Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

If Obama Strikes should he be impeached?


  • Please log in to reply
399 replies to this topic

#31    Harte

Harte

    Supremely Educated Knower of Everything in Existence

  • Member
  • 9,138 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis

  • Skeptic

Posted 08 September 2013 - 03:46 AM

View Postspartan max2, on 08 September 2013 - 01:16 AM, said:

We are suppose to be a representative democracy after all. We should not allow our leaders to just start wars after everyone is clearly against it.
We are a republic that is a representative democracy.  Elected leaders here (and in any republic) can and often do act against the will of the majority of the citizens.

Any other way is chaos or dictatorship.

Harte

I've consulted all the sages I could find in yellow pages but there aren't many of them. - The Alan Parsons Project
Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong. - Thomas Jefferson
Giorgio's dying Ancient Aliens internet forum

#32    hacktorp

hacktorp

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 592 posts
  • Joined:11 Dec 2010

Posted 08 September 2013 - 04:08 AM

View PostHarte, on 08 September 2013 - 03:46 AM, said:

We are a republic that is a representative democracy.  Elected leaders here (and in any republic) can and often do act against the will of the majority of the citizens.

Any other way is chaos or dictatorship.

Harte

Strange then, ain't it?  How we've nonetheless arrived at the brink of both?

Maybe we don't have the "republic that is a representative democracy" we thought we had.

Edited by hacktorp, 08 September 2013 - 04:30 AM.


#33    spartan max2

spartan max2

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,751 posts
  • Joined:15 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ohio

  • There's nothing so absurd that if you repeat it often enough

Posted 08 September 2013 - 05:28 AM

View PostHarte, on 08 September 2013 - 03:46 AM, said:

We are a republic that is a representative democracy.  Elected leaders here (and in any republic) can and often do act against the will of the majority of the citizens.

Any other way is chaos or dictatorship.

Harte

There is a difference between making an unpopular decision and making a decision that the Senate and the House votes down.

If a leader still acts after both bodies voted it down, and the people are so clearly against it. Then to me that does sound like a dictator.
So would deserved to be impeached

Especially when that "decision" is starting a war.  Why in the world should our presidents have the power to starts wars that the rest of the nation and legislative bodies vote down. At that point it would no longer sound like I am living in a free country

Edited by spartan max2, 08 September 2013 - 05:31 AM.

" I imagine that the intellegent people are the ones so intellegent that they dont even need or want to look "intellegent" anymore".
Criss Jami

#34    Valdemar the Great

Valdemar the Great

    Mainly Spherical in Shape

  • Member
  • 25,082 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:there

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 08 September 2013 - 08:20 AM

View PostHarte, on 08 September 2013 - 03:46 AM, said:

We are a republic that is a representative democracy.  Elected leaders here (and in any republic) can and often do act against the will of the majority of the citizens.

Any other way is chaos or dictatorship.

Harte
Surely that is dictatorship, and is most probably a good recipe for chaos.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


:cat:


#35    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,916 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 08 September 2013 - 08:44 AM

Hypocrite:



"Peace cannot be achieved by force, only by understanding."  ~ Albert Einstein
"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela
"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians.  Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." ~ Mahatma Gandhi

#36    shrooma

shrooma

    doesn't have one screw fully tightened.....

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:14 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:leeds, UK.

  • Live.
    Sin.
    Die.

Posted 08 September 2013 - 09:52 AM

View Posthacktorp, on 07 September 2013 - 02:50 PM, said:



More than likely, history will mark Obama's humiliation as the moment at which the American people FOUND their backbone and DECLINED to be pushed around with threats,
.
but yet when we voted no to a strike we were seen as cowards.
I wonder why.

- - - - -disclaimer- - - - -
all posts- without exception- are humourous.
if you fail to grasp the sublety, then don't whine on due to your lack of understanding.

#37    shrooma

shrooma

    doesn't have one screw fully tightened.....

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:14 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:leeds, UK.

  • Live.
    Sin.
    Die.

Posted 08 September 2013 - 10:03 AM

View Postspartan max2, on 08 September 2013 - 05:28 AM, said:



There is a difference between making an unpopular decision and making a decision that the Senate and the House votes down.

Especially when that "decision" is starting a war.  
.
no-one would've started a war Spartan- there would be no soldiers going in- just a missile strike/bombardment to take out some of assad's infrastructure and prevent him from doing the same thing again.
if assad IS guilty, then i'd bomb his ass all the way back to the stone-age, but while the UN sit around with their thumbs up THEIR asses, it's just sending the message that assad can do whatever he wants with impunity, and THAT'S wrong.....

- - - - -disclaimer- - - - -
all posts- without exception- are humourous.
if you fail to grasp the sublety, then don't whine on due to your lack of understanding.

#38    Valdemar the Great

Valdemar the Great

    Mainly Spherical in Shape

  • Member
  • 25,082 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:there

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 08 September 2013 - 10:42 AM

View Postshrooma, on 08 September 2013 - 10:03 AM, said:

.
no-one would've started a war Spartan- there would be no soldiers going in- just a missile strike/bombardment to take out some of assad's infrastructure and prevent him from doing the same thing again.
if assad IS guilty, then i'd bomb his ass all the way back to the stone-age, but while the UN sit around with their thumbs up THEIR asses, it's just sending the message that assad can do whatever he wants with impunity, and THAT'S wrong.....
And taking out Assad Chem Weapons wouldn't send a message of encouragement to the Al Q-supported branch of the Rebels, would it .... ?
But it's only the Evil weapons Mr. Bam wants to take out, you say? Well, did you see the report in a link I put somewhere that it's reckoned that Assad keeps his Evil weapons distributed around maybe 50 towns & cities across Syria? So Bam would have to attack all of them in order to send the right Message to Assad? And since even he realises that that might not be so easy, the alternative way (much easier) would be to take out his delivery systems, i.e. the Syrian air force and mobile rocket forces, i.e. a considerable part of the Syrian armed forces? And to have any hope of doing that, he'd have to first take out the Syrian air defenses and command & control systems, i.e., in effect, declaring full-scale war on the whole country (sorry, Regime). And none of this bombing back to the Stone age would be likely to result in significant civilian casualties? And you don't think that the Regime would make the absolute propaganda maximum out of those casualties? Obviously it'd be hypocritical of him to do so, but surely that would make great TV footage in Iran and all those places that really don't need much encourage to dislike Uncle Sam ...

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


:cat:


#39    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,916 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 08 September 2013 - 11:38 AM

View Postshrooma, on 08 September 2013 - 09:52 AM, said:

.
but yet when we voted no to a strike we were seen as cowards.
I wonder why.
Politics is why.  Maybe you should stop caring about how you're seen.  

The Parliament already voted no, so talking "stone age" tough must be easy now when it's all about what you "would" do and what someone else other than you will do.   But still, where's this important block of citizens at that you're so worried about keeping up appearances with?

Assad isn't doing anything with "impunity" as anyone who's paid any attention to Syria in the past few years well knows.

"Peace cannot be achieved by force, only by understanding."  ~ Albert Einstein
"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela
"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians.  Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." ~ Mahatma Gandhi

#40    Jeremiah65

Jeremiah65

    Seeker of knowledge

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,078 posts
  • Joined:25 Jun 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The mists at the edge of your dreams...

  • "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." Aristotle

Posted 08 September 2013 - 01:34 PM

"Bombing back to the stone age" is "humanitarian aid"?

Wow....How many innocent men, women and children would die from that?  You Know a tomahawk missile is not a scalpel...they have "acceptable collateral damages".  Then say you succeed and remove Assad...but the country is in ruin.  How kind.  How long to rebuild their homes and businesses?  How many will starve?  Iraq is a wasteland.  Rinse and repeat?

Yeah...such humanitarian results comes from drone and missile strikes...

"Liberty means responsibility.  That is why most men dread it."  George Bernard Shaw
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it."  Thomas Jefferson

Posted Image

#41    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,549 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 08 September 2013 - 01:59 PM

View Postspacecowboy342, on 08 September 2013 - 12:39 AM, said:

I agree with the sentiment, I don't want to engage in this war either, but I can site many precedents for US presidents committing troops with no authority but their own, see Teddy Roosevelt for one

Does that mean that if President A violates the Constitution and any federal statute he pleases, then it is OK for succeeding men to do the same?


#42    spacecowboy342

spacecowboy342

    Traveler of both time and space

  • Member
  • 4,111 posts
  • Joined:22 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

  • I shall now proceed to entangle the entire area

Posted 08 September 2013 - 02:08 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 08 September 2013 - 01:59 PM, said:

Does that mean that if President A violates the Constitution and any federal statute he pleases, then it is OK for succeeding men to do the same?
No but if President A exercised presidential power legally why is president B guilty of abuse of power for taking actions no where near as extreme?This is just conservatives screaming because they hate Obama.Were Bush still in office these same people would be singing his praises and the dems would be screaming.In other words politics as usual in the US while real people lives hang in the balance


#43    F3SS

F3SS

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,582 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pittsburgh, Pa

Posted 08 September 2013 - 02:10 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 08 September 2013 - 01:59 PM, said:

Does that mean that if President A violates the Constitution and any federal statute he pleases, then it is OK for succeeding men to do the same?

That's the perpetual bickering conflict about this. There has to be consequences to be faced by someone sometime or what's the point if having laws, three branches of government and their checks and balances?

View Postspacecowboy342, on 08 September 2013 - 02:08 PM, said:

No but if President A exercised presidential power legally why is president B guilty of abuse of power for taking actions no where near as extreme?This is just conservatives screaming because they hate Obama.Were Bush still in office these same people would be singing his praises and the dems would be screaming.In other words politics as usual in the US while real people lives hang in the balance

The difference is congressional approval.

Posted Image

#44    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,549 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 08 September 2013 - 02:11 PM

View Postspacecowboy342, on 08 September 2013 - 02:08 PM, said:

No but if President A exercised presidential power legally why is president B guilty of abuse of power for taking actions no where near as extreme?This is just conservatives screaming because they hate Obama.Were Bush still in office these same people would be singing his praises and the dems would be screaming.In other words politics as usual in the US while real people lives hang in the balance

Your point that an impeachment proceeding would be partisan politics is valid and true, but that does not mean that those who violate the law should be let go free to continue doing so.  At some point, if we really are a nation of laws (which I no longer believe), then the law must be enforced.


#45    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 35,622 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

  • In a flat world there is an explanation to everything.

Posted 08 September 2013 - 02:13 PM

View Postspacecowboy342, on 08 September 2013 - 02:08 PM, said:

No but if President A exercised presidential power legally why is president B guilty of abuse of power for taking actions no where near as extreme?This is just conservatives screaming because they hate Obama.Were Bush still in office these same people would be singing his praises and the dems would be screaming.In other words politics as usual in the US while real people lives hang in the balance

And that is precisely the point: As long as no laws have been violated Congress and Senate members can maxturbate their brains all they want about impeachement. Impeachment is not about removing a prezz whom you don't like but about removing a prezz who broke the law.

In the case of Syria, the only way for Obama to break the law is that Congress passed a law that prohibits him from bombing Syria, that the Senate approves it and then that there is a sufficient majority in both houses to cash in his veto BEFORE he bombed. Good luck with that.

A skeptic is a well informed believer and a pessimist a well informed optimist
The most dangerous views of the world are from those who have never seen it. ~ Alexander v. Humboldt
If you want to bulls**t me please do it so that it takes me more than a minute to find out

about me




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users