HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Regarding Obama's drone h...

Mon May 23, 2016, 06:54 PM

Regarding Obama's drone hit on a man never convicted of anything. Or given any due process.

Nice shot!

Fuck that dude.

FWIW - he wasn't entitled to any kind of due process unless he surrendered.

130 replies, 10962 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 130 replies Author Time Post
Reply Regarding Obama's drone hit on a man never convicted of anything. Or given any due process. (Original post)
arely staircase May 2016 OP
Ohioblue22 May 2016 #1
MohRokTah May 2016 #3
AgingAmerican May 2016 #44
Demonaut May 2016 #62
Octafish May 2016 #80
Demonaut May 2016 #83
Octafish May 2016 #84
Demonaut May 2016 #85
Octafish May 2016 #87
Demonaut May 2016 #89
Octafish May 2016 #92
Demonaut May 2016 #94
Jeffersons Ghost May 2016 #118
AgingAmerican May 2016 #96
Demonaut May 2016 #97
gratuitous May 2016 #95
arely staircase May 2016 #4
cheapdate May 2016 #32
scscholar May 2016 #58
cheapdate May 2016 #61
NutmegYankee May 2016 #65
msanthrope May 2016 #73
Recursion May 2016 #117
MohRokTah May 2016 #2
rug May 2016 #5
arely staircase May 2016 #6
rug May 2016 #8
arely staircase May 2016 #16
tazkcmo May 2016 #27
msanthrope May 2016 #74
arely staircase May 2016 #86
cpwm17 May 2016 #93
arely staircase May 2016 #98
Albertoo May 2016 #30
rug May 2016 #38
Albertoo May 2016 #51
rug May 2016 #53
Albertoo May 2016 #55
rug May 2016 #64
Albertoo May 2016 #66
rug May 2016 #67
Albertoo May 2016 #68
rug May 2016 #69
Albertoo May 2016 #70
rug May 2016 #72
Albertoo May 2016 #75
msanthrope May 2016 #76
guillaumeb May 2016 #120
MohRokTah May 2016 #7
rug May 2016 #10
MohRokTah May 2016 #12
rug May 2016 #14
MohRokTah May 2016 #15
rug May 2016 #17
MohRokTah May 2016 #22
rug May 2016 #23
CompanyFirstSergeant May 2016 #26
tazkcmo May 2016 #28
CompanyFirstSergeant May 2016 #33
tazkcmo May 2016 #39
MohRokTah May 2016 #43
arely staircase May 2016 #130
Albertoo May 2016 #31
tazkcmo May 2016 #37
Albertoo May 2016 #54
AgingAmerican May 2016 #47
arely staircase May 2016 #126
rjsquirrel May 2016 #34
CompanyFirstSergeant May 2016 #35
rjsquirrel May 2016 #36
tazkcmo May 2016 #41
rjsquirrel May 2016 #42
tazkcmo May 2016 #45
rjsquirrel May 2016 #48
AgingAmerican May 2016 #46
Kelvin Mace May 2016 #9
Separation May 2016 #113
Journeyman May 2016 #11
Rex May 2016 #13
ChisolmTrailDem May 2016 #18
Rex May 2016 #19
arely staircase May 2016 #24
Kaleva May 2016 #52
Hydra May 2016 #20
tabasco May 2016 #21
Old Union Guy May 2016 #25
tazkcmo May 2016 #29
felix_numinous May 2016 #40
Ohioblue22 May 2016 #49
msanthrope May 2016 #78
DesMoinesDem May 2016 #90
The Straight Story May 2016 #50
TeddyR May 2016 #56
The_Casual_Observer May 2016 #57
arcane1 May 2016 #102
The_Casual_Observer May 2016 #103
bjo59 May 2016 #59
GOLGO 13 May 2016 #60
DesMoinesDem May 2016 #63
msanthrope May 2016 #71
DesMoinesDem May 2016 #88
beachbum bob May 2016 #77
Octafish May 2016 #79
msanthrope May 2016 #81
Octafish May 2016 #82
ronnie624 May 2016 #91
arely staircase May 2016 #99
ronnie624 May 2016 #105
arely staircase May 2016 #108
ronnie624 May 2016 #110
arely staircase May 2016 #112
ronnie624 May 2016 #115
arely staircase May 2016 #123
Separation May 2016 #116
frankieallen May 2016 #100
Marr May 2016 #107
GoneFishin May 2016 #101
guillaumeb May 2016 #104
arely staircase May 2016 #109
guillaumeb May 2016 #119
arely staircase May 2016 #122
guillaumeb May 2016 #124
arely staircase May 2016 #125
guillaumeb May 2016 #127
arely staircase May 2016 #128
Marr May 2016 #106
TheKentuckian May 2016 #111
guillaumeb May 2016 #121
Demsrule86 May 2016 #114
ileus May 2016 #129

Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Mon May 23, 2016, 06:59 PM

1. Arent All people are entitled to due process ?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioblue22 (Reply #1)

Mon May 23, 2016, 07:00 PM

3. Nope. 100% constitutional, too.

 

We targeted and killed American citizens fighting for the German Army during World War II.

You do not stop to give due process to an enemy combatant on the field of battle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #3)

Mon May 23, 2016, 09:20 PM

44. Where have I heard that one before? Oh, yeah....GW Bush and company

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #44)

Tue May 24, 2016, 12:53 AM

62. those idiots were right on some things

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demonaut (Reply #62)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:39 AM

80. Like invading Iraq?

Like spying on America?

Like stealing elections?

I can't think of a single thing.

What were some of those things they got right, Demonaut?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #80)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:46 AM

83. increasing the funds to combat aids in africa, , closing the prince sultan airbase in Saudi Arabia



I really didn't want to go there but you forced me...thanks

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demonaut (Reply #83)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:57 AM

84. Obviously.

Great list.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #84)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:59 AM

85. you asked

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demonaut (Reply #85)

Tue May 24, 2016, 09:49 AM

87. George W Bush may be your idea of a great American, Demonaut...

He is not mine. I abhor traitors, warmongers, and thieves.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #87)

Tue May 24, 2016, 10:06 AM

89. lol, I never said he's a great american, I hate the fuck but I also hold no regard

for people who have completely closed minds and can't accept when they've lost an argument

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demonaut (Reply #89)

Tue May 24, 2016, 11:15 AM

92. This is an argument?

You win.

As for Bush's accomplishments, they start here:





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #92)

Tue May 24, 2016, 12:48 PM

94. true, I win, thanks for conceding

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demonaut (Reply #94)

Thu May 26, 2016, 12:07 PM

118. BTW, Obama does not order CIA drone attacks or micromanage intelligence operations like Bush and Xi

Here we have "W," "X," and perhaps "Why" there is a series of Trump-bumps at Democratic Underground... Where is the Z?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demonaut (Reply #83)

Tue May 24, 2016, 12:55 PM

96. He closed the prince sultan airbase because it was named in Bin Ladens 1998 fatwa

 

He closed it just before invading Iraq so Al Quaeda would not interfere with his money laundering operation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #96)

Tue May 24, 2016, 02:37 PM

97. true

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #44)

Tue May 24, 2016, 12:51 PM

95. I hope you're not going to get all legalistic about declared wars

I mean, we have to be flexible and able to strike without warning against anyone anywhere, and if you don't like it, then you're on the side of the terrorists, and should be well advised to look at the first part of this sentence. U!S!A! U!S!A!

