New Obama Book: "Drones Make Me Real Good at Killing People."

[rightwinger]

Going into Iraq was a huge blunder and it had nothing to do with 9-11. However, if we have credible intelligence that is properly vetted, I have no problem with taking out targets with a drone. We had 900 civillians killed by drone vs over 100,000 dead in a boots on the ground invasion

Yea, but when we're talking 900 civilians dead by roughly only 340ish drone strikes I think the question needs to be asked - is this the way we really want to conduct ourselves internationally from a human rights perspective?

I mean, that's almost 3 innocent dead per strike, and for what exactly?

How much of this build up industrial military complex is here to serve the good of mankind vs the pocketbook of corporations? $600 billion a year on military is a good chunk of change, and (of course) there will be a lot of forces trying to keep the money flowing - at whatever the cost.

This is what we need to hold our President accountable for..

No question it is a decision not to be taken lightly. But how many innocent victims do we get per terrorist attack?

 

[tinydancer]

I get that, and obviously don't support terrorism, however we - the United States - aren't very nice either.

So thinking back to 9/11 when 3,000 lives were lost, presumably at the hands of terrorists. How did we retaliate? By going into a country - Iraq - that had nothing to do with the attacks and start a war that ended up killing over a million Iraqi soldiers and close to 100,000 innocent civilians.

Does this equation balance? 3,000 = 1,000,000 + 100,000... I certainly don't think so.

Obama - like Bush was before him - deserves to be criticized. Why should he get a free pass? I was highly critical of Bush, and now highly critical of Obama's deadly policies abroad. 900+ innocent civilians dead in drone strikes alone under his watch. That's about 300x more carnage than the boston marathon bombing....

I agree.

Going into Iraq was a huge blunder and it had nothing to do with 9-11. However, if we have credible intelligence that is properly vetted, I have no problem with taking out targets with a drone. We had 900 civillians killed by drone vs over 100,000 dead in a boots on the ground invasion

If Bush caught shit on this....and he caught massive shit as you know...Obama deserves just as much, if not more. You can't have it both ways.

Iraq was a damned if you do or damned if you don't. One more time you had players world wide with oil for food; aye carumba it would take a month of sundays to go thru this all but in the end I still believe every player in the EU realized that if Hussein kicked the bucket and his psycho killer kids were allowed to take control things would go really really bad in the ME.

Think about it.

Bush and Blair took the fall. Americans and Brits took the hit. But there was no way on the planet that any one could allow those monsters to take control of Iraq.

 

[BlindBoo]

Does anything make you good at killing people?

Guess what?

Terrorists are not nice people. They do not follow the rules

I have no issues with terrorizing the terrorists

Good to know. Obviously you fully supported Bush's War on Terror.

So did the nearly the entire country and world. Now when he tried to morph that support into the invasion and occupation of Iraq, well he started losing support. OF course when every thing he claimed about Iraq turned out to be false.........he lost most of the support.

 

[tinydancer]

Going into Iraq was a huge blunder and it had nothing to do with 9-11. However, if we have credible intelligence that is properly vetted, I have no problem with taking out targets with a drone. We had 900 civillians killed by drone vs over 100,000 dead in a boots on the ground invasion

Yea, but when we're talking 900 civilians dead by roughly only 340ish drone strikes I think the question needs to be asked - is this the way we really want to conduct ourselves internationally from a human rights perspective?

I mean, that's almost 3 innocent dead per strike, and for what exactly?

How much of this build up industrial military complex is here to serve the good of mankind vs the pocketbook of corporations? $600 billion a year on military is a good chunk of change, and (of course) there will be a lot of forces trying to keep the money flowing - at whatever the cost.

This is what we need to hold our President accountable for..

No question it is a decision not to be taken lightly. But how many innocent victims do we get per terrorist attack?

You've more than evened up over all the years. You're just whacking the crap out of people now as target practice.

 

[Avorysuds]

Terrorist leaders. The Taliban can't keep up....

This is one of the things I agree with him on. Weird how you republicans can support two wars with air strikes on entire buildings and yet bitch about this.

I wonder how Obama's Peace Prize feels about spending over 150 billion more a year on wars killing people than Bush did. We all know the mindless Democrat voter base loves war now that a Democrat is killing brown people.

 

[tinydancer]

Guess what?

Terrorists are not nice people. They do not follow the rules

I have no issues with terrorizing the terrorists

Good to know. Obviously you fully supported Bush's War on Terror.

So did the nearly the entire country and world. Now when he tried to morph that support into the invasion and occupation of Iraq, well he started losing support. OF course when every thing he claimed about Iraq turned out to be false.........he lost most of the support.

Hey why don't you get back to us with pictures of you marching with Code Pink against all of Obama's support of wars including backing terrorists in Syria?

You and Jodie?

 

[KevinWestern]

Going into Iraq was a huge blunder and it had nothing to do with 9-11. However, if we have credible intelligence that is properly vetted, I have no problem with taking out targets with a drone. We had 900 civillians killed by drone vs over 100,000 dead in a boots on the ground invasion

Yea, but when we're talking 900 civilians dead by roughly only 340ish drone strikes I think the question needs to be asked - is this the way we really want to conduct ourselves internationally from a human rights perspective?

I mean, that's almost 3 innocent dead per strike, and for what exactly?

How much of this build up industrial military complex is here to serve the good of mankind vs the pocketbook of corporations? $600 billion a year on military is a good chunk of change, and (of course) there will be a lot of forces trying to keep the money flowing - at whatever the cost.

This is what we need to hold our President accountable for..

No question it is a decision not to be taken lightly. But how many innocent victims do we get per terrorist attack?

Why in the world would you want to judge or compare any of our country's 'standards' to that of ruthless, murdering terrorists?

I know you're not suggesting this, but sounds like you're saying it's okay to kill because "the terrorists kill more".

And to be honest, the whole thing is moot too begin with because we kill MANY more civilians than terrorists ever have on our soil over the past 10 years. I would say the ratio is somewhere in the neighborhood of 1 / 200.

 

[Avorysuds]

When Bush was killing Muslims and spying on us, the Right was cheering him on.

"We're fighting them there so we don't have to fight them here." Remember?

They would point out no terror attacks had taken place in the US since Bush started spying on us and began the two wars.

Let's not be all hypocritical now.

And now you defend Obama, so to people like myself who never supported any of that, you're fuckin retarded.

 

[tinydancer]

I support killing the terrorists.

Drones are technology, not metaphors for the evil empire.

Can you prove they are terrorists?

 

[BlindBoo]

Going into Iraq was a huge blunder and it had nothing to do with 9-11. However, if we have credible intelligence that is properly vetted, I have no problem with taking out targets with a drone. We had 900 civillians killed by drone vs over 100,000 dead in a boots on the ground invasion

Yea, but when we're talking 900 civilians dead by roughly only 340ish drone strikes I think the question needs to be asked - is this the way we really want to conduct ourselves internationally from a human rights perspective?

I mean, that's almost 3 innocent dead per strike, and for what exactly?

How much of this build up industrial military complex is here to serve the good of mankind vs the pocketbook of corporations? $600 billion a year on military is a good chunk of change, and (of course) there will be a lot of forces trying to keep the money flowing - at whatever the cost.

This is what we need to hold our President accountable for..

Call for the repeal of the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists then.

 

[rightwinger]

I get that, and obviously don't support terrorism, however we - the United States - aren't very nice either.

So thinking back to 9/11 when 3,000 lives were lost, presumably at the hands of terrorists. How did we retaliate? By going into a country - Iraq - that had nothing to do with the attacks and start a war that ended up killing over a million Iraqi soldiers and close to 100,000 innocent civilians.

Does this equation balance? 3,000 = 1,000,000 + 100,000... I certainly don't think so.

Obama - like Bush was before him - deserves to be criticized. Why should he get a free pass? I was highly critical of Bush, and now highly critical of Obama's deadly policies abroad. 900+ innocent civilians dead in drone strikes alone under his watch. That's about 300x more carnage than the boston marathon bombing....

I agree.

Going into Iraq was a huge blunder and it had nothing to do with 9-11. However, if we have credible intelligence that is properly vetted, I have no problem with taking out targets with a drone. We had 900 civillians killed by drone vs over 100,000 dead in a boots on the ground invasion

Who's to say who has been a terrorist or not?

You have the "assassination" President now signing off on these "drone deaths" and you don't care.

You don't care at all.

I think that the fact that the decision to authorize these attacks is reserved for the Presidential level says alot for how seriously the administration takes these decisions. If these attacks were being approved by low level military, I think it would be open for abuse.

As much as you hate Obama, I'm sure he takes these decisions very hard, as would any human asked to make life or death decisions. As in any such decision, you have to weigh whether the target is worth the possible loss of human life

 

[tinydancer]

When Bush was killing Muslims and spying on us, the Right was cheering him on.

"We're fighting them there so we don't have to fight them here." Remember?

They would point out no terror attacks had taken place in the US since Bush started spying on us and began the two wars.

Let's not be all hypocritical now.

And now you defend Obama, so to people like myself who never supported any of that, you're fuckin retarded.

Please note what g5000 says and this means he is one ugly anti american son of a bitch....................

began two wars

The whole world was for going into Afghanistan and wiping out the vipers nests.

But look at how g5000 puts it.

This poster is a pig who doesn't realize that there was no option but to clean out the terror camps in Afghanistan.

Iraq I understand. I never liked it. But I understood it.

 

[tinydancer]

I agree.

Going into Iraq was a huge blunder and it had nothing to do with 9-11. However, if we have credible intelligence that is properly vetted, I have no problem with taking out targets with a drone. We had 900 civillians killed by drone vs over 100,000 dead in a boots on the ground invasion

Who's to say who has been a terrorist or not?

You have the "assassination" President now signing off on these "drone deaths" and you don't care.

You don't care at all.

I think that the fact that the decision to authorize these attacks is reserved for the Presidential level says alot for how seriously the administration takes these decisions. If these attacks were being approved by low level military, I think it would be open for abuse.

As much as you hate Obama, I'm sure he takes these decisions very hard, as would any human asked to make life or death decisions. As in any such decision, you have to weigh whether the target is worth the possible loss of human life

He gets off on it. Plain and simple.

He must. You kill people by drone attacks almost daily in Pakistan. Aren't you keeping up to date?

Target practice because hell's bells you just don't have that many terror attacks out there do you?

Oh I get it. Obama is killing would be terrorists. Yeah, yeah that's the ticket.

 

[Avorysuds]

When Bush was killing Muslims and spying on us, the Right was cheering him on.

"We're fighting them there so we don't have to fight them here." Remember?

They would point out no terror attacks had taken place in the US since Bush started spying on us and began the two wars.

Let's not be all hypocritical now.

And now you defend Obama, so to people like myself who never supported any of that, you're fuckin retarded.

Please note what g5000 says and this means he is one ugly anti american son of a bitch....................

began two wars

The whole world was for going into Afghanistan and wiping out the vipers nests.

But look at how g5000 puts it.

This poster is a pig who doesn't realize that there was no option but to clean out the terror camps in Afghanistan.

Iraq I understand. I never liked it. But I understood it.

I understand, yes. G5 pretends that Democrats were against Iraq and Afghanistan, even homeland security and the patriot act. Bush has overwhelming support from Dems. Not me personally, but G5 wants to live in a made up fact-less reality where Bush caused it all and Obama who ran off ending ALL of that has no choice but to expand off all Bush era policies.

