Some people finally understand the reality behind drone strikes
Did we really have to kill the 16 year old Brother of Alwaki?
I don't understand why that bothers you. He is hanging out with terrorists, why should he get a free pass?
See my issues with teenagers who kill: age is no defense.
I don't understand why that bothers you. He is hanging out with terrorists, why should he get a free pass?
See my issues with teenagers who kill: age is no defense.
What about the Due Process demands of the Fifth Amendment?
When you get past that.....and a Court agrees with you....Doom on them!
Until you do....like it or not...he is fully entitled to that protection under the law.
If he is in a combat zone...say Afghanistan or Pakistan, is caught carrying a weapon, planting an IED, or conducting an armed attack...do him in anyway you can. If you catch in the act inside the USA...again pop him. If not in the act....arrest and prosecution in court is the right way...if he resists with a weapon....pop him. I am old time law enforcement....I have no hang up over dusting a bad guy but you have to do it legally.
As cold as it sounds, a Non-US citizen in exactly the same situation....riding in a car in the desert does not enjoy that same protection as they are not US Citizens....granting them that might be a consideration.
Riding in a car, in the middle of the Yemeni desert lands, I feel you have not reached a threshold that allows you to pop him.
When you get past that.....and a Court agrees with you....Doom on them!
Until you do....like it or not...he is fully entitled to that protection under the law.
If he is in a combat zone...say Afghanistan or Pakistan, is caught carrying a weapon, planting an IED, or conducting an armed attack...do him in anyway you can. If you catch in the act inside the USA...again pop him. If not in the act....arrest and prosecution in court is the right way...if he resists with a weapon....pop him. I am old time law enforcement....I have no hang up over dusting a bad guy but you have to do it legally.
As cold as it sounds, a Non-US citizen in exactly the same situation....riding in a car in the desert does not enjoy that same protection as they are not US Citizens....granting them that might be a consideration.
Riding in a car, in the middle of the Yemeni desert lands, I feel you have not reached a threshold that allows you to pop him.
He is hanging out with terrorists
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I went to see "Oh Dark Thirty" yesterday and couldn't help but think of how much hatred must have been engendered in all those family members the Seals went to great pains not to kill when they assaulted OBL's compound.
If the children weren't hate-filled on the night of the attack, you can be sure there'll be a small army of family retainers revving them up on a daily basis. I think it would be about the safest bet in town that ten to twenty years from now, our side will be hunting for one and probably more of OLB's many offspring.
Unpalatable as it may be to us today, there was a good reason why, up until medieval times, rivals ensured they killed off all the sons of their enemies as well as the enemy himself. It was a matter of survival, because if they remained alive, those sons would surely come after you to exact revenge. But of course, we don't do anything like that anymore - which might say something of how long our current society will endure, because the people we're fighting sure as hell still do!
If the children weren't hate-filled on the night of the attack, you can be sure there'll be a small army of family retainers revving them up on a daily basis. I think it would be about the safest bet in town that ten to twenty years from now, our side will be hunting for one and probably more of OLB's many offspring.
Unpalatable as it may be to us today, there was a good reason why, up until medieval times, rivals ensured they killed off all the sons of their enemies as well as the enemy himself. It was a matter of survival, because if they remained alive, those sons would surely come after you to exact revenge. But of course, we don't do anything like that anymore - which might say something of how long our current society will endure, because the people we're fighting sure as hell still do!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Andu
I agree, however that raid, the fact it was behind enemy lines,
all evidence would be left behind, I don't think they had a choice.
Even taking them all with them wasn't really an option it seems.
I agree, however that raid, the fact it was behind enemy lines,
all evidence would be left behind, I don't think they had a choice.
Even taking them all with them wasn't really an option it seems.
Sod the various constitutional amendments.
The US has shown it will act regardless. Whatever suits the politics of the day, facts on the ground are ignored.
Iraq '03 anyone?
The US has shown it will act regardless. Whatever suits the politics of the day, facts on the ground are ignored.
Iraq '03 anyone?