Please trim your ideals to fit this year's fashion, and get over that unnatural attachment you have to a quaint old document, fka the Constitution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioblue22 (Reply #1)

Mon May 23, 2016, 07:01 PM

4. No. People arrested for crimes are. Enemies on a battlefield not so much.

If they surrender, then sure. Until then it is a fight to the death between warring sides.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioblue22 (Reply #1)

Mon May 23, 2016, 08:59 PM

32. The US Constitution applies to everyone inside the territorial boundaries of the United States.

Taliban leaders, not so much.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cheapdate (Reply #32)

Mon May 23, 2016, 10:02 PM

58. Inalienable means ends at the borders...

 

to you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scscholar (Reply #58)

Mon May 23, 2016, 11:53 PM

61. The US Constitution and over 200 years of jurisprudence says, 'yes'.

It's just a fundamental part of our system of government. Everyone within the territorial boundaries of the United States is under the US Constitution and US law. That means even unlawful aliens have the right to a deportation hearing in front of a judge.

Taliban leaders and Italian film stars simply aren't subject to the same legal rights and protections. They just aren't -- as a matter of US jurisprudence and constitutional law.

What it means to me isn't super important, but in the case of Mullah Mansour, I have to say I'm very conflicted. There just isn't any other way to spin it, Mansour was a truly dark individual. Since taking over the leadership of the Taliban, he has dramatically stepped up attacks on civilians. He's killed and maimed a lot of innocent people, deliberately and spectacularly, over the past 2 years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioblue22 (Reply #1)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:04 AM

65. Soldiers on a battlefield.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioblue22 (Reply #1)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:13 AM

73. He was given due process. What that process was, however, was a drone strike. Nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioblue22 (Reply #1)

Thu May 26, 2016, 11:15 AM

117. No. People actively in arms in a combat zone are usually just killed. Same with pirates.

A whole lot of pirates who were US citizens were just straight-up killed by the US Navy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Mon May 23, 2016, 06:59 PM

2. BINGO!

 

No need for due process in a war zone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #2)

Mon May 23, 2016, 07:01 PM

5. When did Pakistan become a war zone?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #5)

Mon May 23, 2016, 07:02 PM

6. The tribal/boarder region? As far back as anyone can remember

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Reply #6)

Mon May 23, 2016, 07:05 PM

8. I remember. There is a border and Pakistan is a US ally. The drone landed inside a ally's territory.

 

When was war declared?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #8)

Mon May 23, 2016, 07:24 PM

16. The US drone strikes are not against our ally (such as they are)

They are against enemies of that ally. Sure that ally makes a complaint about sovereignty every now and then for their domestic audiences.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Reply #16)

Mon May 23, 2016, 08:47 PM

27. Then you're fine with it.

So, if Pakistan droned a person deemed their enemy on the border of Missouri and Kansas you'd be o.k. with that? Maybe send a strongly worded letter for your domestic audience?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tazkcmo (Reply #27)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:15 AM

74. You have a problem with the UN designating this guy a terrorist and sanctioning him?

 

The day the US harbors a man on the 1267 list, the rest of the world is free to drone strike at will.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tazkcmo (Reply #27)

Tue May 24, 2016, 09:15 AM

86. If Missouri and Kansas were lawless hotbeds of terrorism against the United States

and we weren't capable of killing said terrorists and the rule of law here was comparable to the tribal regions of Pakistan and Afghanistan, I would be all for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Reply #86)

Tue May 24, 2016, 12:46 PM

93. We have a bunch of US politicians responsible for the World's worst crime this century,

 

the Iraq War. The US is a target rich environment. We also have many more powerful people in the US responsible for a number of other serious crimes around the World. These powerful criminals are above the law, and will never be brought to justice.

When do you want the drone attacks on these Americans to start? Or are drones just reserved for brown people in third-world countries that US politicians don't like?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cpwm17 (Reply #93)

Wed May 25, 2016, 03:17 PM

98. Well I suppose they could try. But since they can't you really have no point. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #8)

Mon May 23, 2016, 08:55 PM

30. That legalism will apply once Pakistan has effective control over its NW tribal areas

 

Not the case for now. So little so that the Pakistani government has regular gunfights with Muslim radicals in its NW provinces. And the curriculum at the de facto public education system in the NW provinces, the madrasas, is rabidly anti-American, anti-infidels in general.
Those provinces really have zero wish to be US allies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Albertoo (Reply #30)

Mon May 23, 2016, 09:07 PM

38. National sovereignty is not a "legalism".

 

It's really not for you to determine when international law applies or is ignored.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #38)

Mon May 23, 2016, 09:47 PM

51. Pakistan does not have national sovereignty over its NW provinces

 

It told you so above, but you appear to have voluntary blind spots.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Albertoo (Reply #51)

Mon May 23, 2016, 09:48 PM

53. Who's "It"?

 

And you're confusing control with sovereignty.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #53)

Mon May 23, 2016, 09:51 PM

55. There is no sovereignty without control

 

In practical terms, that is.
But you might prefer etheral ideals over reality

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Albertoo (Reply #55)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:02 AM

64. Tell that to Jefferson Davis.

 

But you might prefer wishful thinking to history.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #64)

Tue May 24, 2016, 07:39 AM

66. Are you comparing the Pakistani NW territories to the Confederate States?

 

If so, it's not altogether clear what point you're trying to make.
Some convoluted search for an escape from the corner you had painted yourself into?

And your 'wishful thinking' jibe has no relevance to the discussion stances we had.
If someone was closer to abstractions than reality, it was you, as I mentioned earlier.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Albertoo (Reply #66)

Tue May 24, 2016, 07:47 AM

67. Those that think an insurrection negates sovereignty likely think the CSA was legit.

 

You should spend less time attempting inept analogies about paint and more time reading history.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #67)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:06 AM

68. You are blurring the issues and misrepresenting what I said

 

As I have every reason to think you're doing it consciously, I am not interested in going further with someone who is just listening to the echoes of his brilliant sophistry.

I will simply restate that I doubt the central Pakistan government has much sway in the NW provinces whose economy is reliant on the cuture of opium and contraband and where the federal security forces are constantly under threat of homegrown jihadists.

But feel free to go back to calling me a supporter of slavery, Stonewall Jackson and count Dracula if it makes you feel good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Albertoo (Reply #68)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:08 AM

69. I'm stating precisely when you implied.

 

"I am not interested in going further with someone who is just listening to the echoes of his brilliant sophistry. "

Boo hoo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #69)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:10 AM

70. Exactly not. You are misrepresenting on purpose what I wrote => end of dicussion

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Albertoo (Reply #70)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:12 AM

72. Misrepresent you? I quoted you.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #72)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:16 AM

75. No, Jefferson Davis was not a quote. Not even an interesting parallel.

 

Stop your cheap High School debating tricks. End of discussion. Thank you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #8)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:17 AM

76. The person in question was designated a terrorist and sanctioned by the UN in 2001. Apparently, he

 

learned little in the intervening 15 years. Nor did he challenge his designation. I'm sorry he did not avail himself of the legal process, but oh, well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #8)

Thu May 26, 2016, 01:57 PM

120. How dare you bring up legalities when the people are celebrating

another glorious killing of an un-convicted person?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #5)

Mon May 23, 2016, 07:04 PM

7. September 11, 2001. eom

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #7)

Mon May 23, 2016, 07:09 PM

10. Did you forget a noun and a verb?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #10)

Mon May 23, 2016, 07:13 PM

12. Did you forget that an attack on the United States was masterminded from

 

the Afghanistan/Pakistan border region?

I'll grant you, Iraq was a load of bullshit as it had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11, but there were and still are groups in Afghanistan and Pakistan that were involved in that attack.

I 100% supported and continue to support the military and intelligence efforts in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

As the most liberal president in history stated years before being elected, "I'm not against all wars, I'm just against stupid wars."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #12)

Mon May 23, 2016, 07:21 PM

14. Did you forget more than 26,000 Afghan civilians have been killed and nearly 30,000 wounded?

 

Or do you just not give a shit?

This isn't counting Pakistan, which the drones are now targeting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_in_the_war_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80%93present)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #14)

Mon May 23, 2016, 07:22 PM

15. That's a reality of war.

 

It happens.

