It costs far less, endangers far fewer people and doesn't get any American military killed.
If I were a neocon I would now say "Why do you hate America so much? Why do you want more Americans to die?"
"Hypocrites", Springer? Let's compare the differences:
Obama: Uses drones to blow up a group of Al-Qaeda members. Republicans crap their pants in anger.
GWB: Lets people rot in Gitmo for years without a right to trial based on little to no evidence of being a terrorist aside from being from the Middle East. Republicans yawn.
Bush arrested human beings and put them in prison and tried to get information from them to save other human beings lives.
Obama kills who he wants ... no matter who they are ... even Americans. BANG!!! You're DEAD!!!
The correct answer is that the overwhelming majority of them were. Hence Islamic Terrorists.
The West is at war with militant Islam, whether spineless liberals want to believe it or not.
And our Kadarshian president cannot bring himself to say the words. Could that be because he is a Muslim, if not de jure, certainly de facto. In fact Mrs. Obama is on record referring to her husband's "Muslim faith."
A) didn't know anything because they weren't actually terrorists.
B) were terrorists, but kept their mouths shut
c) were terrorists, but gave false, useless, or outdated intel.
Torture or threat of death doesn't work on people that have nothing to lose and believe they'll be rewarded for dying for their cause.
As for Obama, he killed people that were actually associated with terrorists . Yet you're acting like he's flying drones all over America, bombing babies and puppies. When he starts drone bombing US ciitizens that AREN'T allied with terrorists, then I'll be outraged.
I'll also go ahead and put it here again so you might catch it a second time.
Just because the majority of terrorists follow Islam doesn't mean the majority of people who follow Islam are terrorists
You aren't serious ... are you?
Can you say Muslim Terrorist? Obama cannot.
So basically, all Al Qaeda has to do is get an American at every facility and then, according to your ruleset, we should never do anything about them at all.
And yeah, you're right, it makes utterly no sense.
It's really simple Jack and if you aren't seeing it you're just choosing not to. If we're going to wage war on terrorists what costs a lot more of everything (including human deaths): surgical strikes or invasions, occupations and airstrikes?
That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
- Gene Wolfe
And who are you replying to? Someone who uses some logic and reason in his argument... whereas it's void in the right wing argument. Right wingers under the Bush administration created many more terrorists... and it was up to Obama to tackle the problem. The neo-con argument often employed in this thread created terrorists. Thanks for demonstrating total and utter inconsistency.
- - - Updated - - -
http://www.salon.com/2013/02/05/who_...mas_kill_list/The condition that an operational leader present an ‘imminent’ threat of violent attack against the United States does not require the United States to have clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests will take place in the immediate future,” the memo states...
But in the new white paper, the Obama administration isn’t just laying waste to that most basic of ideas — it is going further and insisting that even within the extra-constitutional “kill list” deliberations inside the White House, the president doesn’t actually need evidence to order someone’s death.
a case was brought up by his family and the ACLU... it was dismissed under the "political question doctrine," basically meaning that it's up to Congress to do something (or do nothing and let the next President continue on with the assassinations without trials or evidence)Like I said, the Supreme Court can rule on his death - if he were to come back from the dead to challenge the government.
I hope that the President eventually comes around and follows his own suggestions...
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/th...nterview-pt--1One of the things we've got to do is put a legal architecture in place, and we need Congressional help in order to do that, to make sure that not only am I reined in but any president's reined in terms of some of the decisions that we're making
You're the most biased person I've ever seen.
C'mon Springer..... why don't you join up and fight the enemy with your bayonet? They'll be able to see your handsome face.
Are you chicken?
So just sit there on your computer in your little room whining about the President. Big tough man.....
You've really made a fool of yourself in this thread but that's typical for you.
Please, get some perspective.
Saying left hypocrite is a redundancy. Saying left kissass is a redundancy as well. Aren't his balls in Michele's back pocket?
