Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
shut up and pull
climber
|
|
Remember -- according to Prez Hopey Changey, terrorism is a baaaad word now -- you might offend the Muslims who like to do it.
Instead -- we must call these acts "man-caused disasters"
|
|
shut up and pull
climber
|
|
I WANNA KNOW ONE THING --
OBAMA IS CONDUCTING WARS IN AFGHANISTAN, IRAQ, AND NOW LIBYA.
YET THE LIBERAL ANTI-WAR PROTESTERS ARE SILENT.
WHAT GIVES?
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
suap, your father created a man-made disaster.
|
|
shut up and pull
climber
|
|
REPORT: Housing crash getting worse...
...values fall fastest rate since '08
Well, when you force banks to issue loans to people who are terrible credit risks (as Clinton's DOJ did in the mid-1990s, and Obama-the-lawyer sued to enforce), this is what you get.
|
|
Hawkeye
climber
State of Mine
|
|
I WANNA KNOW ONE THING --
OBAMA IS CONDUCTING WARS IN AFGHANISTAN, IRAQ, AND NOW LIBYA.
YET THE LIBERAL ANTI-WAR PROTESTERS ARE SILENT.
WHAT GIVES?
suap,
we are too busy fighting the war of ignorance here in the us. see your posts for more details.
|
|
shut up and pull
climber
|
|
10 years. Thousands of protests by libs against the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Now? Silence.
Lesson to be learned? If a lib bombs and kills Muslims in oil-rich countries -- it is A-OK.
|
|
Wade Icey
Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
|
|
Next, President Hopey Changey is coming for your guns, SUAP. hope you have enough ammo..,
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
The Economist:
A messy business
When a state kills its enemies remotely, the law gets tangled
May 5th 2011 | from the print edition
KILLING quickly in combat, when large numbers of soldiers are fighting according to the laws of war, is sad but legal. Change any of those parameters, and things get tricky. Some lawyers have denounced the killing of Mr bin Laden, unarmed and in his home, as an extra-judicial murder. Others see it as a wholly legitimate military operation.
Every country allows soldiers to use lethal force against a declared enemy in wartime, just as police may, in some circumstances, kill criminals. But America is at war with an organisation, not a country, and though al-Qaeda is not a state it is (by its own account) at war with the United States. Purists argue that the criminal law is the right weapon for defence against terrorists; pragmatists would differ.
In any case, America’s armed forces have legal backing for their actions against al-Qaeda. Though a presidential order of 1976 bars assassinations by America’s spooks, an act of Congress in 2001 authorised the president to use “all necessary and appropriate force” against the perpetrators of the terrorist attack in September of that year.
Next comes the category of person killed. Deliberately targeting civilians in any conflict is illegal. But al-Qaeda has a quasi-military structure, and plenty of precedents exist for killing enemy commanders in wartime: in April 1943 America ambushed Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, the Japanese naval commander, on the express orders of President Franklin Roosevelt. Critics of America’s actions are arguing that Mr bin Laden was no longer the effective commander of al-Qaeda. But that would be hard to prove.
Location can be controversial too. Russia sees the émigré Chechen leadership, for example, as legitimate targets and has killed them in places such as Qatar, to the fury of the local authorities. The assassination of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, a Hamas commander, in Dubai in January 2010, presumably by Israel, aroused similar ire. But Pakistan has itself used lethal force against al-Qaeda and allowed American drone attacks, for all its loud complaining now.
Timing complicates the question further. Bombing soldiers in a hospital, or shooting them after they have surrendered, is a war crime. Soldiers are under no legal duty to give their opponents a chance to surrender, though if the white flag is shown it must usually be honoured. Nobody has suggested that Mr bin Laden tried to surrender. But his shooting while unarmed raises questions about the nature of his resistance. Any video footage of the attack will be closely scrutinised to see whether he was a combatant, rather than a prisoner.
Behind the controversy is a change not in the laws of war but in the means of waging it. Drone strikes were measured in dozens under George Bush. They number many hundreds under Barack Obama. They allow an official sitting in America to kill someone thousands of miles away. Such killings usually escape scrutiny—and controversy—because they preclude any chance of surrender. Killing someone in the same room is always going to be more complicated.
from the print edition |
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
fattrad, it is very difficult for the neocons and their lap-poodle, the GOP, to admit that they failed.
|
|
shut up and pull
climber
|
|
The single greatest truth to understand from the last 10 years is that we at war with an ideology -- Islam. It is not "radical Islam" or "Islamism" -- it is Islam.
Read the Quran.
Go to MEMRI web site and listen to the sermons coming out of the major mosques.
The idea that "radical Islam" is some small percentage of the problem is extremely wishful thinking.
Good to see Obama has the stones to assassinate one of Islam's favorite sons -- OBL -- as he sat on his ass in a Muslim country -- Pakistan.
Lets hope Barry Hussein has the testicular fortitude to carry on the fight -- God knows his party has a terrible track record of demonizing those that do.
|
|
shut up and pull
climber
|
|
JUST ANOTHER IDIOT:
Rosie O'Donnell upset because Obama didnt give Osama due process.
|
|
shut up and pull
climber
|
|
A QUANDRY:
According to libs the past 10 years, it was a singular moral imperative that the most notorious terrorists we have captured (al Libi, KSM, etc.) be given civilian trials, read their Miranda rights, not waterboarded (oh, excuse me, "tortured"), etc. I.e., not treated like terrorists but like ordinary criminals with all the attendant rights.
Yet -- Obama saw absolutely no problem ordering the execution of OBL, as he sat on foreign soil, without a trial, due process, etc.
So -- when the GOP is in power that means the terrorists get all the rights.
But when Barry Hussein is in power -- the libs say "Nahhh, we really didnt mean all the rights crap. Shoot away!"
Again. Too. Funny.
|
|
shut up and pull
climber
|
|
NOAM CHOMSKY -- OFTEN THE INTELLECTUAL LEADER OF A GENERATION OF LIBERALS:
Chomsky very dissapointed in the killing of OBL.
|
|
shut up and pull
climber
|
|
[1] Obama shocking Quote: 'I ceased to advertise my mother's race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites.'
[SOURCE: From "From Dreams of My Father" by Barack Hussein Obama, page-15]
|
|
shut up and pull
climber
|
|
[2] Obama shocking Quote:That hate hadn’t gone away,' he wrote, 'blaming' white people — some cruel, some ignorant, sometimes a single face, sometimes just a faceless image of a system claiming power over our lives.'
[SOURCE: From "From Dreams of My Father" by Barack Hussein Obama]
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!