best intel of any nation on the planet and if you think that Russian/Chinese hackers are good wait and see what happens when we unleash our best and brightest to do what their corporate reject hackers are trying to do.
 
joG said:
It depends on what you mean by public scrutiny. I certainly would not want you reading the "secret budgets" from the opinions you have offered here. But that Senators and Congress persons see them, seems the way to go and can be said to guarantee public scrutiny.
Click to expand...

Yes, the same congresscritters who have legislated so that the Fourth Amendment and Habeas Corpus could be suspended/nullified can view those "off-budget" items is really a persuasive argument joG. :doh Gosh, I feel better already now that you have "explained" it to me.
 
Thoreau72 said:
Yes, the same congresscritters who have legislated so that the Fourth Amendment and Habeas Corpus could be suspended/nullified can view those "off-budget" items is really a persuasive argument joG. :doh Gosh, I feel better already now that you have "explained" it to me.
Click to expand...

"Fourth Amendment and Habeas Corpus could be suspended/nullified "?
 
DaveFagan said:
You have to continually create new enemies, part of the marketing program, to give a Cold War Military spending program protecting the Military Industrial CORPORATE Complex multi billion dollar spending programs. Drug Wars (keep those drugs flowing from Afghanistan), Terror Wars (keep financing al Qeda and have SA, Qatar, and Turkey finance ISIS/ISIL), Cold Wars (create mythical antagonists like Russia, China, etc), Economic Wars (sanction Nations that might create a currency that is actually solvent), Hot Wars (Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Iraq, etc.), and with a marketing program like this "War is good business, and business is good." The USA mantra and it makes me feel ashamed.
Click to expand...

Ok whatever man
 
joG said:
"Fourth Amendment and Habeas Corpus could be suspended/nullified "?
Click to expand...

The patriot act, by way of the National Security Letters it authorizes, effectively suspends the Fourth Amendment regarding searching papers and records of individuals. Thank you Congress.

The NDAA amendment about 3 years ago and since, allows the Executive Branch to practice indefinite detention if it says so.

Thanks Obama, thanks Congress.
 
Thoreau72 said:
The patriot act, by way of the National Security Letters it authorizes, effectively suspends the Fourth Amendment regarding searching papers and records of individuals. Thank you Congress.

The NDAA amendment about 3 years ago and since, allows the Executive Branch to practice indefinite detention if it says so.

Thanks Obama, thanks Congress.
Click to expand...

I had understood that the searches entailed a judge's decision.

It is true, however, that Obama's socialism has introduced and the Democrats have protected very disturbing legislation in the NDAA. I thought it is being disputed in court, though.
 
joG said:
I had understood that the searches entailed a judge's decision.

It is true, however, that Obama's socialism has introduced and the Democrats have protected very disturbing legislation in the NDAA. I thought it is being disputed in court, though.
Click to expand...

NSL's are issued by the Executive. No judicial involvement.

Perhaps you are thinking of the FISA warrants, which are rubber stamped by the FISA Court?

Under the unpatriot act, NSLs can be used as they see fit. Ironically, the only class to object to how these things are used are librarians. Part of the NSL is that the recipient (the librarians in this case) can tell nobody that they have been served. I think the librarians prevailed in some sort of court proceeding, but in the end it made no difference.

Just from memory, the NDAA issue was appealed, and as I recall they won on the lowest level, but the appellate court overturned that decision.

Obama likes the notion of the Unitary Executive, brought by Bush & the Neocons, more than they did. :lol:
 
Thoreau72 said:
.....

Obama likes the notion of the Unitary Executive, brought by Bush & the Neocons, more than they did. :lol:
Click to expand...

That is because the Bushies understood that the instruments were not really kosher and were meant only for a short emergency.
 
joG said:
That is because the Bushies understood that the instruments were not really kosher and were meant only for a short emergency.
Click to expand...

What statements by the Bushies, or historical facts can you offer to support that claim, that they "understood" they were only for a short emergency?

Both the unpatriot act and the NDAA have been extended/renewed a number of times.
 
Thoreau72 said:
What statements by the Bushies, or historical facts can you offer to support that claim, that they "understood" they were only for a short emergency?

Both the unpatriot act and the NDAA have been extended/renewed a number of times.
Click to expand...

It was only a conclusion from hundreds of papers, studies and article I read and you seemingly haven't. ;)
 
joG said:
It was only a conclusion from hundreds of papers, studies and article I read and you seemingly haven't. ;)
Click to expand...

Hundreds of papers?

I would be thrilled if you could provide one sentence in context of Dubya telling us it was just for a short time. :lol:
 
Thoreau72 said:
Hundreds of papers?

I would be thrilled if you could provide one sentence in context of Dubya telling us it was just for a short time. :lol:
Click to expand...

You know that "one sentence" would not saticfy you and I would therefore be wasting my time looking it up.
 
joG said:
You know that "one sentence" would not saticfy you and I would therefore be wasting my time looking it up.
Click to expand...

Well you're wrong about that. One sentence in context would satisfy me. Maybe it's the "in context" part that makes you pass? Maybe he never said anything like that at all that makes you pass?

With all those elected officials voting for the AUMF, maybe you could find or remember an elected official stating "this is just for a short time", or words to that effect?

The USA Patriot Act had several sunset provisions, and each time they came up, our elected officials renewed them.
 
Thoreau72 said:
Well you're wrong about that. One sentence in context would satisfy me. Maybe it's the "in context" part that makes you pass? Maybe he never said anything like that at all that makes you pass?

With all those elected officials voting for the AUMF, maybe you could find or remember an elected official stating "this is just for a short time", or words to that effect?

The USA Patriot Act had several sunset provisions, and each time they came up, our elected officials renewed them.
Click to expand...

Whether he spoke the words that would silence you or not? I don't remember. It is too long ago for such minute detail. The context was clear, however. Anyone following the situation would know that. Also they would realize sunset means temporary and to terminate, when no longer necessary.
 
joG said:
Whether he spoke the words that would silence you or not? I don't remember. It is too long ago for such minute detail. The context was clear, however. Anyone following the situation would know that. Also they would realize sunset means temporary and to terminate, when no longer necessary.
Click to expand...

Silence me? Is that what you're interested in? :lamo

No sir, I've been "following the situation" for about 15 years or so, and I don't recall any statement that this was just "for a short time" or however you want to word it.

I say again sir, USA Patriot Act had several sunset provisions, but it has been renewed each time with vigor. I think you are the one not "following the situation". :peace
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom