12 replies to this topic

[acidhead]

Obama 'drone-warfare rulebook' condemned by human rights groups

New York Times reports administration attempting to set out circumstances in which targeted assassination is justified
Sunday Nov. 25 2012
President Barack Obama's administration is in the process of drawing up a formal rulebook that will set out the circumstances in which targeted assassination by unmanned drones is justified, according to reports.

continued... http://www.guardian....arfare-rulebook

*****

Hypocrite, liberals would be screaming murder if it was Bush policy. but not their guy.... he can murder american citizens and its ok never mind murdering thousands of brown skinned people in the ME.

[acidhead]

Do people forget why he was elected in the first place back in '08?  Remember?  It was because he wasnt Bush.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

acidhead, on 26 November 2012 - 02:03 AM, said:

Do people forget why he was elected in the first place back in '08?  Remember?  It was because he wasnt Bush.

And he was elected in 2012 even after this campaign of Drone assisted enemy deadification.

[and then]

Wearer of Hats, on 26 November 2012 - 03:06 AM, said:

And he was elected in 2012 even after this campaign of Drone assisted enemy deadification.

I don't presume to speak for most Americans but I think they don't care so much about the drones.  Frankly there is a "disconnect" when people look at his policies, I think.  They hate Bush for things that they don't blink an eye over for Obama.  Strange....  If we were not using the drones we'd have to be sending JSOC operators on the ground to get these "targets".  While there would probably be fewer innocents being hit, we would almost certainly be losing more soldiers KIA.  Americans are tired of losing soldiers.

[lightly]

and then, on 26 November 2012 - 12:32 PM, said:

I don't presume to speak for most Americans but I think they don't care so much about the drones.  Frankly there is a "disconnect" when people look at his policies, I think.  They hate Bush for things that they don't blink an eye over for Obama.  Strange....  If we were not using the drones we'd have to be sending JSOC operators on the ground to get these "targets". While there would probably be fewer innocents being hit, we would almost certainly be losing more soldiers KIA.  Americans are tired of losing soldiers.

   I really don't understand why any   "Innocents"  are being hit.    WHY?   Do these things have faulty vision?  ..  If your information is that sketchy ..  don't kill anyone •  
I believe   SOME  innocents are targeted/hit on purpose .    I'll leave it your imaginations to figure out WHY that might be the case.

Drone 'warfare'  disgusts me.   As did/does  Bush and Obama .    I don't believe for an instant that either of them create "policy".

[.AKUMA.]

"obama on isreal, no country on earth would tolerate missiles raining down on its citizens"
Ofcourse we can only assume their shooting gummy bears out of them drones in pakistan

Pakistan really needs to get some AA's over in that region.

[Babe Ruth]

acidhead, on 26 November 2012 - 02:03 AM, said:

Do people forget why he was elected in the first place back in '08?  Remember?  It was because he wasnt Bush.

How true!

Turns out he governs like Bush on steroids.

[Corp]

.AKUMA., on 26 November 2012 - 05:13 PM, said:

"obama on isreal, no country on earth would tolerate missiles raining down on its citizens"
Ofcourse we can only assume their shooting gummy bears out of them drones in pakistan

Pakistan really needs to get some AA's over in that region.

Expect for the most part the Pakistani government is cool with the use of drones, only seriously objecting when there's a huge public outcry. I even think the drones make use of an airfield within Pakistan. So not really the same situation.

[F3SS]

I wonder if Nobel learned their lesson on handing out preemptive peace prizes?

[lightly]

-Mr_Fess-, on 26 November 2012 - 11:42 PM, said:

I wonder if Nobel learned their lesson on handing out preemptive peace prizes?

preemptive |prēˈemptiv|adjectiveserving or intended to preempt or forestall something, esp. to prevent attack by disabling the enemy: preemptive action | a preemptive strike.• relating to the purchase of goods or shares by one person or party before the opportunity is offered to others: preemptive rights.• Bridge denoting a bid, typically an opening bid, intended to be so high that it prevents or interferes with effective bidding by the opponents.
premature |ˌprēməˈCHo͝or, -ˈt(y)o͝or|adjectiveoccurring or done before the usual or proper time; too early: the sun can cause premature aging | [ with infinitive ] : it would be premature to do so at this stage.
• (of a baby) born before the end of the full term of gestation, esp. three or more weeks before.

Sorry fess,  it just bothers me when people use the WRONG word  

[Babe Ruth]

-Mr_Fess-, on 26 November 2012 - 11:42 PM, said:

I wonder if Nobel learned their lesson on handing out preemptive peace prizes?

I doubt it.  Remember that they also awarded the "peace" prize to Henry Kissinger.

[Rafterman]

acidhead, on 26 November 2012 - 02:01 AM, said:

Obama 'drone-warfare rulebook' condemned by human rights groups

New York Times reports administration attempting to set out circumstances in which targeted assassination is justified
Sunday Nov. 25 2012
President Barack Obama's administration is in the process of drawing up a formal rulebook that will set out the circumstances in which targeted assassination by unmanned drones is justified, according to reports.

continued... http://www.guardian....arfare-rulebook

*****

Hypocrite, liberals would be screaming murder if it was Bush policy. but not their guy.... he can murder american citizens and its ok never mind murdering thousands of brown skinned people in the ME.

Come on, you know it's all good as long as there is a Democrat behind the trigger.

[and then]

Corp, on 26 November 2012 - 09:24 PM, said:

Expect for the most part the Pakistani government is cool with the use of drones, only seriously objecting when there's a huge public outcry. I even think the drones make use of an airfield within Pakistan. So not really the same situation.

I may be confused - happens frequently - but I think the Pakistani government is being threatened by the Taliban also.  Their army has been fighting them as long as we've been there.  It's the ISI that is in bed with the militants and isn't THAT weird?  It's a truly schizophrenic situation and they have about 160 nukes and ballistic missiles.