Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Apr 22, 2013, 04:06 PM   #1
balamw
Moderator
 
balamw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: New England, USA
Obama and drones, etc...

MOD NOTE: Discussion extracted from enemy combatant thread.

B

Last edited by balamw; Apr 24, 2013 at 07:34 AM. Reason: Thread split
balamw is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 04:06 PM   #2
rovex
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Obama and drones, etc...

Quote:
Originally Posted by bradl View Post
But the point here is that both McVeigh and Nichols were residents/citizens, and as such, entitled to due process. BTW, Guantanamo existed will prior to 9/11, though not totally as a detention site.

So all of a sudden, despite being a resident and citizen, Tsarnaev isn't entitled to that? What if his name was Jason Neidler (I just made that name up, nothing significant about it)? Does it really have to come down to what is in a name?

Either way, the AP just reported that the White House re-issued a statement stating that Tsarnaev will not be treated as an enemy combatant, as well has officially charged, and as being charged, has been read his Miranda Rights.

Again, an over-reactive jaunt by a bloodthirsty Senator.

BL.
And Obama pledged to close gitmo. Actions speak louder than words, and the government is no stranger to broken promises and lies.
rovex is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 04:21 PM   #3
bradl
macrumors 68030
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by rovex View Post
And Obama pledged to close gitmo.
Which the Reds in Congress objected to and blocked.

Quote:
Actions speak louder than words,
And obstructionism breeds inaction.

Quote:
and the government is no stranger to broken promises and lies.
True here. Perhaps the quote should be changed to "lies, damn lies, and government"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomorrow
As I understand it, they're invoking an "imminent threat" clause to avoid reading him his Miranda rights, presumably to find out whether there are any other bombs anywhere, any plans by any of his associates to carry out any more terroristic acts, etc. None of this means that he doesn't actually have those rights, simply that they're not going to encourage him to use them.
They had used the Personal Safety Exception, but now that he has been formally charged, he has to be read his rights. So it would now be safe to say that that exception no longer is valid, and that those rights have been read.

BL.
bradl is online now   3 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 04:31 PM   #4
rovex
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradl View Post
Which the Reds in Congress objected to and blocked
Obama has bypassed congress plenty of times. When did he ever receive parliamentary sanction for his drone programme?
rovex is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 04:39 PM   #5
bradl
macrumors 68030
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by rovex View Post
Obama has bypassed congress plenty of times. When did he ever receive parliamentary sanction for his drone programme?
The drone program started before Obama. But again, how about starting a new thread and argue that there.

BL.
bradl is online now   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 04:50 PM   #6
rovex
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradl View Post
The drone program started before Obama. But again, how about starting a new thread and argue that there.

BL.
Under Bush terrorists were kidnapped and tortured though extraordinary rendition. Under Obama drones have been used to murder suspects instead of capturing them. Difference.
rovex is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 04:54 PM   #7
Eraserhead
macrumors G4
 
Eraserhead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by rovex View Post
Under Bush terrorists were kidnapped and tortured though extraordinary rendition. Under Obama drones have been used to murder suspects instead of capturing them. Difference.
I think it is clear that Obama has used more drones than Bush and has been worse in that regard.
__________________
Actually it does make sense. Man created god, so if we exist, He exists. - obeygiant
Eraserhead is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 04:57 PM   #8
Peace
macrumors P6
 
Peace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Space--The ONLY Frontier
Quote:
Originally Posted by rovex View Post
Obama has bypassed congress plenty of times. When did he ever receive parliamentary sanction for his drone programme?
The United States doesn't have a Parliament.
Peace is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 05:19 PM   #9
bradl
macrumors 68030
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by rovex View Post
Under Bush terrorists were kidnapped and tortured though extraordinary rendition. Under Obama drones have been used to murder suspects instead of capturing them. Difference.
The difference is that this is offtopic to this thread. If you want to argue Obama and drones, pull up that thread or start a new one.

I'm hesitant to use that report button, but I'm feeling the grip of my hand slipping...

BL.
bradl is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 06:06 PM   #10
rovex
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peace View Post
The United States doesn't have a Parliament.
What's the difference? It has elected representatives debating and passing legislation does it not?
rovex is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 06:41 PM   #11
Peace
macrumors P6
 
Peace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Space--The ONLY Frontier
Quote:
Originally Posted by rovex View Post
What's the difference? It has elected representatives debating and passing legislation does it not?
Well if you lived here you might wonder if that is true.

Peace is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 09:15 PM   #12
citizenzen
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by rovex View Post
Obama has bypassed congress plenty of times. When did he ever receive parliamentary sanction for his drone programme?
That doesn't mean Obama bypassed Congress.

Congress funds government agencies.

Congress doesn't tell the NSA exactly what to do with those funds.

However, if Congress did somehow specifically defund drone projects and Obama shifted money from another agency to continue the project, then that might qualify as "bypassing congress".

Otherwise ...
citizenzen is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2013, 03:33 PM   #13
rovex
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by citizenzen View Post
That doesn't mean Obama bypassed Congress.

Congress funds government agencies.

Congress doesn't tell the NSA exactly what to do with those funds.

However, if Congress did somehow specifically defund drone projects and Obama shifted money from another agency to continue the project, then that might qualify as "bypassing congress".

Otherwise ...
No but Obama directly presides over the killings of suspects in the Yemen and pakistan, this was said by a reporter/scholar can't quite remember who. He gives the order to strike everytime a group of suspicious men (presumably) gather that is then relayed to him by the nsa/military before giving to go ahead to kill. If obama is consulted, why shouldn't congress? Already that the drone programme is illegal under international law and the UN. Since when did Yemen accept having WMD's from abroad, flying over sovereign territory, killing it's own people? Imagine the outcry if this happened in america. It's an act of war....
rovex is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2013, 04:13 PM   #14
bradl
macrumors 68030
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by rovex View Post
No but Obama directly presides over the killings of suspects in the Yemen and pakistan, this was said by a reporter/scholar can't quite remember who. He gives the order to strike everytime a group of suspicious men (presumably) gather that is then relayed to him by the nsa/military before giving to go ahead to kill. If obama is consulted, why shouldn't congress?
Offtopic, but in for a sheep.

Simple:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Article II, Section II, United States Constitution
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States;
The POTUS is Commander-in-Chief, not Congress.

Quote:
Already that the drone programme is illegal under international law and the UN.
Source, please.

Quote:
Since when did Yemen accept having WMD's from abroad, flying over sovereign territory, killing it's own people? Imagine the outcry if this happened in america. It's an act of war....
Again, Source, please. Actually, scratch that. My last time requesting this: If you want to talk about this, start a new thread about it, and we'll talk about it. Otherwise, that report button next to your name is going to get put to use.

BL.
bradl is online now   2 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2013, 06:40 AM   #15
rovex
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradl View Post
Offtopic, but in for a sheep.

Simple:



The POTUS is Commander-in-Chief, not Congress.
Apparently he's not commander-in-chief for gitmo. If an illegal detention camp required parliamentary sanction, essentially kidnapping strangers with a convection rate of 3%, but a similarly illegal drone operation doesn't require parliamentary sanction, this time around murdering suspects with 'collateral' damage, then clearly the constitution has been undermined in one way or another.



Quote:
Originally Posted by bradl View Post
source please.
UN Article 2(7) guarantees state sovereignty. Any intervention in the domestic of states requires either the agreement of the country concerned or security council approval (Article 25). Yemen has not approved the use of WMD's on its territory, meaning a violation of the UN resolution. Illegal, in other words.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bradl View Post
Again, Source, please. Actually, scratch that. My last time requesting this: If you want to talk about this, start a new thread about it, and we'll talk about it. Otherwise, that report button next to your name is going to get put to use.
You don't have to reply, just so you know.
rovex is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2013, 07:55 AM   #16
quagmire
macrumors 603
 
quagmire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by rovex View Post
UN Article 2(7) guarantees state sovereignty. Any intervention in the domestic of states requires either the agreement of the country concerned or security council approval (Article 25). Yemen has not approved the use of WMD's on its territory, meaning a violation of the UN resolution. Illegal, in other words.
When is a drone a WMD? Or did Predators start carrying nukes and chemical weapons?
__________________
Crimes against US History:
CV-6 USS Enterprise
Yankee Stadium
Penn Station-New York
quagmire is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2013, 08:19 AM   #17
skunk
macrumors Demi-God
 
skunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Republic of Ukistan
Quote:
Originally Posted by quagmire View Post
When is a drone a WMD? Or did Predators start carrying nukes and chemical weapons?
Actually, according to the definition being used in Boston, ANY explosive device is a WMD, so they might well qualify.

The drone war is imperial terrorism at its finest. No accountability, no apology, no due process, riding roughshod over UN rules, national sovereignty, human rights and the rule of law. Over 200 children have been killed by drone strikes in Pakistan, and more in Yemen and Somalia. But it's a long way away, and few could even find those places on a map. Can you imagine the reaction if some American nutter set off a bomb in Karachi and the Palistanis took him out on US soil with a drone - and "oops!" a few stray kids too. Bush used to brag about US disregard for international law, Obama just flouts it without saying a thing.
skunk is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2013, 08:51 AM   #18
satcomer
macrumors 601
 
satcomer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Upstate NYS
Boy Ron Paul must be licking his chops now about his Drone predictions.
__________________
Mac Pro Dual 2.8 Quad(Rev B.), 16 G RAM, OS X 10.9, 23'' LCD
Mac Book Pro Core 2 Duo 2.16Ghz, SuperDrive, 2G RAM, OS X 10.7.5
iPad 3, 32 black

Last edited by satcomer; Apr 24, 2013 at 08:59 AM.
satcomer is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2013, 08:55 AM   #19
Happybunny
macrumors 68000
 
Happybunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 's-Hertogenbosch Netherlands
Quote:
Originally Posted by skunk View Post
Bush used to brag about US disregard for international law, Obama just flouts it without saying a thing.
OMG that is ******** true. In true 'softly softly catchy monkey'
__________________
'You cannot undo history, but you can learn from it'
Happybunny is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2013, 10:20 AM   #20
rovex
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
What's more remarkable is the minor coverage the drone campaign receives. Given the wholly unacceptable nature of it, the censorship is impressive even by western standards. The so called free press, refusing to denounce the crimes of states.

Last edited by rovex; Apr 24, 2013 at 10:29 AM.
rovex is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2013, 10:31 AM   #21
VulchR
macrumors 68000
 
VulchR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Scotland
Quote:
Originally Posted by quagmire View Post
When is a drone a WMD? Or did Predators start carrying nukes and chemical weapons?
Well, if explosives in a pressure cooker count then....

I don't object to the drones per se - we are at war (a dirty one at that). But I'd like drones to fire sniper bullets that hit only an identified person rather than taking out a an entire building. I'd also like our government to think the consequences of using drones through. We have the drones now. What happens when terrorists have them? I think we have opened Pandora's Box....
__________________
My first was a Mac+. Now I own an iPhone with 3.5x the pixels, a colour display, WiFi, 512x the RAM, >1500x the data storage, and 100x the speed. And it fits in the palm of my hand.
VulchR is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2013, 10:34 AM   #22
63dot
macrumors 601
 
63dot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Platte
Quote:
Originally Posted by rovex View Post
What's the difference? It has elected representatives debating and passing legislation does it not?
It is very similar from what I have seen having lived in both UK and US. And the public distrust of them is no different.

But what is more interesting is that even with such power, very little gets done and it pretty much leads to broken promises. At this point in my life instead of putting all the blame on the representatives I have to realize that maybe some of the problem is the system.

Has anybody here ever been a civil servant (city, county, state, federal?)?
That tends to answer a lot of questions. While government is necessary imho, at the same time its existence does not make it have to answer to the people as diligently as a corporation has to to its shareholders. Some may say that government is so lazy and corrupt there is NO accountability, but I say it's there but just barely. There is probably no way to make it more efficient and follow its leaders short of being a dictatorship and this whole government thing becomes a rock and a hard place situation.
63dot is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2013, 10:37 AM   #23
skunk
macrumors Demi-God
 
skunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Republic of Ukistan
Quote:
Originally Posted by VulchR View Post
Well, if explosives in a pressure cooker count then....

I don't object to the drones per se - we are at war (a dirty one at that). But I'd like drones to fire sniper bullets that hit only an identified person rather than taking out a an entire building. I'd also like our government to think the consequences of using drones through. We have the drones now. What happens when terrorists have them? I think we have opened Pandora's Box....
We have no idea who these things are targeting, or on what evidence. This is nothing but vigilante justice being practised at state level. Obama has authorised these murders at four times the rate Bush did. The US is fast becoming a rogue state.
skunk is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2013, 10:39 AM   #24
rovex
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by VulchR View Post
Well, if explosives in a pressure cooker count then....

I don't object to the drones per se - we are at war (a dirty one at that). But I'd like drones to fire sniper bullets that hit only an identified person rather than taking out a an entire building. I'd also like our government to think the consequences of using drones through. We have the drones now. What happens when terrorists have them? I think we have opened Pandora's Box....
The US is not at war against Yemen and Pakistan. in fact, i'd argue the us aren't at war against anyone. Just look who's funding al qaida jihadists in syria, and has close ties with Saudi arabia

The idea of state sovereignty was to prevent other countries from doing as they chose outside of their own borders. Even if there are terrorists in the Yemen, it does not give america a ticket to start an aerial war on sovereign land. You can argue that globalisation, free flows of capital etc. has made state sovereignty an outmoded concept, but this is a whole different kettle of fish altogether.

Last edited by rovex; Apr 24, 2013 at 10:51 AM.
rovex is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2013, 10:51 AM   #25
Happybunny
macrumors 68000
 
Happybunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 's-Hertogenbosch Netherlands
Quote:
Originally Posted by skunk View Post
We have no idea who these things are targeting, or on what evidence. This is nothing but vigilante justice being practised at state level. Obama has authorised these murders at four times the rate Bush did. The US is fast becoming a rogue state.
While you are absolutely right.
I do think that he has been very lucky, in that the media, got side tracked by the Credit crisis, and the major problems with the Euro. Plus the media of today does lack a certain watchdog mentality, that was common a few years ago.
I remember in my youth when we were interested in politics, Watergate or Lockheed affair, the Pentagon Papers. In those distant days politicians, ministers and even presidents were called to account by the press.

But today the media is more interested in Kim Kardashian, or Honey Boo Boo.
__________________
'You cannot undo history, but you can learn from it'
Happybunny is offline   1 Reply With Quote


Reply
MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Beer Drones shut down. LIVEFRMNYC Politics, Religion, Social Issues 3 Feb 2, 2014 10:02 AM
Personal Drones: The new frontier jnpy!$4g3cwk Politics, Religion, Social Issues 31 Jan 6, 2014 09:11 PM
Official: US Admits to Murdering American Citizens with Drones thejadedmonkey Politics, Religion, Social Issues 62 May 26, 2013 07:21 PM
Rand Paul stands tough against drones 63dot Politics, Religion, Social Issues 78 Mar 15, 2013 09:30 AM
Drones what are you buying? IpadMania iPhone 7 Sep 21, 2012 07:28 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:42 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC