Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by balamw, Apr 22, 2013.
MOD NOTE: Discussion extracted from enemy combatant thread.
Which the Reds in Congress objected to and blocked.
And obstructionism breeds inaction.
True here. Perhaps the quote should be changed to "lies, damn lies, and government"?
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.
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.
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.
The United States doesn't have a Parliament.
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...
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.
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".
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....
Offtopic, but in for a sheep.
The POTUS is Commander-in-Chief, not Congress.
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.
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.
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.
You don't have to reply, just so you know.
Obama and drones, etc...
And Obama pledged to close gitmo. Actions speak louder than words, and the government is no stranger to broken promises and lies.
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.
Boy Ron Paul must be licking his chops now about his Drone predictions.
OMG that is ******** true. In true 'softly softly catchy monkey'
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.
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....
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.
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.
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.
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.