GWB was a less than perfect president, but people go to the point of being stupid in demonizing him. He did have redeeming qualities. He expressed genuine concern over global warming, and they even have a private residence that is designed to be green-friendly. Also, although I would have liked for him to have more liberal positions on gay rights issues, he did stand up for gay people against "kicking gay people" and using gay people as a political scapegoat. Although I have serious misgivings about GWB, he is not the devil incarnate bastard he is made out to be.
And I have found most of the grounds on which people have tried to slag Obama to be at best dubious, at worst outright lies. Economists who once criticized his stimulus package now acknowledge that it was effective. His health care act has actually succeeded in reducing the proportion of Americans living without health insurance, even before having been fully implemented, and this is no surprise because it was modeled after a program that actually worked pretty well in one of our states. He has been a good president, and he has served this country well.
Now, as far as "Obama killing US citizens," I assume you are talking about Awlaki. Awlaki was a terrorist and a criminal, and thank God he is dead.
As a less than active member of this forum, I get more and more confused every time I stumble in here.
When an American citizen joins forces with anti-american forces (terrorists are a good example.) they have
abrogated their rights as an American Citizen. And there is a PERIOD at the end of that sentence.
I am amazed this needs to be spelled out even for some twits here.
I am older than most of you, half the time you can't even understand me because I am not simplistic enough
for you to do a 2second recon and go on. Okay, bottom line...use your inner eye to visualize...
Place # is rigid, inflexible and secular and has been running their world since before God and running it their way.
Place @ is about 2-300 years old, has welcomed, fed, aided and protected a number of Place #'s for years. Some
of those places frequently invite Place@ to help them
Following so far? Those dissidents in Place # don't like not Controlling everything even more than Place @ likes
playing Nanny to Gaea. (hard to believe...oops JMPO)
If you were a member of my group and jumped ship trying to overtake me and mine, you are not a member of my
group and I don't give a fuck how you get taken down...your collateral damage is a problem for you and your new
allegiance. ...for fuck sake boys and girls,the issue isn't Obama or Bush or those individuals (whose names I can't
pronounce spell or more than half way remember.)
Drones or troop or missiles or active sanctions, what ever works. America needs to remember it is supposed to be
an amalgam of the worlds people, learning at one village, slowly and painfully aspiring to a better place for all. Just
curious, how many here are talking out of life experience and how many are talking out of books? How many are just
talking? These are just my personal thoughts...not meant to attack or insult anyone
I have to leave now before theforum stoning begins.
As for Obama, there's a vast difference between making a valid criticism and heaping made-up bullshit on him. Some people on here (they know who they are) keep repeatedly harping on Obama about stupid inconsequential things (like using the flag on his campaign buttons), blame him for things he has no control or influence over (like Jeeps being made in China), or get their panties all knotted up when Obama does the same thing previous Presidents did. Even worse, when they do have something approaching an actual critique, it's usually a thinly veiled personal attack "supported" by "facts" from grossly biased sources like Fox News, World Net Daily and Breitbart.com.
As for Awlaki, his son died because he was willingly and knowingly associating with known terrorists in a country known to be a hotbed of terrorist activity. He wasn't a 6 year old boy being dragged to Yemen by his father. He was a 16 year old that sought out his father, knowing that he was working with Al-Qaeda. You lie down with dogs, you're going to get fleas. Just because he was an American citizen doesn't give him a free pass.
GWB might not have been a demon, but he ran his 2004 campaign on the back of homophobia. Nuff said.
That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
- Gene Wolfe
4 more years.
When did republicans start caring so much about the lives of people other than their paying constituents? Let alone people from other countries? Oh right, they started caring when Obama won. I guess they finally realized absolutely and publicly refusin to work with the President wasn't working for their approval ratings. Time for a new tactic.
I did read one op-ed supporting the no-due-process drone strikes in the Washington Post, but (surprise) it was written by someone from the Bush administration.