Obama to US Military?: Must shoot US Citizens

[Stellar]

Then why are 30 round mags being treated as imminent by the likes of yourself?

What do you mean?

[F3SS]

I'll let somebody else take that one.

[Stellar]

If youre trying to imply that possession of a 30 round mag makes you an imminent threat to attacking the US, then you're alone in that statement. The only people trying to portray the situation as that are those that are quick to exaggerate everything the government does because of some misplaced need to be against the government in everything.

[+DieChecker]

Isn't the arguement that no one "needs" a 30 round magazine for home defense. Thus, if someone has a 30 round magazine they can be assumed to not be using it for home defense, hunting, ect... but for some other reason. The most spark striking reason then would be domestic terrorism. Thus if you have a 30 round magazine, you're going to be lumped in with the terrorists and thus be subject to being attacked and killed, unless you Repent and abandon your 30 round magazines now.

[AsteroidX]

If youre trying to imply that possession of a 30 round mag makes you an imminent threat to attacking the US, then you're alone in that statement. The only people trying to portray the situation as that are those that are quick to exaggerate everything the government does because of some misplaced need to be against the government in everything.

I see that as nothing but the Liberal propaganda machine in overtime. If you b elieve that I have a bridge in New York thats for sale.

[F3SS]

If youre trying to imply that possession of a 30 round mag makes you an imminent threat to attacking the US, then you're alone in that statement. The only people trying to portray the situation as that are those that are quick to exaggerate everything the government does because of some misplaced need to be against the government in everything.

I think Diechecker answered very well, as usual.

Considering this op topic and the liberal administration and like minded individuals and now this drone topic everything feels lees like the safety of citizens is of concern and a hell of a lot more like who's a threat to the government is the real concern.

Call it what you will. Exaggeration you say? I'll call it foresight, concern, prudence. I say look to history as a cautionary tale. Every government in history has been abolished or overthrown at some point and aside from weak and peaceful nations who were obliterated by a stronger war faring foe the others weren't wiped out because they were nice guys.

My views aren't misplaced but rather found from history. I don't have a need to misplace the situation. I do well and am happy thus far in life. The most drama I face in my life is on these UM threads. So I'm not suffering any harbored feelings that I need to direct at someone for the sake of it. Sure I can be misled, fooled or embarrassed at times but those things don't plant seeds within me. I'm a realist and I get back down to earth ASAP.

The importance the relationship between a government the people is extraordinary. There are so many concerns here that you couldn't understand. In short, elsewhere one might speak of a government and its people whereas in America one must speak of the people and its government. It's an enormous difference and is what makes America great and its citizens, well easy half of the at least, so concerned with everything it is they do and say. It's our job to watch them like a hawk and report on them for going astray.

Sorry bout going on. Got lost in thought...

Edited February 7, 2013 by -Mr_Fess-

[F3SS]

I should've said 'hindsight' too. Remember, it's always 20/20.

[Gromdor]

I was pondering this and was wondering where hackers would fit in under this discription. Anonymous might have the capability to shut down a power plant. Would that not put them in the "free to shoot at" category?

How about propagandists? Both Anwar-an-Awalaki and Samir Khan were propagandists. Anwar-an-Awalaki posted fiery anti-American sermons on the internet and Samir Khan had a magazine called Inspire.

If you can be killed because of your views and affilitations then alot of people on this forum might be in trouble.

And of course we have Abdulrahman al-Awalaki who was either accidentally killed because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time or a miltary aged man in his 20's and thus a valid target in international protocol. (His U.S. birth certificate showed him to be 16)

Being a US citizen, I kinda would like a trial before my execution, or at least the courtesy of being told I was on the "to be killed by a drone" list.

[RavenHawk]

Please, you're reaching here...

Yeah, right. Stay blind.

1) Imminent is imminent.

How imminent is that? Is that like being a bombardier with his finger on the button over the target or the guy grabbing the ignition keys on the counter to the truck filled with explosives so that he can drive all night to blow up a building the next day?

Simply posessing a 30 round mag will not be considered by anyone to be an "imminent threat of attack"

Maybe to you or me, but what about the one that gets paid to make that decision? It’s best to get rid of martyrs before they become martyrs.

2) Are you telling me that your US Vet sitting at home going back and fourth to work every day will be considered "not capturable" by everyone?

That would be one way to call it. You really don’t understand how bureaucracy works do you? One spends most of the time reading between the lines. In politics, you never take anything at face value. Those that do are called low information voters.

3) I dont see how the "laws of war" have an applicability in your fantasy scenario here.

Or reality.

[-M7]

This- is MADNESS.

Such things will drive revolution in America.

You'd probably have U.S. military personal "defecting" to the revolution's side...Examples? Libya, Syria, ect.

I wouldn't be surprised if there'd be a coup d'état made by those in the military opposed to firing on their own citizens.

[acriasis]

Here is some more to add to the tyranny and unconstitutional acts, unfortunately:

http://www.riseearth.com/2013/02/beware-president-who-justifies-secret.html#more

The headline at this link on this website reads:

Beware: A President who justifies secret drone killings of Americans can justify anything

[AsteroidX]

“Posterity! You will never know how much it cost the present Generation to preserve your Freedom! I hope you will make good use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in Heaven, that I ever took half the Pains to preserve it.” ― John Adams

[Ultima Weapon]

Now I have no links to back this up.

End of story.

[ali smack]

I don't think it's true.

Are you sure Alex Jones wasn't the caller?

[regeneratia]

End of story.

Being dismissive is not a good personality characteristic. Ahh, a christian, I see you cannot help it.

Edited February 8, 2013 by regeneratia

[regeneratia]

I don't think it's true.

Are you sure Alex Jones wasn't the caller?

It was a woman.

[Ultima Weapon]

Being dismissive is not a good personality characteristic. Ahh, a christian, I see you cannot help it.

Being hateful, stereotypical, and derogatory aren't very good personality characteristics either, the difference is you can help that.

[F3SS]

Being hateful, stereotypical, and derogatory aren't very good personality characteristics either, the difference is you can help that.

Thought you were done with politics!?

[Ultima Weapon]

Thought you were done with politics!?

I am. It's just when something is so blatently obvious (at least to me) to be bull, I can't help but call it out.

I basically saw it more as a 'news article' as opposed to a political debate.

I mean come on, "I have no evidence, but..." automatically sets it up in my opinion as false.

As for bickering about which policies are right or not, yeah, don't care at all...

[regeneratia]

Being hateful, stereotypical, and derogatory aren't very good personality characteristics either, the difference is you can help that.

I agree. I see that I was just as dismissive as you. My bad. Hope you will forgive.

Classic example of seeing in others that which you may refuse to see in yourself. OK. I am open to change.

[AsteroidX]

It appears they were trying to squeak DHS handling of drones in US airspace by DHS operators using an FAA safety act update as there qualifier. The House member from Texas stopped it dead. Or if someone more politically savvy can interpret this be my guess.

http://www.fas.org/i...drone-thud.html

It would also be prudent to note drones are being used to apprehend US citizens. This one os a bit out of date however still pertinent to US firing on citizens.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/08/02/court-upholds-domestic-drone-use-in-arrest-of-american-citizen

Edited February 9, 2013 by AsteroidX

[AsteroidX]

On last interesting link

http://www.washingtonguardian.com/loan-drone-0

[Stellar]

Ive got a question:

Do you think its ok to fly helicopters over cities to observe them?

[AsteroidX]

Helicopters are not drones. Fact

[Zaphod222]

One has to admire the sheer absurdity of this administration: At home, they coddle their terrorists with the most elaborate protections of the law, yet abroad they practise remote-controlled summary executions by push-button, without any verification and legal checks whatsoever.

Kafka would love it.