I will not be discouraged from supporting a just war over collateral damage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #15)

Mon May 23, 2016, 07:31 PM

17. "I will not be discouraged from supporting a just war over collateral damage."

 

The difference between a just war and jihad is where you're standing.

What do you think they call the dead of the WTC?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #17)

Mon May 23, 2016, 07:59 PM

22. I disagree completely withyour assessment.

 

This is the reality of the world we live within. We are a nation. There are others that will attack our nation. My nation first, everybody else second.

End of discussion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #22)

Mon May 23, 2016, 08:05 PM

23. Uber Alles.

 

“There is no flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people.”
― Howard Zinn

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #22)

Mon May 23, 2016, 08:45 PM

26. You invoke September 11th...

 

....were you there?

I sure as hell hope so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #22)

Mon May 23, 2016, 08:49 PM

28. You can find a recruiter easily.

Good luck in your new career defending your nation. I thank you for your service.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tazkcmo (Reply #28)

Mon May 23, 2016, 09:00 PM

33. "You can find a recruiter..."

 

Thank you...

....for calling out hypocrisy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CompanyFirstSergeant (Reply #33)

Mon May 23, 2016, 09:07 PM

39. No problem.

Chicken Hawks and long distance warriors. Ick.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tazkcmo (Reply #28)

Mon May 23, 2016, 09:15 PM

43. I already served decades ago.

 

I'm too old for them to take me back.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tazkcmo (Reply #28)

Sun May 29, 2016, 09:18 AM

130. Good luck with your new career arresting the Taliban.

See. That works both ways.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #22)

Mon May 23, 2016, 08:57 PM

31. Some people want to prove their selflessness by placing other nations first

 

Gives them some kind of warm, fuzzy feeling. Chomsky comes to mind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Albertoo (Reply #31)

Mon May 23, 2016, 09:07 PM

37. And others

Want to place their countries' principles and laws first. Myself and several old Army friends come to mind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tazkcmo (Reply #37)

Mon May 23, 2016, 09:49 PM

54. Do you not count self defense among useful principles?

 

If not, you probably should contemplate a different line of business

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #15)

Mon May 23, 2016, 09:23 PM

47. So the attack on Afghanistan by Bush was just to you?

 

Even though it was Saudi Arabia who attacked us? lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #47)

Fri May 27, 2016, 12:20 PM

126. To the extent Saudis were involved, they ran it (from the Berlin cell to the choice of targets

from Afghanistan and with the protection of the then Taliban government. Where Bush fucked up was (besides the unbelievable cock up that was The Battle of Torah Bora) was withdrawing so much of our military and intelligence resources and assets out of that country to launch an attack on Iraq, which really didn't have anything to do with 9/11.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #7)

Mon May 23, 2016, 09:00 PM

34. +1

 

Fuck the Taliban.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rjsquirrel (Reply #34)

Mon May 23, 2016, 09:03 PM

35. I know exactly how to do that....

 

....but it involves me taking you to a recruiting office.

Still interested?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CompanyFirstSergeant (Reply #35)

Mon May 23, 2016, 09:06 PM

36. So self righteous

 

My brother served in AF-Pak d-bag.

And I'm almost 60.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rjsquirrel (Reply #36)

Mon May 23, 2016, 09:10 PM

41. Good on your brother.

At least he walked the walk and didn't just talk the talk.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tazkcmo (Reply #41)

Mon May 23, 2016, 09:11 PM

42. I don't usually believe people who play soldier online

 

My family sacrificed. I live blocks from the WTC and did on 9/11 too. I have every right to my opinion.

My bro is career by the way. He didn't "walk the walk" he did his job. Serving in the military doesn't make you uniquely entitled to an opinion on war either.

Not that I believe you served in theater.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rjsquirrel (Reply #42)

Mon May 23, 2016, 09:22 PM

45. I don't care what you think

or believe about me. Never have and never will. Yes, you do have every right to your opinion as does every other person in this world and yes, your family has sacrificed as has mine even if you think I'm a poser. As for serving not making one "uniquely entitled to an opinion on war" I also agree but we've covered that already. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. And I'm entitled to disagree and post that disagreement and my opinion on a discussion board.

Believe what you want. I don't care.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tazkcmo (Reply #45)

Mon May 23, 2016, 09:26 PM

48. Good for you "soldier"

 

You sure do talk tough.

No real solder I know thinks civilians aren't entitled to a political opinion. Most in fact think that is what they are defending.

I'm allowed to hate the Taliban without personally taking up arms. And oh, yeah, those drones are operated out of a base in Florida. No soldiers in theater were involved in this operation. So your blustery tough guy talk about signing up before expressing an opinion is amusing. Sure I'd be happy to sit at a monitor and blow terrorist leaders up. If I weren't 60 with the hand/eye coordination to match I'd be happy to do it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #7)

Mon May 23, 2016, 09:22 PM

46. You sound like Rudy Gulliani

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Mon May 23, 2016, 07:08 PM

9. So, that is the standard of proof for an execution now?

 

And what about any innocent people that are in the vicinity? I guess fuck them too?

It's all cool until a Cheney-type gets in and decides some people right here need to die without trial.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #9)

Thu May 26, 2016, 11:00 AM

113. Innocent people in the area?

LOL thats rich. It was a lonesome road in the lawless border crossing area of Pakistan and Iran. It was him and two others in the car with him. This didnt happen downtown Karachi, nor has it ever. The people in the car with him are in no way innocent

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Mon May 23, 2016, 07:11 PM

11. And the tall Arab recycler and all his buddies are still dead . . .

he was the very first of what increasingly appears to be a very long, probably interminable list.

http://www.thenation.com/article/166124/brief-history-drones#

The Nation: A Brief History of Drones (February 27, 2012)


I think often of the Freeway Blogger's iconic poster, with the silhouette of the hooded man in Abu Ghraib with the electrodes attached to his genitals, and the accompanying message:

"If this was our policy, we're losing a hell of a lot more than just a war."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Mon May 23, 2016, 07:14 PM

13. Now you got me all curious, how do you surrender to a drone?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #13)

Mon May 23, 2016, 07:36 PM

18. How do you surrender to an incoming missile? Or Fat Boy? nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ChisolmTrailDem (Reply #18)

Mon May 23, 2016, 07:40 PM

19. Somehow I don't think putting your hands up to surrender will work. nt

 

nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ChisolmTrailDem (Reply #18)

Mon May 23, 2016, 08:20 PM

24. I don't know. Contact the US government and offer your surrender. NT

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #13)

Mon May 23, 2016, 09:47 PM

52. Same way you surrender to a firing squad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Mon May 23, 2016, 07:41 PM

20. So are you volunteering to be the next drone hit? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Mon May 23, 2016, 07:42 PM

21. Good work, Droney!

 



Couldn't have happened to a nicer guy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Mon May 23, 2016, 08:39 PM

25. The United States is in a state of *permanent* war against the whole world.

 

Winning is never on the agenda.

The "war aim" is to keep it going, and profitable.

I wonder if Trump is elected, will Democrats be anti-war again?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Old Union Guy (Reply #25)

Mon May 23, 2016, 08:50 PM

29. Democrats always have been.

Not so much for the DLC/Third Wayers though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Mon May 23, 2016, 09:09 PM

40. With a Trump et all this close to the WH

this is the reason that a policy of remote machine hits should not be in place anywhere. Do we need a reminder.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Mon May 23, 2016, 09:37 PM

49. Wow I thought this was a rehash of when potus droned the son of the American

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioblue22 (Reply #49)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:19 AM

78. Well, when you make the 1267 list.....unfortunately Anwar's son was with a member of that list,

 

target of the drone strike.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #78)

Tue May 24, 2016, 10:29 AM

90. Jesus, you have no clue what you are talking about.

 

That isn't an assassination list. You think the US is assassinating people based on a UN list? And that excuse that Abdulrahman just happened to be with someone else that they were targeting is bs.

It never surprises me that all the people on this site that just love killing and war are all big Hillary supporters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Mon May 23, 2016, 09:39 PM

50. Options: Let a terrorist organization leader kill more people or stop him. Solution to some?

let em keep killing until some cops fly over there and arrest him.

At some point there is a trust issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Mon May 23, 2016, 09:56 PM

56. Yep

 

This guy led a group that harbored bin Laden and thinks it is ok to throw acid in the faces of young girls for the crime of going to school. They aren't any different from the terrorists who attacked Paris or Belgium. So yeah, fuck them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Mon May 23, 2016, 09:59 PM

57. Don't forget that Uncle Sam is still at war

there. It never ended, and may never end.

It's open season on any of those guys as far as this government is concerned.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The_Casual_Observer (Reply #57)

Wed May 25, 2016, 04:16 PM

102. Bush said it won't end in our lifetime, and Obama is helping assure that n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arcane1 (Reply #102)

Wed May 25, 2016, 04:27 PM

103. I guess that's about the only thing that bush

Has been right about.
He and his stupid buddies saw to the destabilization of the entire region, but its ok because god was on their side. Their god is better than their god.
I think he read that someplace about Christ his savior in one of his Shakespeares.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Mon May 23, 2016, 10:37 PM

59. Thanks for reminding me that I live in a country full of belligerent couch potatoes who love

cheering on the killing from the comfort of their barcaloungers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Mon May 23, 2016, 10:56 PM

60. Drone hits are the best hits

We take them out & we loose none.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 01:00 AM

63. Surrender? What was he charged with?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DesMoinesDem (Reply #63)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:12 AM

71. The UN charged him in 2001 with sanctions for his Taliban activities. Apparently, he didn't learn.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #71)

Tue May 24, 2016, 10:03 AM

88. "Charged with sanctions"

 

LOL. Sanctions is not a crime.
He didn't surrender to the US because he was never charged with a crime, so there was nothing to surrender for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:18 AM

77. war is hell..

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:37 AM

79. Murder by the State is still murder.

And cheering the death of an innocent human being is immoral.

Gen. Smedley Butler pegged it:

"War is a racket."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #79)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:40 AM

81. Innocent? The UN made a mistake with the 1267 designation? Nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #81)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:44 AM

82. Is that the UN we have to bug?

You know, to know how best to get them to go along UN?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #81)

Tue May 24, 2016, 10:37 AM

91. Does 1267 allow for extrajudicial executions and 'collateral damage'?

You either embrace the principle of due process or you don't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ronnie624 (Reply #91)

Wed May 25, 2016, 03:21 PM

99. Short this guy surrendering and being put on trial

exactly how would you go about administering due process in this case?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Reply #99)

Wed May 25, 2016, 06:43 PM

105. Short of any suspect surrendering, how would due process be administered?

Just declare perpetual global war, and you don't have to worry about any of that nonsense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ronnie624 (Reply #105)

Wed May 25, 2016, 07:04 PM

108. Well the person in question was much more than a "suspect"

He was a member of a group waging asymmetrical war against the United States. He is entitled to no more due process than German machine gunners at the Normandy beachhead. They weren't arrested they were killed or taken prisoner.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Reply #108)

Wed May 25, 2016, 09:25 PM

110. He was someone accused of a crime.

Your analogy is nonsense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ronnie624 (Reply #110)

Thu May 26, 2016, 10:50 AM

112. His status as an accused criminal does not erase his status as an enemy soldier

engaged in war with the US.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Reply #112)

Thu May 26, 2016, 11:11 AM

115. The GWOT is a pretext.

The US is not at war. Terrorism is a crime.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ronnie624 (Reply #115)

Thu May 26, 2016, 03:08 PM

123. The US is at war with a loose collection of jihadis who operate in various countries.

And just because a legitimate military target gets indicted doesn't mean he is no longer a legit. target. It just means arrest and prosecution are added to the list of consequences for the poor choice of rising through the ranks of the Taliban.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #79)

Thu May 26, 2016, 11:13 AM

116. Here is what I dont get.

This was a sanctioned hit by Pakistan's military or intelligence agency, I would bet your next paycheck on it.

