Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
Dingus wrote: Litmus test - so its OK for the British government to target IRA holdout terrorists in the US without permission, conducting their own operation?
DMT
Hillary thanks the Pakistan leaders for their help in capturing Osama.
Are you sure the US didn't have the ok?
SUAP wrote: 1. Obama and Holder say OBL caused 9-11....RIGHT
2. Gitmo open, intel taken from detainees led to OBL death....WRONG
3. Waterboarding KSM led to intel that led to OBL death....WRONG
Idiot!
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
debating the legality of entering pakistan for someone who waged war on us is like debating what caliber of bullets killed him.
Actually it is a legitimate debate, because we might not like other countries entering out country in what they determine to be a war. How would you feel if say Venezuala sent a team in to capture someone they thought was at war with them?
I understand where DMT is coming from. I just hope that he can see that there are more sides to the story that we don't really know, and may never know.
|
|
graniteclimber
Trad climber
The Illuminati -- S.P.E.C.T.R.E. Division
|
|
Its very simple - if a Pakistani government official with sufficient authority had a quiet discussion with a US government official of sufficient authority, to the effect that 'when the U.S. finds OBL the U.S. is going to get him" and permission was granted and not subsequently withdrawn, then the mission was legal. I don't know the structure of their government well but I'm guessing the Prime Minister or Chief of Defense or someone at that level.
If no such permission was granted the mission was not legal.
Simple as that.
DMT
Legal, not legal, who gives a f*#k?
They want to say it's no legal? Harboring Bin Laden is an act of war.
They should just be happy we didn't nuke the site from orbit.
They want to go to war against us over it? What are they going to do. They're already at war against us.
|
|
the Fet
climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
|
|
Hawkeye, you may have meant what you said in an entirely speculative way, but DMT has posted photos of his daughter climbing, so that makes it personal. And NOT COOL. If it were me I'd apologize.
|
|
shut up and pull
climber
|
|
HEADLINES TODAY:
OFFICIALS: Find aided by info from Gitmo detainees...
CIA chief: Waterboarding helped...
|
|
shut up and pull
climber
|
|
LIBERALS -- WE MUST SHOW ALL THE ABU GHRAIB PHOTOS TO REALLY MAKE SURE AMERICA LOOKS BAD IN A TIME OF WAR.
LIBERALS TODAY? WE CAN'T SHOW OSAMA'S BRAINS BLOWN OUT BECAUSE THAT WILL MAKE AMERICA LOOK BAD AND ANGER THE ISLAMOFASCISTS WHO WANT TO KILL US.
LOGIC? I THINK NOT.
|
|
shut up and pull
climber
|
|
Here’s Nancy Pelosi from a press conference on September 7, 2006:
[E]ven if [Osama bin Laden] is caught tomorrow, it is five years too late. He has done more damage the longer he has been out there. But, in fact, the damage that he has done . . . is done. And even to capture him now I don’t think makes us any safer.
And here’s Nancy Pelosi yesterday:
The death of Osama bin Laden marks the most significant development in our fight against al-Qaida. . . . I salute President Obama, his national security team, Director Panetta, our men and women in the intelligence community and military, and other nations who supported this effort for their leadership in achieving this major accomplishment. . . . [T]he death of Osama bin Laden is historic. . . .
This devastating then-and-now comparison comes to us courtesy of John Hinderaker of Power Line. It underscores the degree to which partisanship can ravage people’s fair-mindedness and, in the process, make them look like fools and hacks. Such things aren’t uncommon in politics—but what is rare is to see such intellectual dishonesty proven so conclusively.
|
|
the Fet
climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
|
|
I'm worried that shut up is going to have an aneurysm when Obama is re-elected.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
It would be great if he followed his username and actually shut up. No one takes his frothing seriously. Like a lot of people, I'm sure, I just read over his posts.
|
|
Brandon-
climber
Done With Tobacco
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 4, 2011 - 03:56pm PT
|
Who is this shutupandpull character? It's got absolutely nothing constructive to offer. With it, it's like conversing with a robot that's trained to yell back. It can yell back, but it can't offer anything of merit for us to read.
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
He is pretty funny though.. Sort of like Weld it.. But Weld it has class. I hope he has insurance when that blood vessel blows. Or he will be one broke mo fo.
|
|
blahblah
Gym climber
Boulder
|
|
This thread is really getting spammed.
I don't want to be too repetitive, but I do think it's important to point out that the assassination of Osama was likely illegal even if the government of Pakistan gave its tacit OK.
That would depend on the internal laws of Pakistan, which I don't think any of us know jack about. But I'm skeptical that Pakistan law allows its leaders to authorize foreign nations to enter it and assassinate people living there. (Perhaps the Pakistan government does have this power--but I haven't heard anyone, anywhere say that.)
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
well, blahblah
What then would make the assassination legal in your view?
How would you prefer that everything should have been handled in advance to insure that no one can claim it was illegal afterwards?
|
|
Hawkeye
climber
State of Mine
|
|
dmt,
i apologize for using the language i did. i should have asked you if your kids and family were in the twin towers on 9/11 whether you would really give a sh#t if it were legal or not, whether you would even engage in said debate. but you already answered that question....
Actually it is a legitimate debate, because we might not like other countries entering out country in what they determine to be a war. How would you feel if say Venezuala sent a team in to capture someone they thought was at war with them?
John, if we were knowingly harboring someone who made it their goal to terrorize another soverign state, and we did not do anything about it, then by all means that country has the "right" to capture or kill said terrorist (despite how legal it might be, and despite the fact that they might lose their people in the process). i like to think that comparing us to pakistan is not a fair comparison. call me patriotic or whatever.
I don't want to be too repetitive, but I do think it's important to point out that the assassination of Osama was likely illegal even if the government of Pakistan gave its tacit OK.
the only thing that might border on illegal is entering another country to take him out. congress passed a law i think on 9/18/2001.
|
|
cleo
Social climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
Time to edit the Script to Block Posters and add one more name!
Edit: ahhhh, much better. The rest of you, carry on (and ignore him!)
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
I don't want to be too repetitive, but I do think it's important to point out that the assassination of Osama was likely illegal even if the government of Pakistan gave its tacit OK.
That would depend on the internal laws of Pakistan, which I don't think any of us know jack about. But I'm skeptical that Pakistan law allows its leaders to authorize foreign nations to enter it and assassinate people living there. (Perhaps the Pakistan government does have this power--but I haven't heard anyone, anywhere say that.)
Could you equivocate some more please? I don't think I got quite enough of equivocating out of this statement. haha
Lets see.. it might be illegal because you doubt that Pakistans laws allows it leaders to okay this mission, but you don't know. Okie dokie.
And when was it decided that this was definitely an assassination? Didn't Obama say that he ordered them to try and capture Bin laden? So who decided it was definitely an assassination? Not that I don't think that there was some of that going on, but since we are haggling legalities.
|
|
blahblah
Gym climber
Boulder
|
|
well, blahblah
What then would make the assassination legal in your view?
How would you prefer that everything should have been handled in advance to insure that no one can claim it was illegal afterwards?
How about a declaration of war from Congress, and notification to Pakistan that we would attack foreign combatants harbored in Pakistan if they did not expel those combatants or turn them over to US?
Maybe that would create more problems than it would solve, I don't know. I'm sure many governments think that laws are pesky things, best not to take them too seriously sometimes :)
I know Nixon felt that way, seems like Dubya did too. And Obama.
|
|
Hawkeye
climber
State of Mine
|
|
The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists (Pub.L. 107-40, 115 Stat. 224, enacted September 18, 2001), one of two resolutions commonly known as "AUMF" (the other being "Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002"), was a joint resolution passed by the United States Congress on September 14, 2001, authorizing the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the attacks on September 11, 2001. The authorization granted the President the authority to use all "necessary and appropriate force" against those whom he determined "planned, authorized, committed or aided" the September 11th attacks, or who harbored said persons or groups. The AUMF was signed by President George W. Bush on September 18, 2001.
i posted this earlier.
granite is right. we could have bombed the sh#t out of paki as it could be construed that they were harboring the bastard. no laws broken on our side. paki is lucky that we didnt invade them after 9/11, emotions were running pretty high is you recall. whish is partially why we all did not have more to say about the invasion of iraq. which is also why this OBL mission reflects so positively on the Obama's judgement in how we pulled this thing off.
|
|
the Fet
climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
|
|
IMO torture (e.g. waterboarding repeatedly) should be illegal. But in extraordinary circumstances it may be needed and the president can pardon the person if it was justified.
I don't know if OBL was assassinated or killed trying to escape capture. Probably the only guy knows for sure is the guy who pulled the trigger. I'm not so sure if assassinations should be illegal or not. OBL, HItler, etc. Shouldn't we take the really evil dudes out?
If it was illegal to go in an kill OBL, if he was assassinated, if he shouldn't have been buried at sea, I really don't care. I'm just glad the guy is gone, no lengthy trail, no gravesite, no asking permission to enter Pakistan and tipping him off. Done and done!
|
|
enjoimx
Trad climber
Kirkwood, CA
|
|
"We have weapons of mass destruction. Trust me." - Bush
We just killed Bin Laden. Trust me." Obama
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!