• 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!

U.S. Approval of Killing of Cleric Causes Unease

I'd say that the man should be given a trial in his absence and the assassination should only be authorized if he is found guilty. Ideally he would be brought back for a trial, but that isn't practical under the circumstances. While not having the defendant present in court isn't great, it would still act as check against presidential abuse. Its crucial that evidence be presented before American citizens can be killed on government order.
 
rathi said:
I'd say that the man should be given a trial in his absence and the assassination should only be authorized if he is found guilty. Ideally he would be brought back for a trial, but that isn't practical under the circumstances. While not having the defendant present in court isn't great, it would still act as check against presidential abuse. Its crucial that evidence be presented before American citizens can be killed on government order.
Click to expand...

A trial in absentia would be a perfectly acceptable compromise.
 
Agent Ferris said:
And under what ratio decidendi do you base that conclusion? To my knowledge there is absolutely 0 stare decisis to back up that conclusion.
Click to expand...

sigh...

well..until Im elected to some high fallutin office, what Im going to give you is my OPINION...and in MY OPINION..the second some American assclown steps into another country and starts plotting against THIS country they just became a target (by choice).
 
VanceMack said:
sigh...

well..until Im elected to some high fallutin office, what Im going to give you is my OPINION...and in MY OPINION..the second some American assclown steps into another country and starts plotting against THIS country they just became a target (by choice).
Click to expand...

Question: Who determines which persons are plotting against this country and what stops them from making that same determination about you?
 
VanceMack said:
sigh...

well..until Im elected to some high fallutin office, what Im going to give you is my OPINION...and in MY OPINION..the second some American assclown steps into another country and starts plotting against THIS country they just became a target (by choice).
Click to expand...

So in other words you have no legal basis whatsoever to deny a citizen his Constitutional rights for simply stepping onto foreign soil. Gotcha.
 
Deuce said:
Question: Who determines which persons are plotting against this country and what stops them from making that same determination about you?
Click to expand...

Answer...if Im president and my intel agencvies deliver videotapped speeches of an indiviudual advocating the violent overthrow of the country, I dont stop to ask what their nationality is...
 
Agent Ferris said:
So in other words you have no legal basis whatsoever to deny a citizen his Constitutional rights for simply stepping onto foreign soil. Gotcha.
Click to expand...

Spot on...I personally have no legal basis. Then again...last time I checked my phone isnt diorectly connected to a predator drone.
 
VanceMack said:
Answer...if Im president and my intel agencvies deliver videotapped speeches of an indiviudual advocating the violent overthrow of the country, I dont stop to ask what their nationality is...
Click to expand...

So as a Libertarian you believe the government should have the authority to convict a U.S. citizen of a capital offense without a trial by jury?
 
Last edited:
VanceMack said:
Spot on...I personally have no legal basis. Then again...last time I checked my phone isnt diorectly connected to a predator drone.
Click to expand...

Well at least you admit that you have no legal basis for your assertion that the government has a license to commit murder.
 
jamesrage said:
I have the belief that if an American leaves US soil and sides with the enemy against the US then he is no longer a US citizen . Therefore he is free game just as much as Osama Bin Laden or any other terrorist is.
Click to expand...

Agreed, you spit on me, you dish me, you shot at me, you get punished. He made the choice.
 
either way, do you see how disputatious are the politics?

pure poison

our poor, pathetic president
 
Agent Ferris said:
Well at least you admit that you have no legal basis for your assertion that the government has a license to commit murder.
Click to expand...

Doesn't the Delta Team have a license to kill by Executive Order?
 
rathi said:
I'd say that the man should be given a trial in his absence and the assassination should only be authorized if he is found guilty. Ideally he would be brought back for a trial, but that isn't practical under the circumstances. While not having the defendant present in court isn't great, it would still act as check against presidential abuse. Its crucial that evidence be presented before American citizens can be killed on government order.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. It is a scary day when an American citizen can be assassinated by his own government without a trial.
 
VanceMack said:
Sometimes you can reach too far for something that isnt there. There is nothing unethical about taking out a terrorist...regardless of his country of birth.
Click to expand...

Strange.
I never denied that.
Only pointed out lefties screamed about waterboarding and they are silent about this.

Seems odd doesn't it?
Nobody died from waterboarding.

.
 
zimmer said:
Strange.
I never denied that.
Only pointed out lefties screamed about waterboarding and they are silent about this.
.
Click to expand...

Never mind the fact that there are many posters, conservative and liberal, who are both anti-torture and anti-assassination of U.S. citizens without a trial. But that wouldn't support the "liberals are evil america haters" paradigm you cling to, would it? :roll:
 
earthworm said:
A man(regardless of politics) should be able to determine that waterboarding is a form of torture, this should not be the American way.
Are we not better than that?
This has nothing to do with left, right, inner or outer.
If you think it does; then how does this sound??
The conservatives favor torture and the liberals do not....
Tell this to your children.
Click to expand...

Waterboarding is not torture.

If it is torture, then we have tortured scores of our military personnel.
Shall they be compensated for being tortured by the state?

.
 
Know that I got my facts straight I would not approve of this by either party. However this little deal is supported by both parties, if I read the article correctly. In my own personal opinion, he lost all his rights when he allied himself with the enemy. However according to the Constitution of America it states that he deserves a trail , before we carry out the execution of this person. I would rather they go by the law then say their personal opinion.
 
Last edited:
Catz Part Deux said:
Never mind the fact that there are many posters, conservative and liberal, who are both anti-torture and anti-assassination of U.S. citizens without a trial. But that wouldn't support the "liberals are evil america haters" paradigm you cling to, would it? :roll:
Click to expand...
I see I have struck a raw nerve and exposed a hypocritical left. Yawn.

It was the left and some RINO's that whined about waterboarding.
It is an anti-waterboarder of the first degree putting out assassination orders on American citizens.

Like, where's the outrage?
Think if Bush did this? Whoa!

PS. Nobody ever died of waterboarding.

.
 
Last edited:
RyrineaHaruno said:
Know that I got my facts straight I would not approve of this by either party. However this little deal is supported by both parties, if I read the article correctly. In my own personal opinion, he lost all his rights when he allied himself with the enemy. However according to the Constitution of America it states that he deserves a trail , before we carry out the execution of this person. I would rather they go by the law then say their personal opinion.
Click to expand...

What if he ends up committing mass murder in service of the enemy?
Killing Americans?

.
 
[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LPubUCJv58"]YouTube- Watch Christopher Hitchens Get Waterboarded (VANITY FAIR)[/nomedia]


The whole point of weatherboarding is torture, and this is the same type of reason that lead to the topic we are talking about now. Those who give up liberty for security deserve neither Ben Franklin.

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LPubUCJv58"]YouTube- Watch Christopher Hitchens Get Waterboarded (VANITY FAIR)[/nomedia]
 
Last edited:
zimmer said:
What if he ends up committing mass murder in service of the enemy?
Killing Americans?

.
Click to expand...

Face palms, I will not approve of our right being violated, because it makes you feel a little bit safer in your head.
 
RyrineaHaruno said:
Expect anyone will say anything under torture to stop that torture.
Click to expand...

We have had valuable successes with waterboarding.

It isn't torture.

Since you enjoy quoting Franklin, I suppose you are in support of the systematic destruction of the welfare state?
WARNING: another bit of liberal hypocrisy coming....

.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom