This country is seriously fucked

[Luddly Neddite]

Why are rw's against the killing of terrorists?

Never mind where they were born because it does NOT matter. What matters is that weprotect our country and rw's are against that.

If you are against keeping the US safe, leave.

Believe me, you will not be missed.

 

[Polk]

Obama already killed Americans without intimate threat or due process, and yes, no one cared on the left.

A lot of people didn't care, but the only source of constant criticism you saw on the topic was from the left (Glenn Greenwald, et al.).

 

[Quantum Windbag]

80% of the republicans APPROVE OF THE DRONE KILLINGS.

Odd that your post failed to note that.

30. Do you approve or disapprove of the United States using unmanned aircraft called drones to kill a suspected terrorist in a foreign country?

...............Total.. Dem...Rep... Ind
Approve....74%. 69%... 80%.. 73%
Disapprove.22%.. 27% ..16% ..21%
(Don'tknow)4% .....3% ......3% ..6%​

Since I have consistently argued against using drones in this forum, even if I were a Republican I would be in the 20% that oppose it. I always thought that Democrats had better sense on issues like this, now I know I was wrong, and the country is fucked.

When compared to $$TRILLIONS spent and MILLIONS killed and maimed, YEP, smart people do prefer (NOT love) drones.

You already knew this.

Interesting that the usual hacks can't come up with anything better. When you can, come back and post it. I'd really love to hear it because, in fact, I don't like drones. I DO prefer them.

See the difference?

Stop going to war and you will end that problem, won't you?

 

[Polk]

I don't know what else to say when 45% of Americans and 44% of Democrats want to give the government the power to target American citizens with drones on American soil without any judicial review or due process at all.

Sad isn't it? Guess what, it doesn't get much better if they ask if the president should have the power to do this on his own.

Sorry about the picture being so small, the full poll is here. It turns out that this entire country loves drones, and almost no one cares if it kills a few innocents because that is better, and easier, than making sure we get the right person.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/interactive/2013/03/04/fox-news-poll-majority-supports-use-drones/

80% of the republicans APPROVE OF THE DRONE KILLINGS.

Odd that your post failed to note that.

30. Do you approve or disapprove of the United States using unmanned aircraft called drones to kill a suspected terrorist in a foreign country?

...............Total.. Dem...Rep... Ind
Approve....74%. 69%... 80%.. 73%
Disapprove.22%.. 27% ..16% ..21%
(Don'tknow)4% .....3% ......3% ..6%​

The point is AMERICAN citizens IN AMERICA and by extention Americans abroad. So try and stay on point. 41 percent of democrats said it was OK to kill Americans in America only by the say so of the POTUS, that should scare you. One day you might be standing next to a Tea Party grandma when the POTUS decides to take that threat out.

Isn't question 30 like asking if you approve of using an F16???

It does scare me, but the only reason such a low percentage of Republicans have that position is because Obama is in the White House. That number would have skyrocketed under a Romney administration.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Obama already killed Americans without intimate threat or due process, and yes, no one cared on the left.

A lot of people didn't care, but the only source of constant criticism you saw on the topic was from the left (Glenn Greenwald, et al.).

That was the only source you saw, that is hardly the only source.

 

[Polk]

Obama already killed Americans without intimate threat or due process, and yes, no one cared on the left.

A lot of people didn't care, but the only source of constant criticism you saw on the topic was from the left (Glenn Greenwald, et al.).

That was the only source you saw, that is hardly the only source.

In fairness, I guess there are a few Ron Paul types complaining as well.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Ah, so now you want Obama to be able to declare war on domestic terrorists?

Really?

Please point out exactly where I wrote that.

Why can't rw's read and comprehend what they read???

 

[Luddly Neddite]

freewill

Obama already killed Americans without intimate threat or due process, and yes, no one cared on the left.

You mean non-enemy combatants, right?

Please post links.

Thanks.

 

[boedicca]

This is a thread about a poll in which a sizable portion of respondents supported using drones on U.S. citizens on U.S. soil. You countered that we'd save a lot of money using drones instead of standard military action. Not only is your reading comprehension defective, but your moral core is rotten as well.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Ah, so now you want Obama to be able to declare war on domestic terrorists?

Really?

We are in a state of war with Al Qaeda. The United States is not an Al Qaeda sanctuary.

 

[Polk]

Why are rw's against the killing of terrorists?

Never mind where they were born because it does NOT matter. What matters is that weprotect our country and rw's are against that.

If you are against keeping the US safe, leave.

Believe me, you will not be missed.

I couldn't disagree more strongly. While you're okay with Obama doing it, would you be okay with Rubio doing it?

 

[Freewill]

Obama already killed Americans without intimate threat or due process, and yes, no one cared on the left.

A lot of people didn't care, but the only source of constant criticism you saw on the topic was from the left (Glenn Greenwald, et al.).

I usually don't listen to left wing stuff and I heard about it several times. The people who should be looking into it the DOJ.

 

[NYcarbineer]

80% of the republicans APPROVE OF THE DRONE KILLINGS.

Odd that your post failed to note that.

30. Do you approve or disapprove of the United States using unmanned aircraft called drones to kill a suspected terrorist in a foreign country?

...............Total.. Dem...Rep... Ind
Approve....74%. 69%... 80%.. 73%
Disapprove.22%.. 27% ..16% ..21%
(Don'tknow)4% .....3% ......3% ..6%​

The point is AMERICAN citizens IN AMERICA and by extention Americans abroad. So try and stay on point. 41 percent of democrats said it was OK to kill Americans in America only by the say so of the POTUS, that should scare you. One day you might be standing next to a Tea Party grandma when the POTUS decides to take that threat out.

Isn't question 30 like asking if you approve of using an F16???

Agreed, but the point is that Americans agree with the "preemptive" Bush Doctrine, that, given even the SUSPICION of immanent threat, the US President is ultimately responsible for protecting Americans, and therefore has a "license to kill."

Obviously, ANY president can abuse his authority, and this is why they are impeachable.

We are in a state of war against Al Qaeda. This is not preemption. We were attacked on 9/11/01, you may recall.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

This is a thread about a poll in which a sizable portion of respondents supported using drones on U.S. citizens on U.S. soil. You countered that we'd save a lot of money using drones instead of standard military action. Not only is your reading comprehension defective, but your moral core is rotten as well.

You wrote

Ah, so now you want Obama to be able to declare war on domestic terrorists?

Really?

Quit trying to weasel out and just show me EXACTLY where I wrote that, or admit you fucking lied. As usual.

You always do this. You lie and then change the subject. It is YOU who is 'rotten to the core'.

I'm done with you because you will just keep on lying about what I wrote.

=======

The rw's are saying that the "left" has been supportive of President Obama's targeting of American citizens who are also enemies of the US.

My question is twofold:

One, were you rw's against dubya's use of drones against US enemies?

Two, why are you now NOT against President Obama's use of drones against US enemies?

Or, put another way, who's side are you on? and why are you not on the side of the US?

 

[regent]

Think of drones as just another weapon protected by the second amendment and it all becomes easier.

 

[Polk]

The point is AMERICAN citizens IN AMERICA and by extention Americans abroad. So try and stay on point. 41 percent of democrats said it was OK to kill Americans in America only by the say so of the POTUS, that should scare you. One day you might be standing next to a Tea Party grandma when the POTUS decides to take that threat out.

Isn't question 30 like asking if you approve of using an F16???

Agreed, but the point is that Americans agree with the "preemptive" Bush Doctrine, that, given even the SUSPICION of immanent threat, the US President is ultimately responsible for protecting Americans, and therefore has a "license to kill."

Obviously, ANY president can abuse his authority, and this is why they are impeachable.

We are in a state of war against Al Qaeda. This is not preemption. We were attacked on 9/11/01, you may recall.

God, I never realized Carb was Clarence Thomas doing his impression of a liberal 90% of the time.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I don't support the President being able to unilaterally decide to kill American citizens without due process.

But I don't understand what the big deal is about "drones".

What can a "drone" do that a police helicopter can't already do?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Agreed, but the point is that Americans agree with the "preemptive" Bush Doctrine, that, given even the SUSPICION of immanent threat, the US President is ultimately responsible for protecting Americans, and therefore has a "license to kill."

Obviously, ANY president can abuse his authority, and this is why they are impeachable.

We are in a state of war against Al Qaeda. This is not preemption. We were attacked on 9/11/01, you may recall.

God, I never realized Carb was Clarence Thomas doing his impression of a liberal 90% of the time.

Have you ever read the Afghan war authorization? Do you understand it?

 

[Freewill]

This is a thread about a poll in which a sizable portion of respondents supported using drones on U.S. citizens on U.S. soil. You countered that we'd save a lot of money using drones instead of standard military action. Not only is your reading comprehension defective, but your moral core is rotten as well.

One Hellfire missile cost between 58000 AND 70000 dollars and their kill radius is pretty big I would think. There are other options, which may be cheaper but doubtful, they could drop laser guilded 500 pound bombs.

That said the poster to whom you refer is just making light of the killing of American citizens, as you said their moral core is rotten if not hollow.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Why are rw's against the killing of terrorists?

Never mind where they were born because it does NOT matter. What matters is that weprotect our country and rw's are against that.

If you are against keeping the US safe, leave.

Believe me, you will not be missed.

I couldn't disagree more strongly. While you're okay with Obama doing it, would you be okay with Rubio doing it?

I hope I'll never have to answer that question because I do not want Rubio in any office, especially POTUS.

BUT, I was okay with Bush using drones.

Its the 21st century and so-called "boots on the ground" war is stupid and wasteful. President Obama has taken out quite a few of our enemies without it costing thousands of American lives, millions of innocent bystanders and costing $trillions.

I've said I don't like drones but I really hate old fashioned war.

Was it you above who pointed out the obvious - that if it were Romney, the rw's would be in favor of drones.

But, Romney/Rs would not use drones the way Obama has because it does not benefit the war machine and those who make huge profits from killing American soldiers.