Here are some facts, this guy was a known member of the Taliban. He was not in hiding as Pakistans intelligence and military were in talks with him and other warlords to try and get some peace going on out in that region. He was a holdout to that peace process and it was pissing of the Pakistan intelligence community. So here he comes across the border, and gets zapped.

How did we come across this intel? Either some other warlord sold him out, or more than likely the Pakistan intelligence knew his movements and knew when he was going to cross the border with Iran.

If the people of Pakistan knew how much Pakistan cooperates with the United States it wouldn't be effigies of Bush, Obama, and American flags being burned in the streets.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 03:53 PM

100. The planet is better off when people like this are removed from society.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frankieallen (Reply #100)

Wed May 25, 2016, 06:52 PM

107. "People like this" is easily redefined. /nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 04:01 PM

101. You are a right wing extremist ignorant fuck. Voting for Trump I presume. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 04:27 PM

104. What about 16 year old Abdel Rahman al-Awlaki?

He was another victim of the President's illegal drone killings.

What a disgusting, inhumane post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #104)

Wed May 25, 2016, 07:06 PM

109. Victim of really bad parenting. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Reply #109)

Thu May 26, 2016, 01:41 PM

119. Would ou be as callous and ignorant if it was your son?

This type of comment really typifies the ugly American that much of the world sees when the US war machine kills innocent people in service to empire while Americans endlessly mourn the fall of the two towers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #119)

Thu May 26, 2016, 03:04 PM

122. I wouldn't take my kids to a terrorist camp or meeting.

That is about as bad as parent as one can be. I mean shit, look what happenef.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Reply #122)

Thu May 26, 2016, 06:38 PM

124. al-Awlaki's 16 year old son was in Yemen when he was killed.

The US is not at war with Yemen, at least not officially, but civilians are killed there. The US is also not at war with Pakistan. Many civilians have been killed there also. Perhaps you blame the Pakistanis for living in Pakistan? But the US never follows laws and treaties that it considers to be inconvenient to the pursuit of empire and world control.

Assuming that you have not seen it, I would recommend Greenwald's "Unmaned:America's Drone wars" for a slightly different view.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #124)

Fri May 27, 2016, 11:07 AM

125. No we are not at war with Yemen. We did unburden Yemen of the unwanted

presence of al-alwlaki. That he brought his son along with him to Outward Bound AL Quaeda camp is on him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Reply #125)

Fri May 27, 2016, 07:33 PM

127. And if Yemen had "unburdened" the US of Dick Cheney and George Bush

would you have agreed with that action also?

Or do you subscribe to the double standard theory wherein the US reserves to itself alone the right to interfere in the affairs of other nations?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #127)

Sun May 29, 2016, 09:10 AM

128. When they do I will voice my opinion. Until then I will stick to reality. NT

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 06:50 PM

106. Disgusting. The tent is too damned big if it's got room for fascist, sycophantic shit like this.

 

I'm no pacifist, and I might even be convinced of the worthiness of programs like this, given a lucid, honest argument.

But this slavering cheer for swaggering, law-skirting violence is fucking repulsive. It's something I'd expect from lunatic, extreme right-wingers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #106)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:23 PM

111. The big part of the tent stretches only on the right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #106)

Thu May 26, 2016, 01:59 PM

121. Agreed. But the lynch mob is not ready to listen because

they have convicted and passed sentence without a trial.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Thu May 26, 2016, 11:10 AM

114. Yeah He got the head of the Taliaban...good for Obama

He has done much to stop the bad guys.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Original post)

Sun May 29, 2016, 09:12 AM

129. If Mr. Obama does it, no matter what "it" may be we should support him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread