Obama admin committed an act of war against Iran

[Bowfinger]

Not my fault you are the one who keeps talking about men and hurt butts. I heard there is a genetic predisposition for such a fetish.




Your messiah accepted it - which means he agreed with them.

And YOU are the one who brought up the butt hurting of other men...and then claim I am derailing the thread. Is it a double standard (you can do it and it is ok, but others doing it is wrong), or is it standard hypocrisy (no one can do it, but you do it anyway)?

Obama also claims that blowing up tanks and killing soldiers is not military agression and therefor does not need to follow the War Powers Act. You knew this, right? If killing enemy soldiers is not military aggression, then stuxnet is not either.

Go play child. Your juvenile semantics games get more boring with time, not less.

 

[mchammer187]

I definitely can and do condemn him for the Stuxnet thing. I think it opens the door to retaliation not just from Iran but any country that views the US as a threat.

Guatanamo and stuff he is worlds apart from Bush. Remember the administration tried to have them tried in NYC but this was blocked. There was also much reform in regard to the torture policy and as for the military commissions there is a semblance of justice though it is far from perfect. It is a far cry from the the whole "you can't see the evidence we have against you because its classified and you are therefore are guilty" mantra of his predecessor.

As for the drone strikes I am somewhat ambivalent because they appear to be saving many American lives in hindsight. I probably would have been against them before they were implemented though and I will definitely admit that.

 

[cybrsage]

Missing the whole point.
In todays world the average US citizen is pretty much immune to war.
We don't see it. We don't sacrifice for it. We don't see the dead (on either side).
You might catch it on the nightly news if you look closely, right between the fish with two heads story and the latest celibately sex/drug scandal.
War has been reduced to nothing more than a video game.
You can take it or leave it. It won't involve you.
The only time American citizens get involved with war is when we see the night fire, all gun-ho, give em hell CNN kickoff coverage.
Then it looks pretty damn neat. Pretty colors. USA! USA!
Other than that, we really don't care.
It doesn't have any intrusion on our daily life.

And, by the way, this ho hum attitude will just get more ho hum as war technology advances. We won't care. Why should we? Wars fought using technology will cut most of the cost out of waging war. That might be the one advantage America has over all other countries in the world.
At least for now...

Agreed, which is why comparing Iraq or Afghanistan (the US portion - not the Russian portion) to Vietnam is incredible stupid. At the height of the Vietnam war, over THREE THOUSAND Americans were killed in a single month. It took almost four years of fighting in Iraq to reach three thousand Americans killed.

 

[cybrsage]

Go play child. Your juvenile semantics games get more boring with time, not less.

LOL. This translates to: I am going to take my ball and go home.

 

[cybrsage]

Guatanamo and stuff he is worlds apart from Bush.

He refuses to close the prison, which he promised to do. No one can stop him from transfering them to another overseas base, he is the commander-in-cheif, Congress cannot stop him from commanding the military except in declaring war.

 

[mchammer187]

He refuses to close the prison, which he promised to do. No one can stop him from transfering them to another overseas base, he is the commander-in-cheif, Congress cannot stop him from commanding the military except in declaring war.

What would be the point of that so he can technically fulfill a campaign promise without addressing the problem.

I don't have a problem with the prison itself it is the indefinite detention that is the problem.

 

[cybrsage]

What would be the point of that so he can technically fulfill a campaign promise without addressing the problem.

If his word meant anything to him, yes.

I don't have a problem with the prison itself it is the indefinite detention that is the problem.

He could have military tribunals going on full steam now that the courts have finally started allowing them. It took a long time to get a law passed they did not invalidate, but there has been one since the end of the Bush administration. By now, everyone at Gitmo could have either been cleared and released or convicted in military court and sentenced. There are not a lot of people at Gitmo, three years is enough time to go through them all.

 

[Darwin333]

Missing the whole point.
In todays world the average US citizen is pretty much immune to war.
We don't see it. We don't sacrifice for it. We don't see the dead (on either side).
You might catch it on the nightly news if you look closely, right between the fish with two heads story and the latest celibately sex/drug scandal.
War has been reduced to nothing more than a video game.
You can take it or leave it. It won't involve you.
The only time American citizens get involved with war is when we see the night fire, all gun-ho, give em hell CNN kickoff coverage.
Then it looks pretty damn neat. Pretty colors. USA! USA!
Other than that, we really don't care.
It doesn't have any intrusion on our daily life.

You are so right and it is very sad. Politics plays a far greater role in peoples "give a shit" about a certain war than anything else. For proof I offer this thread.....

And, by the way, this ho hum attitude will just get more ho hum as war technology advances. We won't care. Why should we? Wars fought using technology will cut most of the cost out of waging war. That might be the one advantage America has over all other countries in the world.
At least for now...

Again, right on the nose. The ONLY give a shit we have (and it is sadly very small and FAR behind the political give a shit) to the consequences of war are our own casualties. Even then unless it personally hits you it is generally more of a "damn that sucks, isn't cake boss on" type of attitude to the masses. The average American has no clue how many innocent Iraqi's died and would offer little more than a shrug and lip service if you told them. Being able to remove a large a number of those American casualties removes what little give a fuck the general population has and leaves only the politics.

A very sad state indeed.

 

[zsdersw]

I find it quite funny that the OP and his ilk really didn't have any problem with Bush & Iraq/Afghanistan but are now complaining about their ideological opposites doing what they themselves did.

 

[Darwin333]

He refuses to close the prison, which he promised to do. No one can stop him from transfering them to another overseas base, he is the commander-in-cheif, Congress cannot stop him from commanding the military except in declaring war.

What would be the purpose of moving them from one military prison not on our shores to another military prison not on our shores?

If his word meant anything to him, yes.

Thats just playing semantics and frankly regardless if I like or dislike him I would rather the President not waste his time playing bullshit semantic games. You are suggesting that he "keep his word" by completely ignoring the point and the reason behind his promise.

 

[cybrsage]

I find it quite funny that the OP and his ilk really didn't have any problem with Bush & Iraq/Afghanistan but are now complaining about their ideological opposites doing what they themselves did.

The OP said nothing about whether the wars were right or not, but instead bemoaned the lack of protests to Obama engaging in warfare when there were huge protests against Bush engaging in warfare.

What do you think about the thread topic? Do you agree with him that there seems to be a double standard by the protestors?

 

[cybrsage]

What would be the purpose of moving them from one military prison not on our shores to another military prison not on our shores?

To fulfill one of his campaign promises. This is one that no one could stop him from actually fulfilling, yet he broke it anyway. Like the promise where we could see bills online for a few days before he signs them...he broke that one too and has no one but himself to blame for it.

If his word meant anything to him, he would keep his promises.

 

[zsdersw]

The OP said nothing about whether the wars were right or not, but instead bemoaned the lack of protests to Obama engaging in warfare when there were huge protests against Bush engaging in warfare.

What do you think about the thread topic? Do you agree with him that there seems to be a double standard by the protestors?

I remember, quite vividly, the defense of Bush's wars by conservatives at the time... and have seen many of those same conservatives either criticize Obama or the lack of protests of Obama by those who criticized Bush.

There are double-standards all around on this issue... by both protesters and supporters alike.

 

[cybrsage]

I remember, quite vividly, the defense of Bush's wars by conservatives at the time... and have seen many of those same conservatives either criticize Obama or the lack of protests of Obama by those who criticized Bush.

There are double-standards all around on this issue... by both protesters and supporters alike.

This thread is not about other threads, please stay on topic and try not to derail it with your crusade.

What do you think about the topic of the thread in which you are posting? Do you agree there is a double standard by the protestors? I do.

 

[zsdersw]

This thread is not about other threads, please stay on topic and try not to derail it with your crusade.

What do you think about the topic of the thread in which you are posting? Do you agree there is a double standard by the protestors? I do.

I don't care whether this thread is about other threads or not. I'm going to bring up relevant information whether you think it belongs in this thread or not.

I think there are double standards by both protesters and supporters; that those who point out the double-standard by their ideological opponents have a double-standard of their own.

 

[Bowfinger]

I don't care whether this thread is about other threads or not. I'm going to bring up relevant information whether you think it belongs in this thread or not.

I think there are double standards by both protesters and supporters; that those who point out the double-standard by their ideological opponents have a double-standard of their own.

Plus it's a false equivalence. Much of the protest against our invasion of Iraq was fueled by aggravating factors: the false premise behind it, the fact that even most of our allies opposed it, and the tremendous cost in both blood and dollars. These are not material factors in Obama's actions so far. It's like equating carpet bombing to a sniper. Small similarities, but a tremendous difference in focus and scale.

 

[waggy]

Anti-war protesters stopped marching once Dubya was out of office. Obama can commit acts of war, perform assassination by Predator drone, and carry on Guantanamo with impunity since he's a Democrat. Don't worry, the peaceniks will come back out to play once a Republican occupies the White House again.

I thought the protesters were idiots back then. but i do find it funny they stoped once Obama got in office. he hasn't done anything diffrent since bush but so far everyone is ok with it.

 

[zsdersw]

I thought the protesters were idiots back then. but i do find it funny they stoped once Obama got in office. he hasn't done anything diffrent since bush but so far everyone is ok with it.

Were you ok with it when Bush was president? Are you ok with it now?

 

[waggy]

Were you ok with it when Bush was president? Are you ok with it now?

oh I'm ok with what Obama is doing now. FUck that send in more drones. better that and keeping Our kids safe or even better pull them out now.


I just find it funny that people were protesting bush for the wars. yet Obama has ratched it up and there is nothing. they stopped.

I think that politics in the US has lost its focus. it's now about red vs blue. its war and one side has to win at any cost useing any tactic. BOTH parties lost that its for the people and not about party, pocketbook and such.

 

[thraashman]

I thought the protesters were idiots back then. but i do find it funny they stoped once Obama got in office. he hasn't done anything diffrent since bush but so far everyone is ok with it.

That's technically incorrect. He has done things quite different. Official combat operations in Iraq have ended and there has been a significant drawdown of troops. There has also been a significant increase in troops in Afghanistan and a shift from a focus on ground troops to a focus on drone strikes. Most people are more ok with drone strikes because it does not put American troops as much in harms way. Strategically I think drone strikes seem more effective. I completely disagree with the classification of any military age male as an enemy combatant. Obama did not start Afghanistan and has set a time table for withdrawal, and has ended the Iraq military operation, this is why you don't see protests.

Libya, we didn't go to war. We assisted an already occurring rebellion against a regime we hated anyway. Similar to what the French did in the American Revolutionary War. Our entire involvement lasted a few weeks, we weren't the primary country assisting, and not a single troop set foot on ground there. That's why you don't see protests.

What we're doing in Iran is really espionage not war. It is an act of aggression, which is not the same as an act of war. No one has been killed as a result. That's why you don't see protests.

 

[Ninjahedge]

Actually, he has done things differently, just not differently enough.

Most of his supporters are disappointed with him not being stronger on this issue and are less enthusiastic about supporting him in general.

Is he SO bad that they wish to protest? Well, a few things get in the way.

First, we are leaving Iraq. That was not 100% him. That was an unwillingness of the Iraqi government to renew our agreement.

Second, the troops he repositioned are in the place they SHOULD HAVE BEEN FROM DAY 1! You know, the country that actually HOUSED THE TERRORISTS THAT ATTACKED US???

Third, his relations with Pakistan are crumbling mainly because of our actions. You know, KILLING THE LEADERS OF THE TERRORIST ORGANIZATION WE DECLARED WAR AGAINST BEING "UNKNOWINGLY" HARBORED BY OUR "ALLY"??!?!?!?

And he is doing it with Seal teams and drones, not 135,000 countrymen. While still serious, the "collateral damage" due to these "precision strikes" has been substantially less than what was "achieved" through other means.

And while I disagree in their classification of any "able bodied man" in the area of a bombing being a possible hostile, I do not disagree to their tactic of taking of the heads of the hydra 11 frigging YEARS after we said we would.


So why are there no protests? Simply put, the shit he is doing ain't nowhere near as bad as the shit we got into in the first place. In order to shift a supporter to a protester, you really have to piss them off.

Bush's exclusionary tactics did not win him any supporters, even grudgingly, in his opponents base. It got him elected twice, but it did not win him any friends in the opposition. Small surprise that many protested.

 

[Bowfinger]

[ ... ]
I just find it funny that people were protesting bush for the wars. yet Obama has ratched it up and there is nothing. they stopped. ...

WTF? How has Obama ratcheted it up compared to Bush? By any reasonable metric -- American casualties, civilian casualties, boots on the ground, dollars, etc. -- Obama has cut way back.

I think that politics in the US has lost its focus. it's now about red vs blue. its war and one side has to win at any cost useing any tactic. BOTH parties lost that its for the people and not about party, pocketbook and such.

Indeed.

 

[fskimospy]

This is all very simple. Conservatives love the idea of attacking Iran, they want more war in the Middle East, not less. Therefore, they are reluctant to attack Obama on the substance of an issue that they wholeheartedly agree with. Obama's supporters are reluctant to criticize their man regardless of whether or not they like this because they fear that it will harm his ability to do other things that they do like.

It is in unfortunate ways like this that a bipartisan consensus for warrantless wiretapping, lawless warmaking, etc is formed. One of my greatest problems with the Obama administration is his national security posture, unfortunately his opponents gleefully endorse basically everything he's done in that respect while pushing for even worse options.

 

[waggy]

WTF? How has Obama ratcheted it up compared to Bush? By any reasonable metric -- American casualties, civilian casualties, boots on the ground, dollars, etc. -- Obama has cut way back.



Indeed.

oh yes i agree he has brought down American casualties (woot for him) but that was not what many were protesting. it was Guitmo bay (witch is still open) the death of "innocent" people in the area etc. witch with drones ain't down that much and the fact we are still in teh "war" spending tons of money.

i don't see much diffrent between bush and obama when it comes to the wars. Bush was starting the pullout of iraq (not that they had much choice). While we should have NEVER went in in the first place..

we did what we had to in Afghanastan. lets get our people out.

 

[Jaskalas]

Iran committed an act of war against us first, by arming insurgents in Iraq.

That, and it was a more humane way for us to slow the progress their nuclear ambitions than using cruise missiles.

Slow, but not end it. Actions that piss them off in folly should be treated as criminal stupidity.