 

[KevinWestern]

Going into Iraq was a huge blunder and it had nothing to do with 9-11. However, if we have credible intelligence that is properly vetted, I have no problem with taking out targets with a drone. We had 900 civillians killed by drone vs over 100,000 dead in a boots on the ground invasion

Yea, but when we're talking 900 civilians dead by roughly only 340ish drone strikes I think the question needs to be asked - is this the way we really want to conduct ourselves internationally from a human rights perspective?

I mean, that's almost 3 innocent dead per strike, and for what exactly?

How much of this build up industrial military complex is here to serve the good of mankind vs the pocketbook of corporations? $600 billion a year on military is a good chunk of change, and (of course) there will be a lot of forces trying to keep the money flowing - at whatever the cost.

This is what we need to hold our President accountable for..

Call for the repeal of the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists then.

I have, lol, many times.

Again, why is it that so many left leaning folks turn the other way when Obama orders a strike that kills innocent children, or spies on and intimidates journalists, or makes backdoor deals with Monsanto when they would have been all over Bush's ass for doing the exact same thing?

I admit, I was fooled by Obama in 2008. But now, in 2013? Not anymore.

Why do you still give him a free pass? Time to see the guy for what he is; another slimy, bought out politician. Period.

 

[tinydancer]

Aren't you people ashamed to be so called liberals but still endorse this President who is so into killing?

 

[rightwinger]

Who's to say who has been a terrorist or not?

You have the "assassination" President now signing off on these "drone deaths" and you don't care.

You don't care at all.

I think that the fact that the decision to authorize these attacks is reserved for the Presidential level says alot for how seriously the administration takes these decisions. If these attacks were being approved by low level military, I think it would be open for abuse.

As much as you hate Obama, I'm sure he takes these decisions very hard, as would any human asked to make life or death decisions. As in any such decision, you have to weigh whether the target is worth the possible loss of human life

He gets off on it. Plain and simple.

He must. You kill people by drone attacks almost daily in Pakistan. Aren't you keeping up to date?

Target practice because hell's bells you just don't have that many terror attacks out there do you?

Oh I get it. Obama is killing would be terrorists. Yeah, yeah that's the ticket.

George Bush made the decision to invade Iraq. That decision cost us 5000 American lives, untold wounded and 100,000 innocent Iraqi deaths. I do not feel any safer because of that invasion.

Barack Obama has made hundreds of decisions to launch drone attacks on terrorist targets. Those attacks often lead to the deaths of innocent civilians. As dirty as the business of hunting terrorists may be, I prefer hunting them down in whatever shithole they are hiding to invading countries and instilling a government of our choice

 

[boedicca]

Obama has the morality of somebody playing a game on an x-box.

 

[tinydancer]

I say we stop calling them liberals.

They aren't liberals.

 

[Avorysuds]

I think that the fact that the decision to authorize these attacks is reserved for the Presidential level says alot for how seriously the administration takes these decisions. If these attacks were being approved by low level military, I think it would be open for abuse.

As much as you hate Obama, I'm sure he takes these decisions very hard, as would any human asked to make life or death decisions. As in any such decision, you have to weigh whether the target is worth the possible loss of human life

He gets off on it. Plain and simple.

He must. You kill people by drone attacks almost daily in Pakistan. Aren't you keeping up to date?

Target practice because hell's bells you just don't have that many terror attacks out there do you?

Oh I get it. Obama is killing would be terrorists. Yeah, yeah that's the ticket.

George Bush made the decision to invade Iraq. That decision cost us 5000 American lives, untold wounded and 100,000 innocent Iraqi deaths. I do not feel any safer because of that invasion.

Barack Obama has made hundreds of decisions to launch drone attacks on terrorist targets. Those attacks often lead to the deaths of innocent civilians. As dirty as the business of hunting terrorists may be, I prefer hunting them down in whatever shithole they are hiding to invading countries and instilling a government of our choice

Obama kept Iraq going until Bush's exit date. Obama is looking to re-enter Iraq. Obama spends 150 billion more than Bush does every year killing people. You support a massive war President, end of story.