Mind explaining what you are talking about....Iraq 2003?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Fife, Scotland
Age: 78
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"extrajudicial strikes on suspected terrorists"
There was a video of a night attack by a helicopter on "terrorists" in a convoy of stationary vehicles, it looked strange to me so I watched it several times.
I then realised that it was the body language which was odd.
Felt ill when I saw that it was most likely an old man, an old woman and a teenage girl trying to rescue a tractor.
There was a video of a night attack by a helicopter on "terrorists" in a convoy of stationary vehicles, it looked strange to me so I watched it several times.
I then realised that it was the body language which was odd.
Felt ill when I saw that it was most likely an old man, an old woman and a teenage girl trying to rescue a tractor.
You probably missed the one where two pair of Apaches hunt down over 20 Taliban fighters. They discuss amongst themselves the fact there are Women and Children in the area and they very carefully go about their bloody business making every effort to correctly ID Weapons in the hands of the Taliban before doing ANY shooting.
Mistakes are made in war time....and before you get too carried away...remember Dresden?
Mistakes are made in war time....and before you get too carried away...remember Dresden?
SASLess, Having read all your comments, I wonder if your opinion would be different if the incumbent in the oval office was a Republican?
One thing I have picked up with American politics is that if 'your' team is in office they can do very little wrong - if the other team has the ball then even the way the president puts his socks on is wrong - it tends to be a fairly simplistic one eyed view. This has its strengths - election volunteers seem to be everywhere - in Australia - frankly we wouldn't volunteer - 'It just encourages the barstewards". Then again, when your man doesn't win, here we go down to the pub and and think that things would be pretty much the same anyway. In the US - how many presidents have you had assassinated or attempted assasinated? I suspect that this debate is along party lines.
I suspect in the UK as with Australia we tend to view all politicians with a large degree of skepticism - both sides of politics stuff things up, no side gets everything right.
One thing I have picked up with American politics is that if 'your' team is in office they can do very little wrong - if the other team has the ball then even the way the president puts his socks on is wrong - it tends to be a fairly simplistic one eyed view. This has its strengths - election volunteers seem to be everywhere - in Australia - frankly we wouldn't volunteer - 'It just encourages the barstewards". Then again, when your man doesn't win, here we go down to the pub and and think that things would be pretty much the same anyway. In the US - how many presidents have you had assassinated or attempted assasinated? I suspect that this debate is along party lines.
I suspect in the UK as with Australia we tend to view all politicians with a large degree of skepticism - both sides of politics stuff things up, no side gets everything right.
You did not read my comments very closely then.
My complete rejection of the policy is based upon Constitutional issues....not politics.
I am clearly supportive of bringing Terrorists to Justice or bringing Justice to the Terrorists. I am quite clear on that in my posts.
As I have said....I have no problem whacking Bad Guys....I have done that.
But...I also insist it be done legally. Key word "Legally".
US Citizens anywhere in the World and anyone citizen or not, within the borders of the USA are protected by the Fifth Amendment that demands "Due Process"....meaning a Judicial Proceeding before the Government can deprive one of property, freedom, and life.
There is no Left or Right when it comes to that.
When you add the Secrecy that the Obama Administration has applied to this Drone Program and the Killing of US Citizens....and in effect making Obama (or any President) the Accuser, Prosecutor, Judge, Jury, and Executioner and all done in Secret even including the Office of Legal Counsel Legal Justification....why am I wrong to challenge this?
Do you trust your government to that degree?
Should I trust mine?
Should I just ignore the Constitution as it appears Obama is doing?
If you answer yes to any of those last four questions....I would have to question your ability to reason effectively.
I am a Conservative....actually more a Libertarian under our political definitions and have a background in law enforcement in both the City and Federal Levels.
During my Federal Service with the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS), an agency that can be described as being the Navy's FBI, I was shocked to listen to stories the older Agents told of doing Bag Jobs on homes during the Vietnam War era and shortly afterwards.
By Bag Job, I mean what they called "warrantless covert entries into people's homes to search for incriminating information". The excuse was "National Security" which did allow for that. This was during the time when Homosexuality was a mortal sin in the Military and if found out....the Person would be tried in a Courts-martial and be discharged at the minimum if not imprisoned if found to have been engaged in actual sexual activity. Mind you....there was no requirement for the individual to hold a Security Clearance of any kind, they did not have to have access to Classified Material, or in any way be suspected of anything but being Homosexual.
When I took issue with the old guys, reminding them about the Fourth Amendment Protections re Unlawful Search and the Right to Privacy, they scoffed. As a City Police Officer, we were schooled very well about the laws on Search and Seizure and in no way what the Federal Government was doing in that regard as described by the very guys doing those searches, remotely respect those Rights.
Congress very harshly stepped down on the Federal Government and Federal Intelligence Agencies for those kinds of Abuses.
If our Society is to survive....we have to resist any encroachment upon our Constitutional freedoms and I see this latest Obama action as something that cannot be allowed to happen.
Already, the Congress is talking about the equivalent of a FISA Court which is in use for National Security Wire Tapping and Intercepts. It is not just me that is against what is going on.
We are seeing a despotic regime trying to take hold here....one that rejects the Constitution as evidenced by repeated breaches of Federal Laws that they are sworn to uphold and enforce. The Federal Courts have slammed Obama over his appointments to the NLRB in what was a gross act of misconduct by him.
The Drone Program is just one of many problems the Obama Administration have brought upon themselves. If you may recall, Obama was very much against anything Bush did after 9-11. He was all incensed about Water Boarding and called it Torture.....yet here we have the same guy issuing orders to KILL the same kinds of People that he objected to being Water Boarded plus they are American Citizens that are afforded Constitutional Protections against exactly what he is doing.
Don't you find it a bit odd that he does this?
As to being silent when your side is in office....how about the Democrats, Liberals, Progressives, and the fecking Media in my country....where the hell are they? Remember how they raised hell over AbuGrahib, Gitmo, Water Boarding? You heard anything out them on Obama ordering Killings?
Don't accuse me of being hypocritical on this issue as that just isn't true.
My complete rejection of the policy is based upon Constitutional issues....not politics.
I am clearly supportive of bringing Terrorists to Justice or bringing Justice to the Terrorists. I am quite clear on that in my posts.
As I have said....I have no problem whacking Bad Guys....I have done that.
But...I also insist it be done legally. Key word "Legally".
US Citizens anywhere in the World and anyone citizen or not, within the borders of the USA are protected by the Fifth Amendment that demands "Due Process"....meaning a Judicial Proceeding before the Government can deprive one of property, freedom, and life.
There is no Left or Right when it comes to that.
When you add the Secrecy that the Obama Administration has applied to this Drone Program and the Killing of US Citizens....and in effect making Obama (or any President) the Accuser, Prosecutor, Judge, Jury, and Executioner and all done in Secret even including the Office of Legal Counsel Legal Justification....why am I wrong to challenge this?
Do you trust your government to that degree?
Should I trust mine?
Should I just ignore the Constitution as it appears Obama is doing?
If you answer yes to any of those last four questions....I would have to question your ability to reason effectively.
I am a Conservative....actually more a Libertarian under our political definitions and have a background in law enforcement in both the City and Federal Levels.
During my Federal Service with the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS), an agency that can be described as being the Navy's FBI, I was shocked to listen to stories the older Agents told of doing Bag Jobs on homes during the Vietnam War era and shortly afterwards.
By Bag Job, I mean what they called "warrantless covert entries into people's homes to search for incriminating information". The excuse was "National Security" which did allow for that. This was during the time when Homosexuality was a mortal sin in the Military and if found out....the Person would be tried in a Courts-martial and be discharged at the minimum if not imprisoned if found to have been engaged in actual sexual activity. Mind you....there was no requirement for the individual to hold a Security Clearance of any kind, they did not have to have access to Classified Material, or in any way be suspected of anything but being Homosexual.
When I took issue with the old guys, reminding them about the Fourth Amendment Protections re Unlawful Search and the Right to Privacy, they scoffed. As a City Police Officer, we were schooled very well about the laws on Search and Seizure and in no way what the Federal Government was doing in that regard as described by the very guys doing those searches, remotely respect those Rights.
Congress very harshly stepped down on the Federal Government and Federal Intelligence Agencies for those kinds of Abuses.
If our Society is to survive....we have to resist any encroachment upon our Constitutional freedoms and I see this latest Obama action as something that cannot be allowed to happen.
Already, the Congress is talking about the equivalent of a FISA Court which is in use for National Security Wire Tapping and Intercepts. It is not just me that is against what is going on.
We are seeing a despotic regime trying to take hold here....one that rejects the Constitution as evidenced by repeated breaches of Federal Laws that they are sworn to uphold and enforce. The Federal Courts have slammed Obama over his appointments to the NLRB in what was a gross act of misconduct by him.
The Drone Program is just one of many problems the Obama Administration have brought upon themselves. If you may recall, Obama was very much against anything Bush did after 9-11. He was all incensed about Water Boarding and called it Torture.....yet here we have the same guy issuing orders to KILL the same kinds of People that he objected to being Water Boarded plus they are American Citizens that are afforded Constitutional Protections against exactly what he is doing.
Don't you find it a bit odd that he does this?
As to being silent when your side is in office....how about the Democrats, Liberals, Progressives, and the fecking Media in my country....where the hell are they? Remember how they raised hell over AbuGrahib, Gitmo, Water Boarding? You heard anything out them on Obama ordering Killings?
Don't accuse me of being hypocritical on this issue as that just isn't true.
Last edited by SASless; 9th Feb 2013 at 13:21.
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
Thread Starter
One thing I have picked up with American politics is that if 'your' team is in office they can do very little wrong - if the other team has the ball then even the way the president puts his socks on is wrong - it tends to be a fairly simplistic one eyed view
As a consequence politics here are the very definition of the word "Polarized" although over the last 20 or so years, this has shifted to become more bi-polar than polarized. There is no subtlety, no nuance, no understanding that most issues on this planet have degrees, and not absolutes. "If you're not with us you're with the terrorists" is a great example of trying to polarize an issue for party political purposes instead of trying to understand it. But although that one belongs to George W, there are just as many trite, over simplistic banalities spouted by the Democrats every day.
If you can corral the masses into 2 camps - us and them - you're job as a politician just got really easy. Once you know who to woo, you can hate and despise the rest. Of course having multiple political parties and a broad spectrum of philosophies to draw from produces indecision and procrastination at times, but fundamentally it produces more well-rounded and consistent national policies, not the constant flip-flopping tag game of "my dick is bigger than yours" that passes for politics here in the US.
Apologies all, this nonsense really belongs in Jetblast, away from the more cerebral aspects of life.
The RAF Forum.....Cerebral?
Now that is funny....I don't care who you are!
Now that is funny....I don't care who you are!
The RAF Forum.....Cerebral?
Now that is funny....I don't care who you are!
X2!
SASLess: Getting back to your reply: So, from your post, you believe the liberal media covered the other issues that were against the law (military, constitutional whatever) when the Republican was at the helm such as Abu Ghraib et al. As you point out this isn't an issue of politics but law breaking by the pres.
So I guess you were equally outspoken about George Bush on items such as AbuGhraib, water boarding etc? If I search your posts will I find an equal measure of indignation against the Republican incumbent?
Now that is funny....I don't care who you are!
X2!
SASLess: Getting back to your reply: So, from your post, you believe the liberal media covered the other issues that were against the law (military, constitutional whatever) when the Republican was at the helm such as Abu Ghraib et al. As you point out this isn't an issue of politics but law breaking by the pres.
So I guess you were equally outspoken about George Bush on items such as AbuGhraib, water boarding etc? If I search your posts will I find an equal measure of indignation against the Republican incumbent?
Two's In - I can sort of relate - our political system is basically a two horse race with daylight third. Our versions are The Liberal party (our version of the Republicans) that would probably be on a policy basis in recent times similar to your Dems, and the Labor party similar also to a slightly further to the left dems. The traditional divide of the Libs being close to the Tea party and the Labor party being basically an arm of the trade unions is long gone.
Our pollies and parties lack only a few small things such as vision, leadership an understanding of the average voter and standards. All told, it's pretty difficult to respect any of 'em. Which is why our prime minister isn't addressed in deferential tones, rather when members of the public meet her its usually on a first name basis. We do not fawn over our leaders, they put their pants on one leg at a time just like the rest of us.
If you gave an option to an Aussie to vote for:
A. Liberal candidate
B. Labor candidate
or...
C. Tying both of the pollies to a pole because they are all thieving lying bar stewards, setting fire to both of them and going for a good p1ss up, I guarantee most Aussies will take option C.
Our pollies and parties lack only a few small things such as vision, leadership an understanding of the average voter and standards. All told, it's pretty difficult to respect any of 'em. Which is why our prime minister isn't addressed in deferential tones, rather when members of the public meet her its usually on a first name basis. We do not fawn over our leaders, they put their pants on one leg at a time just like the rest of us.
If you gave an option to an Aussie to vote for:
A. Liberal candidate
B. Labor candidate
or...
C. Tying both of the pollies to a pole because they are all thieving lying bar stewards, setting fire to both of them and going for a good p1ss up, I guarantee most Aussies will take option C.
You can search all you want.
You will see I was quite vocal about Paul Bremer/Bush and their decisions that so badly affected the Iraq War.
You will see that I do not consider Water Boarding Torture as defined by most conventions and think using such techniques on three individuals helped in chasing down Bin Liner. You will also read that I consider such measures are much less reliable and in the long term less effective than "Soft" techniques. Recall my Law Enforcement background...I have done lots of interviewing and interrogations.
You will find I reference conversations with a Mate of mine that worked at Gitmo and supervised DOD Investigators and that he and I both agreed that Soft beat Harsh.
I am sure you will find that I objected to what went on at Abu Grahib....and you also should note those guilty of crimes were punished, well those of junior rank anyway....as the Colonels on up skated.
You can find plenty of places I have called for the end of the Afghan War as well.
Your search will find I objected to some provisions of the Patriot Act....but as Bush is blamed for it...it was Congress that passed the Law.
The issue at hand is not what Bush did...or what the media did then as it is about what Obama is doing now and what the media is not doing now. The one thing your search will find...in many places is my disgust at how the Media in this Country has failed its duty to serve the People by being the "purveyors of truth" as the Founding Fathers thought they should be. They knew an informed Citizenry was the absolute bed rock of a successful Democracy or Representative Republic as we have. Bias in media reporting is bad....but the "not reporting" is evil.
You started this whole exchange by framing it as a Republican/Democrat thing and seemed intent to keep after that idea despite being told my reasons for saying what I do about this.
So....you care to respond to those questions I asked you or you just going to act like you are running a Winkle Stand.
You will see I was quite vocal about Paul Bremer/Bush and their decisions that so badly affected the Iraq War.
You will see that I do not consider Water Boarding Torture as defined by most conventions and think using such techniques on three individuals helped in chasing down Bin Liner. You will also read that I consider such measures are much less reliable and in the long term less effective than "Soft" techniques. Recall my Law Enforcement background...I have done lots of interviewing and interrogations.
You will find I reference conversations with a Mate of mine that worked at Gitmo and supervised DOD Investigators and that he and I both agreed that Soft beat Harsh.
I am sure you will find that I objected to what went on at Abu Grahib....and you also should note those guilty of crimes were punished, well those of junior rank anyway....as the Colonels on up skated.
You can find plenty of places I have called for the end of the Afghan War as well.
Your search will find I objected to some provisions of the Patriot Act....but as Bush is blamed for it...it was Congress that passed the Law.
