• 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!

CIA terror link puts rebranded Blackwater under fire again

repeter

repeter

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2009
Messages
3,445
Reaction score
682
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
CIA terror link puts rebranded Blackwater under fire again

Despite its recent attempt to rebrand itself as Xe Services, Blackwater, the private military empire of Erik Prince, has struggled under a growing weight of allegations surrounding its conduct in Iraq and Afghanistan. Now further questions have been raised by claims it was subcontracted by the CIA during the George Bush presidency to run an unrealised campaign of assassinations of al-Qaida leaders kept secret from Congress.
Click to expand...

There you go.
 
Did they score any kills? It's a good thing if they did. I mean, who cares if Blackwater iced a few terrorists?
 
apdst said:
Did they score any kills? It's a good thing if they did. I mean, who cares if Blackwater iced a few terrorists?
Click to expand...

The only reason this is under fire is because 1. The POTUS didn't know, and 2. They wasted millions of dollars, for no kills.

Had they killed even one big terrorist leader, no one except the pansies would complain.
 
apdst said:
Did they score any kills? It's a good thing if they did. I mean, who cares if Blackwater iced a few terrorists?
Click to expand...

I care if any one involved in our government or foreign policy commit crimes. I don't believe in turning a blind eye to criminal activity for political expediency.
 
repeter said:
CIA terror link puts rebranded Blackwater under fire again



There you go.
Click to expand...

There we go what?

repeter said:
The only reason this is under fire is because 1. The POTUS didn't know, and 2. They wasted millions of dollars, for no kills.

Had they killed even one big terrorist leader, no one except the pansies would complain.
Click to expand...

1) If the president didn't know (I hadn't heard that he didn't), it wouldn't really surprise me. Do you think the DoD tells the pres about every million they spend?

2) The whole "no kills" thing is overly simplistic. As it stands, it appears they were only paid for training for a program designed to catch a very few specific targets. I doubt that they were expecting many kills, and I further doubt that any "failure" is attributable to Blackwater.
 
Well, that's some crack investigative reporting. Two unverified sources...

I don't think I'll lose too much sleep over mercenaries being trained to kill terrorists.
 
repeter said:
The only reason this is under fire is because 1. The POTUS didn't know, and 2. They wasted millions of dollars, for no kills.

Had they killed even one big terrorist leader, no one except the pansies would complain.
Click to expand...

You don't know that they didn't rack up any kills, for one, and for two, you can't kill'em, if you don't go after'em. If you don't bag any bad guys, then that's just the way it is. That's why it's called hunting and not killing.



Redress said:
I care if any one involved in our government or foreign policy commit crimes. I don't believe in turning a blind eye to criminal activity for political expediency.
Click to expand...


What crimes have possibly been committed. Last time I checked, wasting terrorists wasn't illegal.
 
Fiddytree said:
If they would have done their job well, the idea itself is good. Since it was never put into action, we would not know. Blackwater itself is a PR nightmare.
Click to expand...

I've always believed that the US needs to create a foreign legion organized like the French Foreign Legion.
 
I say we all let it slide. We must remember GW was a responsible conservative spender that never contracted to his friends for massive corporate profits. Obama is to blame.
 
JakeFromWI said:
I say we all let it slide. We must remember GW was a responsible conservative spender that never contracted to his friends for massive corporate profits. Obama is to blame.
Click to expand...

Ironic statement, since all the current administraion has done is blame their failures on the previous one.

Also, as best as I can tell, even the author of the article admits that the information is not confirmed, just reported by two anonymous sources.
 
American said:
So you think we should investigate Obama for the firing of Walpin?

The White House Fires a Watchdog - WSJ.com
Click to expand...

Why do people keep doing this. Let me reiterate my belief: If there is any credible evidence of corruption or lawbreaking by any of our public servants of either party, investigate, prosecute, and convict if the person is guilty. Obedience to laws and the public trust trumps any sense of partisan politics I might feel. I am, in this, 100 % consistent.
 
Yes I do.

And the firing of DAs during the Bush administration.

I'm sick of "your wrong im right" BS. They should all be closely watched and held accountable.

American...Some are not automatically innocent because others are guilty.
 
Last edited:
theangryamerican said:
Ironic statement, since all the current administraion has done is blame their failures on the previous one.

Also, as best as I can tell, even the author of the article admits that the information is not confirmed, just reported by two anonymous sources.
Click to expand...

What failures...the economy, the wars...what?

1/8 of one term and Obama is already a failure. There must be no bias behind your statements.
 
JakeFromWI said:
What failures...the economy, the wars...what?

1/8 of one term and Obama is already a failure. There must be no bias behind your statements.
Click to expand...

With all due respect for the Office, the man certainly has fallen hard on his face within just 8 months. Why must my statements reflect no bias, when your first post in this discussion was biased anti-Bush rhetoric? ...or have you been learning your "Do as I say, not as I do..." from the tax dodgers in government?

You seem to be very sure of the guilt of the Bush administration when I've pointed out twice now that this story even admits to being unsubstantiated.

It has about as much credibility at this point as the Obama Birther conspiracy.

Does that mean I'm denying this is true? No. I'm simply saying that there's no point in you going off the deep end on what is essentially a media rumor at this point.
 
Last edited:
JakeFromWI said:
I say we all let it slide. We must remember GW was a responsible conservative spender that never contracted to his friends for massive corporate profits. Obama is to blame.
Click to expand...

LOL...as if Obama isn't doing the same thing. I bet you're not too worried about the no-bid contracts that Shaw Global got in New Orleans, either.
 
Substantiated bias. I am indeed incorrect if these statements are false

1) 4333 Americans died on the premise that Saddam had WMD's and was an immediate threat to our safety, while NK and Iran were not.

2) The Bush administration gave no bid contracts to corporate entities with direct connections to the administration

3) The Bush administration spent and awful lot of money for a "fiscal conservative"

4) The Bush administration extended the rights limiting Patriot Act before midterm elections to ensure its passage

5) GW cited a personal grudge for invasion of Iraq

6) The Bush administration neglected patients at Walter Reed

7) The Bush administration illegally fired US Attorneys

8) Scooter Libby's "brush with the law"

9) Bush's failed promise to get Osama "dead or alive"

10) Illegal Wiretaps

11) The fall of the dollar

12) Torture of detainees

13) No Child Left Behind

I cant keep going if you'd like...
 
JakeFromWI said:
Substantiated bias. I am indeed incorrect if these statements are false

1) 4333 Americans died on the premise that Saddam had WMD's and was an immediate threat to our safety, while NK and Iran were not.

2) The Bush administration gave no bid contracts to corporate entities with direct connections to the administration

3) The Bush administration spent and awful lot of money for a "fiscal conservative"

4) The Bush administration extended the rights limiting Patriot Act before midterm elections to ensure its passage

5) GW cited a personal grudge for invasion of Iraq

6) The Bush administration neglected patients at Walter Reed

7) The Bush administration illegally fired US Attorneys

8) Scooter Libby's "brush with the law"

9) Bush's failed promise to get Osama "dead or alive"

10) Illegal Wiretaps

11) The fall of the dollar

12) Torture of detainees

13) No Child Left Behind

I cant keep going if you'd like...
Click to expand...


Smoke and mirrors...I was referring to this particular article being unsubstantiated. I won't even bother with responding with the rest, since it's off-topic.
 
theangryamerican said:
With all due respect for the Office, the man certainly has fallen hard on his face within just 8 months. Why must my statements reflect no bias, when your first post in this discussion was biased anti-Bush rhetoric? ...or have you been learning your "Do as I say, not as I do..." from the tax dodgers in government?
Click to expand...

I was citing the substantiation behind my bias. It was an appropriate response to YOUR off topic rhetoric...
 
JakeFromWI said:
Substantiated bias. I am indeed incorrect if these statements are false

1) 4333 Americans died on the premise that Saddam had WMD's and was an immediate threat to our safety, while NK and Iran were not.
Click to expand...

We would have had to fly through Iraqi airspace to invade Iran, so strategically, invading Iraq was a good idea.

2) The Bush administration gave no bid contracts to corporate entities with direct connections to the administration
Click to expand...

Shaw Global CEO Jim Bernhard, who was a DNC honcho in Louisiana got no bid contracts to fix up New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.

6) The Bush administration neglected patients at Walter Reed
Click to expand...

PBO wants to try and talk vets into giving up their medical bennies.

Jim Towey: The Death Book for Veterans - WSJ.com

10) Illegal Wiretaps
Click to expand...

PBO's snitch website

11) The fall of the dollar
Click to expand...

Surprisingly, that happened after the Dems took control of Congress.
 
theangryamerican said:
Smoke and mirrors...I was referring to this particular article being unsubstantiated. I won't even bother with responding with the rest, since it's off-topic.
Click to expand...

Code for, "I can't rebute any of that."
 
apdst said:
We would have had to fly through Iraqi airspace to invade Iran, so strategically, invading Iraq was a good idea.
Click to expand...

Russia??? Afghanistan? Pakistan? India? THE PERSIAN GULF???

Shaw Global CEO Jim Bernhard, who was a DNC honcho in Louisiana got no bid contracts to fix up New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.
Click to expand...

Called FEMA buddy. ;)

PBO wants to try and talk vets into giving up their medical bennies.

Jim Towey: The Death Book for Veterans - WSJ.com
Click to expand...

Anything Mr. Towey says would be subject to some... uneeded bias. That "article" is as objective as O' Reilly defending himself about calling for Tiller to be targeted.

PBO's snitch website
Click to expand...

Relevance? Oh, yeah, there is none. :doh

Surprisingly, that happened after the Dems took control of Congress.
Click to expand...

I can't help but notice that the problem we are in right now was set up in the first 4 years of Bush's Presidency...really, this problem was spawned during Reagan's and Bush Sr's presidencies.

I can't help but notice you don't even try rebuting more then half of the facts presented to you. Good for you!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom