85 replies to this topic

[concert andy]

We should probably get an idea of what the administration's definition of "terrorist" actually is.

 

Is it any 16 year old American child or just those children fathered by suspected terrorists?

 

Is it just those who are directly targeted or does it include all those killed by the missiles we fire whether they're actually guilty or not?

 

At this point I think there are just too many unanswered questions for anyone to make an informed decision on what the better option might be.

 

May be you should push for those answers instead of bashing the action.

 

 

 

What if he was completely justified (doubt it, but what if)?  Then do you join the team?

 

What if it turns out that, this kids was a rougue US citizen who found Allah?  There have been many americans that have.

 

 

All I am saying is you are judging without knowing the answers.

[Tim the Beek]

What if it turns out that, this kids was a rougue US citizen who found Allah?  There have been many americans that have.

 

Far as I know, "he found Allah," isn't a Constitutionally allowable exception to the 4th, 5th and 6th Amendments.

[concert andy]

Far as I know, "he found Allah," isn't a Constitutionally allowable exception to the 4th, 5th and 6th Amendments.

 

May be I worded it wrong, but there are examples of Americans joining the Taliban or some other Middle East based terrorist organization.

[concert andy]

john walker lindh

 

or 

American Taliban' wins right to group prayer in prison

or

 

 

American Terrorist's Mom Wants Him Back Home

 

or 

 

 

Americans join al-Shabab terrorists in Somalia, House committee investigation finds

 

And that took 5 minutes of using the google.

[Tim the Beek]

john walker lindh

 

or 

American Taliban' wins right to group prayer in prison

or

 

 

American Terrorist's Mom Wants Him Back Home

 

or 

 

 

Americans join al-Shabab terrorists in Somalia, House committee investigation finds

 

And that took 5 minutes of using the google.

 

I think you wasted 5 minutes. No one ever said there weren't Americans involved with this stuff.

 

What we're saying, or at least what I'm saying, is that the extrajudicial execution of them by people who have sworn to uphold and protect the Constitution is disgusting.

[Joker]

May be you should push for those answers instead of bashing the action.

 

 

 

What if he was completely justified (doubt it, but what if)?  Then do you join the team?

 

What if it turns out that, this kids was a rougue US citizen who found Allah?  There have been many americans that have.

 

 

All I am saying is you are judging without knowing the answers.

I'm judging because our government refuses to give us any answers.

 

They still won't acknowledge that we even have a drone program.

 

I should stop bashing the targeting and execution of US citizens until they decide to tell us why they're doing it? The administration is fighting in court to keep that information from us. 

 

I posted something yesterday that had a top Obama advisor stating something along the lines of "the kid shouldn't have had a father who was a terrorist" he was killed days after they had taken out his father.

 

found it

 

[concert andy]

I'm judging because our government refuses to give us any answers.

 

They still won't acknowledge that we even have a drone program.

 

I should stop bashing the targeting and execution of US citizens until they decide to tell us why they're doing it? The administration is fighting in court to keep that information from us. 

 

I posted something yesterday that had a top Obama advisor stating something along the lines of "the kid shouldn't have had a father who was a terrorist" he was killed days after they had taken out his father.

 

While I understand, you haven't provided an alternative.  Regardless of how the government runs the drone program.  

 

 

The only one I have heard in reading many of your threads, is to send in more troops.  Now with the Suicide rate higher than the death rate for returning soldiers, I do not think sending troops in is a good idea.  Hence me not committing to either side, BECAUSE I DO NOT KNOW ALL THE DETAILS.

[TakeAStepBack]

You do know that these strikes are against international and our domestic laws though presumably. Which is ennough. Any further justification on behalf of the administration would be just more typical pontificating on their behalf.

[Joker]

While I understand, you haven't provided an alternative.  Regardless of how the government runs the drone program.  

 

 

The only one I have heard in reading many of your threads, is to send in more troops.  Now with the Suicide rate higher than the death rate for returning soldiers, I do not think sending troops in is a good idea.  Hence me not committing to either side, BECAUSE I DO NOT KNOW ALL THE DETAILS.

Oh, I see, because you don't think my alternative is a good idea you just pretend I haven't provided one. Got it.

 

And if this administration (the "transparent" admin.) has it's way you're not going to know all the details.  

 

THAT is what I have a problem with, they're putting American children on hit lists and assassinating them for God's sake!!! 

 

If you want to sit by and not commit to either side while that happens then that's your choice. I prefer to be on the side looking for answers and calling them out for their actions

[concert andy]

You do know that these strikes are against international and our domestic laws though presumably. Which is ennough. Any further justification on behalf of the administration would be just more typical pontificating on their behalf.

 

I am aware, and why I am staying neutral.  I see the bigger picture.  I see a war that has been going on since the early 2000's, and almost 10 years old now with no end in site. 

 

I see the drone program as the president choosing US Soldiers over whomever else it may be.   You have stated the drone program is making new terrorists, but the alternative of sending troops does the same thing.

 

 

 

Pontificating on their behalf?   Are you serious?  (trying not to saying anything derogatory)

 

We can not have a discussion.  I have to be on one side or the other.

 

TASB, what is your alternative?

 

Yes you Can!  (provide me your alternatives, instead of complaining on a daily basis about the same subjuct).

[concert andy]

Oh, I see, because you don't think my alternative is a good idea you just pretend I haven't provided one. Got it.

 

And if this administration (the "transparent" admin.) has it's way you're not going to know all the details.  

 

THAT is what I have a problem with, they're putting American children on hit lists and assassinating them for God's sake!!! 

 

If you want to sit by and not commit to either side while that happens then that's your choice. I prefer to be on the side looking for answers and calling them out for their actions

 

 

No, I have not seen or read your alternative, at this time I do not believe that exists.  If you have one, please at least point me to the thread where I can see or read it.

 

Didn't Obama come out and say there should be guidelines on drone useage? A rule book per se.  It is only two months since then.  

 

Election Spurred a Move to Codify U.S. Drone Policy  (11/24/12)

 

Then there is this article from the Boston Globe from today 1/16/13 :  

 

http://bostonglobe.c...opEK/story.html

 

 

 

Then there are the statistics about drone usage.

 

 

Do these not count as providing information?  (Oh I get it, not enough info for your liking).

[concert andy]

I feel the debt, and jobs are far more important than discussing this, but somehow there is a new thread or an new article about this every few days.

[Joker]

No, I have not seen or read your alternative, at this time I do not believe that exists.  If you have one, please at least point me to the thread where I can see or read it.

 

 

 

 

While I understand, you haven't provided an alternative.  Regardless of how the government runs the drone program.  

 

 

The only one I have heard in reading many of your threads, is to send in more troops.  

 

So you've heard my alternative but you don't believe it exists?

[Joker]

No, I have not seen or read your alternative, at this time I do not believe that exists.  If you have one, please at least point me to the thread where I can see or read it.

 

Didn't Obama come out and say there should be guidelines on drone useage? A rule book per se.  It is only two months since then.  

 

Election Spurred a Move to Codify U.S. Drone Policy  (11/24/12)

 

Then there is this article from the Boston Globe from today 1/16/13 :  

 

http://bostonglobe.c...opEK/story.html

 

 

 

Then there are the statistics about drone usage.

 

 

Do these not count as providing information?  (Oh I get it, not enough info for your liking).

 

 

Did you bother to read that 2nd piece?

 

 

"After Obama’s reelection, the administration’s sense of urgency lessened considerably. Now, with Brennan’s nomination, this urgency may have dissipated entirely. Certainly his elevation suggests that the decision-making process behind drone strikes will remain opaque. The man called “the high priest of targeted killing” will keep his exalted position."

 

Don't you get it? 

 

They don't want us to know what they're doing. They want to be able to just target and execute anyone they decide needs to be killed. They're assuming people are guilty, blowing them up without being sure anything wrong has been done and they're not answering to anyone. They're in court fighting to keep the information private.

 

Or do you think it's acceptable as long as it's just Obama doing it?

 

You can bet your ass that policy would have been completed if Romney had won so there's no excuse for it not being done by Inauguration Day regardless of who won. Well, other than they don't want to have to abide by any actual set of rules that they could be held accountable to.

 

 

 

 

[concert andy]

So you've heard my alternative but you don't believe it exists?

 

I thought that was someone else's idea, and the my whole point.

 

But may be you missed that too.

[concert andy]

Did you bother to read that 2nd piece?

 

 

"After Obama’s reelection, the administration’s sense of urgency lessened considerably. Now, with Brennan’s nomination, this urgency may have dissipated entirely. Certainly his elevation suggests that the decision-making process behind drone strikes will remain opaque. The man called “the high priest of targeted killing” will keep his exalted position."

 

Don't you get it? 

 

They don't want us to know what they're doing. They want to be able to just target and execute anyone they decide needs to be killed. They're assuming people are guilty, blowing them up without being sure anything wrong has been done and they're not answering to anyone. They're in court fighting to keep the information private.

 

Or do you think it's acceptable as long as it's just Obama doing it?

 

You can bet your ass that policy would have been completed if Romney had won so there's no excuse for it not being done by Inauguration Day regardless of who won. Well, other than they don't want to have to abide by any actual set of rules that they could be held accountable to.

 

 

 

 

 

Of course I did.

 

But come on bro, it doesn't matter who is doing it.  You think I am defending Obama, when I am stating he chose troops lives over sending drones.  Tough decision and glad I do not have to make it.  Hence being neutral. 

 

May be it would have been done if Romney won, but history is always written by the victor.  And we know that nothing gets done in Washington until there is pressure applied publicly.

 

Also, at least the media is covering the story, one thing you complained about around thanksgiving.  Which will eventually force something being done.

[concert andy]

OK.  Say you got everything you wanted and we sent troops in.

 

What about the articles about many troops committing suicide since returning?   I have seen other people post about drones and them not caring because of the effects on the troops, but i do not see you vehemently defending your point to them as defending the president?  

 

But ultimately we are saying the same thing.  Except that there needs to be more info provided, that we agree on,

 

You say the down stream effect is creating terrorists, I say sending troops does the same thing, and this way US citizens are not dying.  Am I wrong?

[TakeAStepBack]

TASB, what is your alternative?

 

 

I've answered this so many times it's not even funny. (trying not to say anything derogatory)

 

But I'll do it again, since it seems you're selective in reading replies. Here we go again. One more time.

 

The solution is to end the war on terror because it is a failure. You can not defeat an idea with guns and bombs. And you can not rightfully fight an idea you're creating in the first place.

[concert andy]

I've answered this so many times it's not even funny. (trying not to say anything derogatory)

 

But I'll do it again, since it seems you're selective in reading replies. Here we go again. One more time.

 

The solution is to end the war on terror because it is a failure. You can not defeat an idea with guns and bombs. And you can not rightfully fight an idea you're creating in the first place.

 

And I read many posts, and I somehow missed this.

 

I agree in theory, but practically something has to be done.  Is what we are doing right?   Very debatable.

 

Then what should we do about terrorists who want to do harm to America and other developed parts of the world? Just take it in Arse?

[Joker]

I don't think you're really getting my point. I agree there's room for, and a need to use, drones.

 

My major problem is with the targeting and killing of people on just the suspicion of being guilty of something. Their use of drones to carry out the killing just gives them the ability to do it without answering the questions they'd need to answer in order to send in the troops to do the same job. They're avoiding accountability and the way they are doing it kills innocent people. Shit wouldn't fly if there were reports of a group of soldiers storming into a house and killing everyone in it because they thought someone in there might be guilty of something but if they use a drone and do the same thing they don't have to explain a damn thing and can just categorize the collateral dead as "enemy combatants"

[Joker]

You say the down stream effect is creating terrorists, I say sending troops does the same thing, and this way US citizens are not dying.  Am I wrong?

 

Obama is targeting and killing US citizens so yeah you're wrong.

 

And yes, I do understand you're talking quantity of US citizens dying  

[TakeAStepBack]

And I read many posts, and I somehow missed this.

 

I agree in theory, but practically something has to be done.  Is what we are doing right?   Very debatable.

 

Then what should we do about terrorists who want to do harm to America and other developed parts of the world? Just take it in Arse?

 

The same thing we've done before we started being the Imperial police. Protect ourselves and work in diplomatic ways to pursue peace. It's not a matter of practicality at this point, it's a matter of responsibility and adhering to the law. If you're willing, as you indicated, to stay neutral, like so many others until somehow these professional psychopaths let you in on their plans, I'm not sure it is people like Joker and I that need to take action instead of complain. This is taking some action by trying to get people to hold the administration they helped elect be accountable.

 

If we can't get there, then we'll just keep bitching. To which you will likely ask us again why we are doing so.

[concert andy]

I don't think you're really getting my point. I agree there's room for, and a need to use, drones.

 

My major problem is with the targeting and killing of people on just the suspicion of being guilty of something. Their use of drones to carry out the killing just gives them the ability to do it without answering the questions they'd need to answer in order to send in the troops to do the same job. They're avoiding accountability and the way they are doing it kills innocent people. Shit wouldn't fly if there were reports of a group of soldiers storming into a house and killing everyone in it because they thought someone in there might be guilty of something but if they use a drone and do the same thing they don't have to explain a damn thing and can just categorize the collateral dead as "enemy combatants"

 

I did not understand your point completely then, because I thought your point was any use of drone was bad.   

 

Answering the highlighted section:

 

But it happens.  My cousin told me he and his troop all agreed never to talk to the media or anyone about things they did or that happened.

 

What about contract soldiers who do not abide by our laws, that were overseas (not sure if they still are but I assume).

 

None of it is right.  

 

Just saying that sending troops, this happens too, and they say the collateral dead were enemy combatants in the same way.

 

 

See, this is where we will never see I to I.

 

You say I am wrong, I say you are misguided.  You are not wrong to feel that way, but some how I am WRONG.

 

So one US citizen was targeted.  His father was a terrorist (from your post above).  How do you know this kid did not think the sun shined out of his fathers ass and did what ever he wanted to get acceptance or really believed his father was doing what was right?  

 

You must be a better person than me, because I do not have these powers. 

 

This is what you are mad about, you want these questions answered.  But it is national security, so can hide behind that, for a while, until the pressure gets to hot.  So keep applying pressure, and have fun.

[concert andy]

The same thing we've done before we started being the Imperial police. Protect ourselves and work in diplomatic ways to pursue peace. It's not a matter of practicality at this point, it's a matter of responsibility and adhering to the law. If you're willing, as you indicated, to stay neutral, like so many others until somehow these professional psychopaths let you in on their plans, I'm not sure it is people like Joker and I that need to take action instead of complain. This is taking some action by trying to get people to hold the administration they helped elect be accountable.

 

If we can't get there, then we'll just keep bitching. To which you will likely ask us again why we are doing so.

 

When have we peacefully negotiated a treaty with a terrorist or terrorist regime in the 20th century?

 

I can think of WW I, WW II, Korea, Vietnam, Cuba Crisis, Libya, guatamala (I forget exactly but the movie with clint eastwood as a drill sergeant is my only reference or remembering of this), Russia (we negotiated when they were weakened, but not for the 30 years prior).

[Joker]

No, I'm saying you're wrong when you say no US citizens are dying. 

 

I understand what you're saying about drones rather than troops, you're not wrong there. I just think there needs to be rules put in place as to how and when those drones are used. That kid was sitting in an outdoor cafe when he was killed, was there any immediate need to kill him (as well as anyone else killed in that attack) right then or could they have waited and sent in a sniper or a team to take him out if he really had to die?

[concert andy]

No, I'm saying you're wrong when you say no US citizens are dying. 

 

I understand what you're saying about drones rather than troops, you're not wrong there. I just think there needs to be rules put in place as to how and when those drones are used. That kid was sitting in an outdoor cafe when he was killed, was there any immediate need to kill him (as well as anyone else killed in that attack) right then or could they have waited and sent in a sniper or a team to take him out if he really had to die?

 

I understand your point about the kid, but who knows he wasn't going to do something very BAD in the coming days.  May be they got credible info that he was an immediate threat.  Just saying that you are assuming he was completely innocent.  He may have been but we don't know.  Which is your point.

 

This is why I am neutral because I do not know, may be it was justifiable.  Then again may be it was not. 

[concert andy]

The same thing we've done before we started being the Imperial police. Protect ourselves and work in diplomatic ways to pursue peace. It's not a matter of practicality at this point, it's a matter of responsibility and adhering to the law. If you're willing, as you indicated, to stay neutral, like so many others until somehow these professional psychopaths let you in on their plans, I'm not sure it is people like Joker and I that need to take action instead of complain. This is taking some action by trying to get people to hold the administration they helped elect be accountable.

 

If we can't get there, then we'll just keep bitching. To which you will likely ask us again why we are doing so.

 

IMO, More people are worried about jobs, the debt, and many other things to care enough about this issue.

[TakeAStepBack]

Great. Maybe so, Maybe not.

 

Another round on the record, sir?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

IMO, More people are worried about jobs, the debt, and many other things to care enough about this issue.

 

As you've been having the gun legislation conversation, is that right?

[TakeAStepBack]

[concert andy]

As you've been having the gun legislation conversation, is that right?

 

Oh is this about me now?

 

Because I said "more people"  implying a good portion of the US of A.

 

And gun legislation falls under the portion I stated, and "many other things".

 

 

 

Where are those references of our country peacefully negotiating with terrorists or terrorist regimes historically?  This is what we had done before we became the Imperial Police.  I say that we did sometime in the 20th century (WW I) so going back further is irrelevant.

 

I was hoping you would enlighten me on this historical fact.  Usually if I am wrong or slightly off base, you run and find proof to support this.  

[TakeAStepBack]

Proof:

 

[concert andy]

I see how it is, when you are done that means we must have jumped the shark time.

 

Surprised you did not give me a, Yes We Can!

[concert andy]

See this is original:

 

[concert andy]

Damn I found that from your post in August.

 

Foil'd!

[concert andy]

I just googled images of obama, and I found this link:

 

http://www.gathering...we-did-sticker/