• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Killing them Softly

BenBurch said:
That took massive cajones.
Click to expand...

I want to know how he avoided the John Wayne swagger when he walked up to the podium to make the announcement about OBL death. I wish G.W.B had accepted his invitation to make a joint announcement. Would have been a great moment in America's history
 
MG1962 said:
I want to know how he avoided the John Wayne swagger when he walked up to the podium to make the announcement about OBL death. I wish G.W.B had accepted his invitation to make a joint announcement. Would have been a great moment in America's history
Click to expand...

He actually had the tact and decency to offer GWB that?

I'm now even more impressed.
 
I have no issue with the targeted killing of terrorists, imminent threat to the safety of civilians or not. They choose to take part in organizations that advocate the deliberate killing of every day people who are going about their lives, death is a suitable reward for that choice.

That said, as an American, I am extremely uncomfortable with killing any US citizen without so much a convening a grand jury. Where is the line drawn on that? Must they be outside the US in a country hostile to our interests? Or does it just have to be a country with a non-extradition policy? Or worse yet, someone here in the US living at one of those militia compounds? I can't quote them as directly saying so but I'm pretty sure the guys who came up with our Constitution didn't intend for due process to amount to a secret meeting between the President and advisers he has chosen to surround himself with.

One other thing I can not fathom is how it is the mm, when they report on it at all, almost seems to be supporting the entire thing. I find that surprising since at one time I got so sick of hearing about water-boarding that I was almost willing to suffer it myself if they would just shut up about it but yet now very little, if anything, in the way of large scale outcry. Why the difference?
 
BenBurch said:
He actually had the tact and decency to offer GWB that?

I'm now even more impressed.
Click to expand...

Well 911 happened on GWB's watch and he'd been the one to steer the nation through some pretty tough emotional times. I am sure some of the assets that eventually identified OBLs location were started under Bush's instructions

And OBL didn't draw any distinctions, he killed Republicans and Democrats with equal cold bloodedness
 
Twiggett said:
That said, as an American, I am extremely uncomfortable with killing any US citizen without so much a convening a grand jury. Where is the line drawn on that? Must they be outside the US in a country hostile to our interests? Or does it just have to be a country with a non-extradition policy? Or worse yet, someone here in the US living at one of those militia compounds? I can't quote them as directly saying so but I'm pretty sure the guys who came up with our Constitution didn't intend for due process to amount to a secret meeting between the President and advisers he has chosen to surround himself with.
Click to expand...

It may well be that the decision to take up arms against the US was seen as a tactile rejection of their US citizenship and the loss of all rights and privilegs you would normally be accorded
 
Twiggett said:
That said, as an American, I am extremely uncomfortable with killing any US citizen without so much a convening a grand jury.
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong: I think grand juries are awesome.

But I'm curious to know what special something you think grand juries do, that the President sitting down with his top advisors and the senior staff of his intelligence agencies, and carefully reviewing these people, aren't already doing.

I mean, is the chief executive not capable of doing what any grand juror is expected to do?

Pretty soon, you're going to end up needing oversight committees for your oversight committees.

What's the point of having a Chief Executive if he doesn't actually ever execute?
 
theprestige said:
Don't get me wrong: I think grand juries are awesome.

But I'm curious to know what special something you think grand juries do, that the President sitting down with his top advisors and the senior staff of his intelligence agencies, and carefully reviewing these people, aren't already doing.

I mean, is the chief executive not capable of doing what any grand juror is expected to do?
Click to expand...

There isn't any way that a POTUS has time to "carefully review" stuff like this. You've made that up. It is simple rubber stamping of subordinate decisions of unknown and unknowable quality, done by the POTUS.

So...no, the POTUS is absolutely not capable of doing what any grand jurer is expected to do. Neither should you or anyone consider him capable of doing that.
 
MG1962 said:
Well 911 happened on GWB's watch and he'd been the one to steer the nation through some pretty tough emotional times. I am sure some of the assets that eventually identified OBLs location were started under Bush's instructions

And OBL didn't draw any distinctions, he killed Republicans and Democrats with equal cold bloodedness
Click to expand...

Oh, I know the reasons he did it, but a politician facing re-election willing to give anything like honor to a big name member of the other party is unexpected.
 
mhaze said:
There isn't any way that a POTUS has time to "carefully review" stuff like this. You've made that up. It is simple rubber stamping of subordinate decisions of unknown and unknowable quality, done by the POTUS.

So...no, the POTUS is absolutely not capable of doing what any grand jurer is expected to do. Neither should you or anyone consider him capable of doing that.
Click to expand...

