So tired of the anti-administration propaganda posted sometimes

[stevenleser]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by grantcart (a host of the Barack Obama group).

I'm not so sure of the idea to award medals for people who pilot drones, but characterizing that in an OP titled "US To Award Medals For Killing Civilians" is way over the top.

Sorry, needed to vent.

[graham4anything]

1. Plus ten zillion

more and more and more and more and more

[truth2power]

2. You're entitled to vent, but IMO what's over the top

is sitting in a comfy chair and pushing a button to blow away people half a world away, many of whom ARE civilians, women, children, and other assorted innocents. And then being awarded a medal for it fercrissake!

I don't know who should be blamed if not Obama, since he's the CIC. Are they tying him up and threatening his children in order to get his approval for this program?

From what I've seen and heard, he seems to be okey-dokey with it. So he should own it.

[stevenleser]

3. Thank you for proving my point. That you dont get it is pretty telling. nt

[stevenleser]

4. P.s., This group is a safe haven for those who support the President's policies.

If you are posting to say you disagree with them, or you agree with negative characterizations for them, you are beyond the SOP of the group.

[OKNancy]

5. I think most thoughtful Democrats realize that it is a dilemma

Drones are better that boots on the ground and fewer civilians are killed. On the other hand, it's a shame that any innocents are killed.
I think most thoughtful Democrats realize that al-Qaeda is a threat. I sometimes think some feel they are not. But all it takes is to read what they really believe and to read the news. The latest that really got me was the destruction of the old manuscripts in Timbuktu. They are religious zealots. It's not like THEY don't kill innocent people.* But then our moral dilemma is that we should be better.

It's difficult.

I've often wondered. I wonder if we will find out years from now what Obama knows. What would make him...someone who I feel once was pretty anti-war... into someone who is very aggressive when it comes to "terrorists" ( I hate that word)?

I also feel that cyber-terrorism is real. I trust Richard Clarke and other experts in the field. I don't think liberals should poo-poo the threat.


* Edit to add: just a second after I sent this post, I went to LBN and read this: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014401000

[stevenleser]

6. Thank you and thanks for taking the action to block that poster.

I didn't want to do it for fear of the block seeming personal.

[OKNancy]

7. Just want to let BOG readers know that truth2power didn't know

that they were in the BOG. They just saw it on the latest page and responded.
I got a really nice PM. I wanted to let everyone know.

[stevenleser]

8. Wow. In that case I think we should unblock them.

Just my 2 cents

[OKNancy]

9. they said I didn't have to or need to

but I think I will just on principle.

[greatauntoftriplets]

10. Good move since she thought she was elsewhere.

[Amonester]

11. Sigh. I am soooo with you.

Sometimes, extremely heartbreaking decisions have to be made after having thoroughly thought and pondered a much bigger picture's consequences than what seems to be evident to most of us on the surface.

Although I can understand the frustrations reflected in these reactionary headlines, I think President Obama's re-elected administration is our last 'defense' against the complete overhaul of the Theocrats who would have had a free reign in a Romney/Ryan one...

If they can't 'see' that sometimes heartbreaking reality, I don't know what else to say.

The stupid teahadists should be happy Obama isn't the Marxist/Fascist dictator they claim...

If it was only me.... I wouldn't trust myself dealing with their violent, racist lunacy...

[grantcart]

12. While I understand your frustration, this isn't really appropriate for BOG.

If you have an issue with a meme in GD or Politics, fight it out there.

If you have an issue with a general trend at DU, bring it up in Meta.

We don't want to use the 'safe haven' status of BOG to make critical comments about other DUers when, in all fairness, they can't really respond.

I understand and share your perspective on the drones. Having worked for almost a decade resettling hundreds of thousands whose lives were decimated by the Khmer Rouge (and a couple of million that didn't make it to the camps) I am keenly aware that there are those whose primarily military strategy is to target civilian populations to try and trigger wider conflict. Once in power they continue to target civilians as they govern. It eventually took the NVA to wipe out the Khmer Rouge leadership, but if it could have been done by an manned jet or an unmanned 'drone' I would have been happy to pull the trigger.

Nevertheless I am glad that the President has called for greater transparency in their use.

I am also not disappointed that the issue is debated passionately here, although the idea that the drones account for more civilian casualties than their targets is not true. But we should always be making the maximum steps to minimize civilian deaths.

So while sympathetic to your overall point I am locking this because we do not want to exacerbate perceptions of disunity here by using the 'safe haven' of the BOG to rail against DUers resulting from discussions in other forums.

Hope you understand this somewhat nuanced point.