Jeb Bush on Climate Change. WTF???

[dank69]

It's funny to watch Dank69 prove himself to be exactly like the Republicans he claims to hate.

The Republicans also don't think al-Awlaki was a US citizen?

 

[rudeguy]

The Republicans also don't think al-Awlaki was a US citizen?

What people think doesn't matter. What matters are facts.

 

[DrPizza]

I had no idea moving outside the country is grounds for losing constitutional rights. Actively plotting a crime is not grounds for death penalty. And neither is having no realistic avenue for capture. What you outlined is rather scary.

Is waving a gun over your head, running toward a crowd, shouting, "I'm going to kill all those mf-ers" reasonable grounds for a police officer to shoot the person waving the gun? I kind of think it is, especially if there's no other way to intervene, and the police take the threat seriously. That seems to be nearly the exact case for those drone attacks - a serious threat of death to other citizens with no other reasonable intervention. I'm certainly not going to lose sleep over this. It's only an issue because people want something to hate Obama for. Had it been Bush, we would instead be hearing from the right, "Bush is tough on terrorism." "Hear" isn't quite the right word though, since many cannot pronounce "terrorists" or "terrorism" correctly.

 

[dank69]

Is waving a gun over your head, running toward a crowd, shouting, "I'm going to kill all those mf-ers" reasonable grounds for a police officer to shoot the person waving the gun? I kind of think it is, especially if there's no other way to intervene, and the police take the threat seriously. That seems to be nearly the exact case for those drone attacks - a serious threat of death to other citizens with no other reasonable intervention. I'm certainly not going to lose sleep over this. It's only an issue because people want something to hate Obama for. Had it been Bush, we would instead be hearing from the right, "Bush is tough on terrorism." "Hear" isn't quite the right word though, since many cannot pronounce "terrorists" or "terrorism" correctly.

Imagine if this guy orchestrated another successful 911 style attack and it later came out that Obama had the chance to take him out and didn't do so. I wonder if the conservatives would applaud Obama for making the right call.

 

[fskimospy]

Is waving a gun over your head, running toward a crowd, shouting, "I'm going to kill all those mf-ers" reasonable grounds for a police officer to shoot the person waving the gun? I kind of think it is, especially if there's no other way to intervene, and the police take the threat seriously. That seems to be nearly the exact case for those drone attacks - a serious threat of death to other citizens with no other reasonable intervention. I'm certainly not going to lose sleep over this. It's only an issue because people want something to hate Obama for. Had it been Bush, we would instead be hearing from the right, "Bush is tough on terrorism." "Hear" isn't quite the right word though, since many cannot pronounce "terrorists" or "terrorism" correctly.

That's the thing though, it wasn't like that. The guy was certainly advocating for attacks against America. He was absolutely engaging in behavior that would warrant his arrest and prosecution. That is light years away from 'unilateral execution' territory though.

The entire point of the criminal justice system is to prevent the executive from having the power to declare someone guilty by itself. We all agree to suspend that in cases where someone's life is in imminent danger, but there is no evidence that is the case here.

The power to drone strike American citizens without trial who do not pose an imminent threat to someone else's life is a power no one should have.

 

[rudeguy]

Is waving a gun over your head, running toward a crowd, shouting, "I'm going to kill all those mf-ers" reasonable grounds for a police officer to shoot the person waving the gun? I kind of think it is, especially if there's no other way to intervene, and the police take the threat seriously. That seems to be nearly the exact case for those drone attacks - a serious threat of death to other citizens with no other reasonable intervention. I'm certainly not going to lose sleep over this. It's only an issue because people want something to hate Obama for. Had it been Bush, we would instead be hearing from the right, "Bush is tough on terrorism." "Hear" isn't quite the right word though, since many cannot pronounce "terrorists" or "terrorism" correctly.

Except your situation is not relative.

It would be that someone owned a gun and said they were going to shoot someone. Then 2 years later a cop shoots him in the back of the head while he is eating ice cream.

 

[fskimospy]

Except your situation is not relative.

It would be that someone owned a gun and said they were going to shoot someone. Then 2 years later a cop shoots him in the back of the head while he is eating ice cream.

How do you feel about the president's right to torture people? That is also a horrendous violation of human rights, not to mention a war crime. Republicans strongly support it though.

 

[rudeguy]

How do you feel about the president's right to torture people? That is also a horrendous violation of human rights, not to mention a war crime. Republicans strongly support it though.

I think calling what we did torture is dumb. I also believe that it was ran by every level of legal advisor possible and was cleared.

Can you say the same for Obama?

 

[fskimospy]

I think calling what we did torture is dumb. I also believe that it was ran by every level of legal advisor possible and was cleared.

Can you say the same for Obama?

It wasn't dumb, it was a war crime. It also was in no way run by 'every level of legal advisor possible'. That is a hilariously wrong statement. Not only did it run contrary to established legal precedent, the opinion was cherry picked and then later shown to be so badly reasoned it was formally withdrawn and the authors almost disbarred.

I've already made my opinion on Obama's actions with strikes on Americans abundantly clear. Can you bring yourself to admit that republicans are supporting war crimes?

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Is waving a gun over your head, running toward a crowd, shouting, "I'm going to kill all those mf-ers" reasonable grounds for a police officer to shoot the person waving the gun? I kind of think it is, especially if there's no other way to intervene, and the police take the threat seriously. That seems to be nearly the exact case for those drone attacks - a serious threat of death to other citizens with no other reasonable intervention. I'm certainly not going to lose sleep over this. It's only an issue because people want something to hate Obama for. Had it been Bush, we would instead be hearing from the right, "Bush is tough on terrorism." "Hear" isn't quite the right word though, since many cannot pronounce "terrorists" or "terrorism" correctly.

Hell look at our friendly neighborhood Spidey. Should he be subject to a drone strike? There are Americans who spit out hate & race wars. I really think these deserve some kind of review.

Spidey isn't that friendly now that I think about it.

 

[soundforbjt]

I think calling what we did torture is dumb. I also believe that it was ran by every level of legal advisor possible and was cleared.

Can you say the same for Obama?

Nope, it was Bush's guy who cleared it.

http://crooksandliars.com/jon-perr/did-alberto-gonzales-lie-to-congress

"Enhanced interrogation" is just an attempt as a "nice" word for torture.

 

[rudeguy]

It wasn't dumb, it was a war crime. It also was in no way run by 'every level of legal advisor possible'. That is a hilariously wrong statement. Not only did it run contrary to established legal precedent, the opinion was cherry picked and then later shown to be so badly reasoned it was formally withdrawn and the authors almost disbarred.

I've already made my opinion on Obama's actions with strikes on Americans abundantly clear. Can you bring yourself to admit that republicans are supporting war crimes?

Just because it was withdrawn (the replaced with a different memo), doesn't mean that Bush didn't clear it first. And I'm sure Bush didn't run it by every possible level, but the ones that made sense. White House Counsel, I'm assuming AG as well? Either way, he tried to make sure it was legal.

And let's not pretend Bush woke up one day and said "let's water board some fuckers!" The CIA or other agencies asked for permission to do what they felt had to be done. It went to Bush, Bush asked his advisors and did what he thought was best.

 

[Genx87]

Is waving a gun over your head, running toward a crowd, shouting, "I'm going to kill all those mf-ers" reasonable grounds for a police officer to shoot the person waving the gun? I kind of think it is, especially if there's no other way to intervene, and the police take the threat seriously. That seems to be nearly the exact case for those drone attacks - a serious threat of death to other citizens with no other reasonable intervention. I'm certainly not going to lose sleep over this. It's only an issue because people want something to hate Obama for. Had it been Bush, we would instead be hearing from the right, "Bush is tough on terrorism." "Hear" isn't quite the right word though, since many cannot pronounce "terrorists" or "terrorism" correctly.

This guy was not figuratively running toward a crowd with a gun. In fact he was not such an immediate threat his dad had time to file a federal lawsuit seeking to block his sons execution.

So please don't fall into the immediate threat trog trap the administration tosses out there. It fails miserably.

 

[Genx87]

That's the thing though, it wasn't like that. The guy was certainly advocating for attacks against America. He was absolutely engaging in behavior that would warrant his arrest and prosecution. That is light years away from 'unilateral execution' territory though.

The entire point of the criminal justice system is to prevent the executive from having the power to declare someone guilty by itself. We all agree to suspend that in cases where someone's life is in imminent danger, but there is no evidence that is the case here.

The power to drone strike American citizens without trial who do not pose an imminent threat to someone else's life is a power no one should have.

Exactly!

 

[fskimospy]

Just because it was withdrawn (the replaced with a different memo), doesn't mean that Bush didn't clear it first. And I'm sure Bush didn't run it by every possible level, but the ones that made sense. White House Counsel, I'm assuming AG as well? Either way, he tried to make sure it was legal.

And let's not pretend Bush woke up one day and said "let's water board some fuckers!" The CIA or other agencies asked for permission to do what they felt had to be done. It went to Bush, Bush asked his advisors and did what he thought was best.

You can't be serious. If for some reason you are, please go read the history of the decision to start using torture after September 11th.

Bush and his administration authorized war crimes. You just make future war crimes easier to do when you allow partisanship to overwhelm human decency. What Obama does with strikes on American citizens is deeply wrong. Supporting it is immoral. What Bush did with torturing people was deeply wrong. Supporting that is immoral too. You need to accept that.

 

[rudeguy]

You can't be serious. If for some reason you are, please go read the history of the decision to start using torture after September 11th.

Bush and his administration authorized war crimes. You just make future war crimes easier to do when you allow partisanship to overwhelm human decency. What Obama does with strikes on American citizens is deeply wrong. Supporting it is immoral. What Bush did with torturing people was deeply wrong. Supporting that is immoral too. You need to accept that.

I shall go read up to make sure I'm not putting my foot too far into my pie hole.

 

[Paratus]

My drone army is real!

Is the hex custom? Kinda looks like a DJI F550?

 

[rudeguy]

Is the hex custom? Kinda looks like a DJI F550?

They are all custom.

Hex is on a Tarrot X6 frame, quad some junk frame and the flying wing is on a Skywalker X8. Motors and electronics are all custom. The X8 is going to be a bad boy. Pretty soon it will be able to fly 200km or more and carry a six station camera that can scan down to cm from 500 feet.

 

[rudeguy]

You can't be serious. If for some reason you are, please go read the history of the decision to start using torture after September 11th.

Bush and his administration authorized war crimes. You just make future war crimes easier to do when you allow partisanship to overwhelm human decency. What Obama does with strikes on American citizens is deeply wrong. Supporting it is immoral. What Bush did with torturing people was deeply wrong. Supporting that is immoral too. You need to accept that.

So CIA captured a guy, sent it up the ladder to see if they could use different techniques than normal, Bush consulted with a shit ton of advisors including AG.

I'm not seeing where I was wrong. Did Bush wake up one day and decide he wanted people water boarded?

 

[MongGrel]

Nope, it was Bush's guy who cleared it.

http://crooksandliars.com/jon-perr/did-alberto-gonzales-lie-to-congress

"Enhanced interrogation" is just an attempt as a "nice" word for torture.

This.

 

[glenn1]

So CIA captured a guy, sent it up the ladder to see if they could use different techniques than normal, Bush consulted with a shit ton of advisors including AG.

I'm not seeing where I was wrong. Did Bush wake up one day and decide he wanted people water boarded?

Can we bring the conversation back to the actual topic and not litigate the Iraq War yet again?

 

[fskimospy]

So CIA captured a guy, sent it up the ladder to see if they could use different techniques than normal, Bush consulted with a shit ton of advisors including AG.

I'm not seeing where I was wrong. Did Bush wake up one day and decide he wanted people water boarded?

Bush hired a bunch of people with sharply divergent opinions on executive power precisely for that reason. Then he relied on that opinion to say it was legal.

To put it into a different perspective, the same people in Obama's administration have said that drone strikes against American citizens are legal. Do you think he has similarly consulted every legal expert?

 

[rudeguy]

Can we bring the conversation back to the actual topic and not litigate the Iraq War yet again?

The topic was stupid. We made it better.

 

[rudeguy]

Bush hired a bunch of people with sharply divergent opinions on executive power precisely for that reason. Then he relied on that opinion to say it was legal.

To put it into a different perspective, the same people in Obama's administration have said that drone strikes against American citizens are legal. Do you think he has similarly consulted every legal expert?

Sounds like the way politics works. You hire people to help you make decisions.

And the difference is huge between dumping water on someone and murdering an American. You are comparing apples and door knobs.

 

[dank69]

Is that a compliment or are you being derisive? I am not keeping up with your shtick.

Derisive. See eskimo's checklist that I posted in response to your earlier comment.