Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
obama invaded the sovereign nation of Pakistan or at least thats how Pakistan is spinning this.
Holy shit, now the crazy idiot is starting another war in Pakistan. Hey, you lefties better talk to your President. He's completely lost his damn mind.
US Drone Strike Kills 15 Militants, Says Pakistan | South Asia | English
Holy shit, now the crazy idiot is starting another war in Pakistan. Hey, you lefties better talk to your President. He's completely lost his damn mind.
US Drone Strike Kills 15 Militants, Says Pakistan | South Asia | English
But we can't just fly into Pakistan and kill someone who lives there. Besides that, Osama wasn't read his rights. I think there should be an investigation. How dare the arrogant, imperialistic USA violate Pakistan's sovereignty. The Pakistani military, a fine organization I'll have you know, is doing all they can to help us in our fight against terrorism. God bless them and please send more financial aid.
How is pointing out that killing unarmed old men who are barely awake is not justice siding with Osama?
Holy shit, now the crazy idiot is starting another war in Pakistan. Hey, you lefties better talk to your President. He's completely lost his damn mind.
US Drone Strike Kills 15 Militants, Says Pakistan | South Asia | English
Yes, Pakistan.
Hey, remember when we invaded Iraq? Why was it we did that again?
Oh yeah:
* Because they had WMDs and might give them to terrorists.
* Because they were harboring known terrorists.
* and because there were links between their government and Al Qaeda.
Now, tell me this: Which of these factors actually applied to Iraq? No don't bother, the answer is none.
And what country do these factors actually apply to?
Hmmm, let's see:
* Pakistan not only has WMD's, but has disseminated them to other countries and organizations hostile to the west.
* Pakistan was, and is, harboring terrorists, including Osama Bin Laden
* Pakistan's intelligence service was, and is, actively assisting Al Qaeda and the Taliban to kill Americans.
The judge is legally accurate that the assasination of bin laden and of the quadaffi family is unconstitutional.
this puts me in a dilemma, I dont have issue with what we did but I dont feel right ignoring a violation of the constitution either. Congress is supposed to authorize this stuff, not the president.
But we can't just fly into Pakistan and kill someone who lives there. Besides that, Osama wasn't read his rights. I think there should be an investigation. How dare the arrogant, imperialistic USA violate Pakistan's sovereignty. The Pakistani military, a fine organization I'll have you know, is doing all they can to help us in our fight against terrorism. God bless them and please send more financial aid.
According to Pakistan, he didn't live there. That's what they told us.
So, either he was under their protection, or he was trespassing in their country, and therefore it's none of their business.
Yep. I think they want to keep labeling President Obama an assassin and war criminal until the United States is completely undermined throughout the world.
It is sad, really, because there is no evidence that anything illegal occurred.
Wow more dishonest hackery....i guess I have to quote myself where I say i was glad obama did this on one hand but was concerned about our president issuing assasination without congress' approval.
Freaking desperate hacks are aggrivating me today.
This was not assassination. Bin Laden is a combatant. He was killed in action.
But we can't just fly into Pakistan and kill someone who lives there. Besides that, Osama wasn't read his rights. I think there should be an investigation. How dare the arrogant, imperialistic USA violate Pakistan's sovereignty. The Pakistani military, a fine organization I'll have you know, is doing all they can to help us in our fight against terrorism. God bless them and please send more financial aid.
According to Pakistan, he didn't live there. That's what they told us.
So, either he was under their protection, or he was trespassing in their country, and therefore it's none of their business.
Do you seriously believe no one in the Pakistani Government or military knew Osama was there?
The Executive Director of Human Rights Watch is criticizing the U.S. for killing Terrorist Leader Osama Bin Laden without Due Process. What do you think of this criticizm?
Human Rights Watch chief condemns bin Laden killing | The Daily Caller
????
The New York-based Human Rights Watch has been relatively mum on the Al Qaeda leaders death, issuing a terse statement quoting Mr. Roth: At a time when citizens around the world have engaged in peaceful demonstrations in the name of freedom and democracy, bin Ladens death is a reminder of the thousands of innocents who suffer when terrorist groups seek political change through brutal means.
UPDATE: In a press release Wednesday afternoon, Human Rights Watch clarified that the organization has taken no official position on the legality of bin Ladens killing.
Holy shit, now the crazy idiot is starting another war in Pakistan. Hey, you lefties better talk to your President. He's completely lost his damn mind.
US Drone Strike Kills 15 Militants, Says Pakistan | South Asia | English
Yes, Pakistan.
Hey, remember when we invaded Iraq? Why was it we did that again?
Oh yeah:
* Because they had WMDs and might give them to terrorists.
* Because they were harboring known terrorists.
* and because there were links between their government and Al Qaeda.
Now, tell me this: Which of these factors actually applied to Iraq? No don't bother, the answer is none.
And what country do these factors actually apply to?
Hmmm, let's see:
* Pakistan not only has WMD's, but has disseminated them to other countries and organizations hostile to the west.
* Pakistan was, and is, harboring terrorists, including Osama Bin Laden
* Pakistan's intelligence service was, and is, actively assisting Al Qaeda and the Taliban to kill Americans.
You forget that Saddam was sending arms and money to Hamas. Any Palestinian family that had a member who committed a suicide attack was given $25,000. Iraq was breaking the UN treaty every day. Besides that, The Dems were claiming Saddam had WMDs and had to go even before Bush became President. Please make my day and ask me for the quotes.
Do you seriously believe no one in the Pakistani Government or military knew Osama was there?
Yes, Pakistan.
Hey, remember when we invaded Iraq? Why was it we did that again?
Oh yeah:
* Because they had WMDs and might give them to terrorists.
* Because they were harboring known terrorists.
* and because there were links between their government and Al Qaeda.
Now, tell me this: Which of these factors actually applied to Iraq? No don't bother, the answer is none.
And what country do these factors actually apply to?
Hmmm, let's see:
* Pakistan not only has WMD's, but has disseminated them to other countries and organizations hostile to the west.
* Pakistan was, and is, harboring terrorists, including Osama Bin Laden
* Pakistan's intelligence service was, and is, actively assisting Al Qaeda and the Taliban to kill Americans.
You forget that Saddam was sending arms and money to Hamas. Any Palestinian family that had a member who committed a suicide attack was given $25,000. Iraq was breaking the UN treaty every day. Besides that, The Dems were claiming Saddam had WMDs and had to go even before Bush became President. Please make my day and ask me for the quotes.
1. How does "Hamas" have anything to do with what I said?
and
2. When did I say anything about who thought what? All I said is that Pakistan is everything we accused Iraq of being. But in Iraq, we were wrong.
Thus, according to the reasons given, Pakistan is the country we should have invaded in the first place. But Pakistan doesn't have oil.
Holy shit, now the crazy idiot is starting another war in Pakistan. Hey, you lefties better talk to your President. He's completely lost his damn mind.
US Drone Strike Kills 15 Militants, Says Pakistan | South Asia | English
Yes, Pakistan.
Hey, remember when we invaded Iraq? Why was it we did that again?
Oh yeah:
* Because they had WMDs and might give them to terrorists.
* Because they were harboring known terrorists.
* and because there were links between their government and Al Qaeda.
Now, tell me this: Which of these factors actually applied to Iraq? No don't bother, the answer is none.
And what country do these factors actually apply to?
Hmmm, let's see:
* Pakistan not only has WMD's, but has disseminated them to other countries and organizations hostile to the west.
* Pakistan was, and is, harboring terrorists, including Osama Bin Laden
* Pakistan's intelligence service was, and is, actively assisting Al Qaeda and the Taliban to kill Americans.
You forget that Saddam was sending arms and money to Hamas. Any Palestinian family that had a member who committed a suicide attack was given $25,000. Iraq was breaking the UN treaty every day. Besides that, The Dems were claiming Saddam had WMDs and had to go even before Bush became President. Please make my day and ask me for the quotes.
You forget that Saddam was sending arms and money to Hamas. Any Palestinian family that had a member who committed a suicide attack was given $25,000. Iraq was breaking the UN treaty every day. Besides that, The Dems were claiming Saddam had WMDs and had to go even before Bush became President. Please make my day and ask me for the quotes.
1. How does "Hamas" have anything to do with what I said?
and
2. When did I say anything about who thought what? All I said is that Pakistan is everything we accused Iraq of being. But in Iraq, we were wrong.
Thus, according to the reasons given, Pakistan is the country we should have invaded in the first place. But Pakistan doesn't have oil.
I'm just saying Iraq was not the wrong country to invade. Saddam had to go. Oil is a consideration. Why is Obama involved in Libya and not in Syria? Oil protection. Oil is blood to the USA. Without oil we die. It's vital national security for this administration as well as the last one.
That's not an answer.
There's a bunch of people here accusing the Left of hypocrisy on this issue, because they support the killing of Bin Laden, supposedly only because Obama is now president.
I would like to know who on the Left opposed going after Bin Laden when Bush was president.
That's exactly what a large portion on the left are, they praise Obamush for exactly the samething they wanted to jail Bush for.
And you're not answering the question either.
That's exactly what a large portion on the left are, they praise Obamush for exactly the samething they wanted to jail Bush for.
And you're not answering the question either.
Who Obamush? Stupid when I said a large portion that should have given you a clue.
how does that question have anything to do with what I said?
That's not an answer.
There's a bunch of people here accusing the Left of hypocrisy on this issue, because they support the killing of Bin Laden, supposedly only because Obama is now president.
I would like to know who on the Left opposed going after Bin Laden when Bush was president.
Never had a problem here.
Asking your question again only denotes a willful refusal to understand the point made to you. I'm sorry, but since you CHOOSE to be stupid, I can't help you.This is obvious to someone paying any attention at all.Tell us the difference then.
The 'legal' question does not revolve around where the action took place, but the specifics of the actions themselves, the orders behind them, and who gave them.
Apples and oranges. Thus, your statement and the rleated question do not follow from the issue at hand.
Let me guess - you can't Google latin terms.And stop tossing around terms like non sequitur that you don't know the meaning of.
You and Jillian need to broaden your horizons.
Still waiting for you to man up and admit you werw wrong.
The question again:
What's the material difference between Bush going into Afghanistan after Bin Laden, and Obama going into Pakistan after Bin Laden?
