• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Obama impeachment a possibility, says Ron Paul

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
and if bush did it they would be fine but since its a demcrat they want to impeach.

Forget impeaching the guy who lied to use and use propaganda to get us to go to war. No thats not a crime. Killing this traitor is the real crime.

Fucking sock puppets.
 
I thought killing terrorists is what we are suppose to do.

Oath of Allegiance

I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

In Obama's Presidency in defending this country, He gets an A. As for the other stuff, welllllllll.................................
 
Police officers kill fellow citizens in the line of duty fairly often, Usually without trial or charges being brought. Under what circumstances are they allowed to do so? And If there are circumstances in which this is allowed, why is it that these same principles can or cannot be applied to the execution of known terrorists?
 
Texashiker said:
Do you even understand what Al Quaeda is fighting for?
Click to expand...

I will answer your questions, you answer mine, please. It makes no difference what Al Quaeda is fighting for. The way they fight is to kill innocent people creating the imperative that they be stopped any way possible.

The Japanese bombed pearl harbor, lets keep bombing them, why did world war II end?
Click to expand...

M: They surrendered and signed a peace treaty.

We are an occupying force in a foreign country.
Click to expand...

We were invited in by the Saudis

You seem to like "if" statements - if the USA was invaded, our government overthrown, our president hung, would you do any less?
Click to expand...

M: Much less. I can't kill innocent people. It would make me feel worthless.
 
GuitarDaddy said:
Do you gun lovin, Consitution huggin conservative really expect anybody to believe for one second that you guys would'nt be cheering this guys death if he where killed under a Republican administration? Please, you really can't be that stupid.

This is such an obvious partisan witchhunt its comical.
Click to expand...

You can't possibly believe that if it was a republican in office there wouldn't have been pages of macros about the right wing criminal cabal murdering US citizens? Obvious partisans indeed.
 
classy said:
I thought killing terrorists is what we are suppose to do.

Oath of Allegiance

I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

In Obama's Presidency in defending this country, He gets an A. As for the other stuff, welllllllll.................................
Click to expand...

Right...So having the POTUS be able to declare someone (i.e. specifically talking about a US citizen here) a target for assassination without a trial is brilliant move.

Really I am glad your boy Obama set the precedence for future presidents and has with this action highlighted the hypocrisy of the left. Just don't complain when it's a GOP president using this same precedence in a similar action to kill off some vaunted hero for you lefties.
 
Last edited:
Malfeas said:
Police officers kill fellow citizens in the line of duty fairly often, Usually without trial or charges being brought. Under what circumstances are they allowed to do so? And If there are circumstances in which this is allowed, why is it that these same principles can or cannot be applied to the execution of known terrorists?
Click to expand...


Hint: A police officer can't just walk up to a known gang banger and blow his brains out all over the side walk just because the dude sides with the local thugs who are known to extort and or kill people (aka innocent or rival gang bangers). Police officers don't kill suspects unless their is an immediate and life threatening situation that places themselves or present nearby civilians at risk. Your description does not even remotely fit this scenario in which police officers are allowed to use deadly force vs what Obama has okay'd.
 
Last edited:
eskimospy said:
As diabolical Communist Kenyan Muslim Manchurian candidate plants bent on the destruction of the US go, he's proven to be awfully good at killing Muslims. It never ceases to impress/make me sad how Republicans keep trying to go after the guy for being weak or whatever when he's turned out to be one of the coldest blooded killers of people I've ever seen. Bush and Cheney were pussies next to this guy.

(note: I don't think that's a good thing, but lots of people apparently do, hence my confusion)
Click to expand...

lol. I was reading the other day Obama has increased drone attacks by many fold. It was a ridiculous number like 1000 strikes compared to Bush's 70 in 8 years. Now he's assassinating un-indicted US citizens.:\

Only a democrat could get away with this. Like Vietnam or cutting welfare ala Clinton you need a democrat to really put the screws to people and press is mum.
 
tweaker2 said:
Agreed. In my mind, Awlaki saw himself as a jihadist at war against the crusaders and infidels from the west. He saw himself as a warrior fighting for the survival of Islam. At the time of his being killed, I really don't think he saw himself as citizen of the USA, nor do I think he expected to take advantage of his right to a fair trial because he not only renounced his citizenship, he denounced it as well. He knew full well that he was being actively sought after for what he was; a terrorist, and not as the "former" US citizen he renounced himself as.

The mere technicality that he did not formally renounce his nationality was, IMO, due to the circumstances surrounding his "defection" to an organization that sought to kill Americans in terrorist fashion. IMO, I think he felt it was to the advantage of the United States that he did not formally renounce, and a distinct disavanatage to himself.

I believe if he were captured by US forces, he would have refused to be tried in the US court system and would have insisted on being tried under Sharia Law, thus rendering the point of giving him that choice moot.
Click to expand...

So they say. That's why we have trials. Or used to.
 
DucatiMonster696 said:
Right...So having the POTUS be able to declare someone (i.e. specifically talking about a US citizen here) a target for assassination without a trial is brilliant move.

Really I am glad your boy Obama set the precedence for future presidents and has with this action highlighted the hypocrisy of the left. Just don't complain when it's a GOP president using this same precedence in a similar action to kill off some vaunted hero for you lefties.
Click to expand...

Wait. So Awlaki was a vaunted hero to the right? Certainly explains a lot...
 
didn't read through the whole thread and someone might have raised this.

But didn't Obama, democrats and all the liberal cry babies wanna close Guantánamo camp because the harsh treatment, lack of legal protection and human rights violation? Aren't those detainees the same terrorist, same aholes trying to harm America just like this guy Obama ordered to kill?

And then when Obama turned around and outright killed this guy without legal due process, and all the liberals jump to protect him.

I mean I think Ron Paul is an idiot trying to make killing a known terrorist an issue. But for Obama and liberal democrats, isn't this sudden change of attitude a little, shall we say hypocritical?
 
rchiu said:
didn't read through the whole thread and someone might have raised this.

But didn't Obama, democrats and all the liberal cry babies wanna close Guantánamo camp because the harsh treatment, lack of legal protection and human rights violation? Aren't those detainees the same terrorist, same aholes trying to harm America just like this guy Obama ordered to kill?

And then when Obama turned around and outright killed this guy without legal due process, and all the liberals jump to protect him.

I mean I think Ron Paul is an idiot trying to make killing a known terrorist an issue. But for Obama and liberal democrats, isn't this sudden change of attitude a little, shall we say hypocritical?
Click to expand...

Maybe you should have read the thread to see that 'all the liberals' didn't jump to defend him.

Nahhhh. Seems like a lot of work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top