The issue at hand is not what Bush did...or what the media did then as it is about what Obama is doing now and what the media is not doing now. The one thing your search will find...in many places is my disgust at how the Media in this Country has failed its duty to serve the People by being the "purveyors of truth" as the Founding Fathers thought they should be. They knew an informed Citizenry was the absolute bed rock of a successful Democracy or Representative Republic as we have. Bias in media reporting is bad....but the "not reporting" is evil.
You started this whole exchange by framing it as a Republican/Democrat thing and seemed intent to keep after that idea despite being told my reasons for saying what I do about this.
So....you care to respond to those questions I asked you or you just going to act like you are running a Winkle Stand.
I agree, however that raid, the fact it was behind enemy lines,
all evidence would be left behind, I don't think they had a choice.
all evidence would be left behind, I don't think they had a choice.
As for the various kill videos on Ytube and the like, there is some truly stomach-churning footage where individuals are literally obliterated when it is clear they have already been put out of the game, probably for good (limbs blown off etc). The lack of restraint and/or level of hatred exhibited by western forces in these events is deeply unsettling. Its a small mercy we generally only see the footage in monochrome.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: PugetSound
Age: 76
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Two quotes:
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" Santayana
“And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;
And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;
And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up.” ORAC / Niemöller
The trampling of US constitutional rights that has occurred since September 11, 2001 is exactly what the authors of the US constitution feared most:
Good men trying to do justifiable things in the name of honorable ends which lead to a temporary and subsequently permanent expansion of federal authority and limitations on individual rights and liberties.
Those men, in 1787, anticipated the moral dilemmas so carefully described in this forum and thousands of publications. How do we protect US citizens while ensuring the continuation of liberty and freedom?
The answer, clearly stated with no ambiguity, in the Bill of Rights, is that NO US citizen may be deprived of their life, liberty, or property absent due process. The Bill of Rights contains NO exceptions.
The Bill of Rights was an addition to the original constitution which had to be added to gain public support and ratification of the constitution. The first United States citizens refused to approve the original constitution without the added protections of the Bill of Rights.
The United States has survived through several times of stress without abrogation of the Bill of Rights and those rights should not now be “avoided” or eliminated in the name of “protecting US citizens.”
We need to re-read the original debates regarding constitutional ratification and see that the topic being discussed here is exactly what the Bill of Rights authors most feared.
History - it can teach a lot!
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" Santayana
“And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;
And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;
And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up.” ORAC / Niemöller
The trampling of US constitutional rights that has occurred since September 11, 2001 is exactly what the authors of the US constitution feared most:
Good men trying to do justifiable things in the name of honorable ends which lead to a temporary and subsequently permanent expansion of federal authority and limitations on individual rights and liberties.
Those men, in 1787, anticipated the moral dilemmas so carefully described in this forum and thousands of publications. How do we protect US citizens while ensuring the continuation of liberty and freedom?
The answer, clearly stated with no ambiguity, in the Bill of Rights, is that NO US citizen may be deprived of their life, liberty, or property absent due process. The Bill of Rights contains NO exceptions.
The Bill of Rights was an addition to the original constitution which had to be added to gain public support and ratification of the constitution. The first United States citizens refused to approve the original constitution without the added protections of the Bill of Rights.
The United States has survived through several times of stress without abrogation of the Bill of Rights and those rights should not now be “avoided” or eliminated in the name of “protecting US citizens.”
We need to re-read the original debates regarding constitutional ratification and see that the topic being discussed here is exactly what the Bill of Rights authors most feared.
History - it can teach a lot!
DP.....War is an ugly thing is it not?
When the Old Men kick one off for Young Men to fight perhaps they might think about what they are doing and then hopefully find a peaceful way to work out their differences.
Mankind has been warring since almost the beginning of time.
The only thing that changes is the methods and weapons.
How does one bring an end to it all?
When the Old Men kick one off for Young Men to fight perhaps they might think about what they are doing and then hopefully find a peaceful way to work out their differences.
Mankind has been warring since almost the beginning of time.
The only thing that changes is the methods and weapons.
How does one bring an end to it all?