While I agree with that, totally, what I am unclear on here is how a grand jury applies to a situation that is either analogous to actual warfare where targeting particular assets is acceptable or to an officer firing a shot to prevent immanent harm to a noncombatant.
 
Cain said:
Obama dithers. Romney would have killed all the bad guys before they were born!
Click to expand...

Nyet. Republicans insist that you wait untill people are fully born before killing them. Policy wise they are very clear on this.
 
Puppycow said:
When we're in a war we don't put enemy soldiers on trial before shooting them.
Click to expand...

Please don't give the RIAA ideas.


but that asside:

1)Its not a war. Its at the level of a law enforcement problem.
2)If it is war it isn't our war. fighting going on in far away places about which we know little
3)if for some reason you want to view it as a war then using drones is foolish. Hit-men are a lot cheaper. Sure you might get a bunch of them killed but in war your forces are to some extent expendable.
 
geni said:
Please don't give the RIAA ideas.


but that asside:

1)Its not a war. Its at the level of a law enforcement problem.
2)If it is war it isn't our war. fighting going on in far away places about which we know little
3)if for some reason you want to view it as a war then using drones is foolish. Hit-men are a lot cheaper. Sure you might get a bunch of them killed but in war your forces are to some extent expendable.
Click to expand...

We already have the hit man angle covered with the bounty program.

From the magical internet: http://finance.townhall.com/columni..._bounties_on_terrorists_often_fail/page/full/
While the RFJ advertises that it has paid out more than $100 million in rewards, it must be pointed out that a great deal of that money has been paid in Iraq, where the reward paid for the deaths of Udai and Qusay Hussein alone was $30 million. More than $11 million has been paid out in recent years for leaders of the Abu Sayyaf group in the Philippines. Although $25 million rewards were offered each for Saddam Hussein and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, rewards were not authorized in their cases.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
marplots said:
We already have the hit man angle covered with the bounty program.
Click to expand...

Are you seriously trying to suggest an unsupported freelancer would be as effective CIA former Vlakplaas operative? Must be a few around looking for work.
 
There's a petition up on the government's uh, petition site or something. Apparently if 25,000 people sign it they'll issue a response. The petition is for creating a Do Not Kill list, where one could opt-in to it in order to avoid being targeted for assassination.

https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitio...gov&utm_medium=shorturl&utm_campaign=shorturl

Since someone put on the Kill List doesn't even know it, and has no opportunity to refute evidence or defend themselves before death, and the Kill List has no courts or warrants or such to go through...and Congress and the Judiciary is unconcerned... something like the Do Not Kill List seems about as much power as we have over not being targeted for death by our President.
 
Dragoonster said:
There's a petition up on the government's uh, petition site or something. Apparently if 25,000 people sign it they'll issue a response. The petition is for creating a Do Not Kill list, where one could opt-in to it in order to avoid being targeted for assassination.

https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitio...gov&utm_medium=shorturl&utm_campaign=shorturl

Since someone put on the Kill List doesn't even know it, and has no opportunity to refute evidence or defend themselves before death, and the Kill List has no courts or warrants or such to go through...and Congress and the Judiciary is unconcerned... something like the Do Not Kill List seems about as much power as we have over not being targeted for death by our President.
Click to expand...

Perhaps. But if you manage to survive the initial attack you've got a pretty good moral justification for taking out the US which is always handy.
 
Dragoonster said:
There's a petition up on the government's uh, petition site or something. Apparently if 25,000 people sign it they'll issue a response. The petition is for creating a Do Not Kill list, where one could opt-in to it in order to avoid being targeted for assassination.

https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitio...gov&utm_medium=shorturl&utm_campaign=shorturl

Since someone put on the Kill List doesn't even know it, and has no opportunity to refute evidence or defend themselves before death, and the Kill List has no courts or warrants or such to go through...and Congress and the Judiciary is unconcerned... something like the Do Not Kill List seems about as much power as we have over not being targeted for death by our President.
Click to expand...

Actually, I feel I am fully empowered to not be targeted for death by our President, and I feel extremely confident that by taking some very simple and easy steps in my daily life, I am guaranteed to be safe from this Kill List.

But I could see how, if I changed my name to Muhammad, corresponded with radical Muslim clerics, moved to Yemen, and repeatedly came up by name and photo as a person consistently involved in directing terror plots and actions, the President might mistakenly think I needed some killbot lovin'.

I guess I see your point: It's easy for US citizens to draw the murderous attention of the President.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom