WTF? WHO we are at WAR with is CLASSIFIED?

[JimBowie1958]

You guys had no problem with this sort of thing when Bush was doing it.

And you guys have no problem when Obama does it.

So what was all that hatred directed at Bush for?

Oh yeah, blind partisanship.

No -- because Bush was the worst, most loathsome, criminal President in US history, who should be hauled up before a War Crimes tribunal and punished with the greatest possible severity.

It's too bad drawing-and-quartering has fallen into disuse -- though having wild horses tear off Bush's limbs, slitting open his belly, pulling out his intestines and burning them before his still living eyes would be only an infinitesmal recompense for the evil and torture which he was involved in !!

What would Hitler have deserved if he had been caught alive?

.

Comparing Bush to Hitler; you are officially off the deep end, fuck face.

Welcome to my ignore list.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Pentagon: Who We're At War With Is Classified

In a major national security speech this spring, President Obama said again and again that the U.S. is at war with “Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and their associated forces.”

So who exactly are those associated forces? It’s a secret.

At a hearing in May, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., asked the Defense Department to provide him with a current list of Al Qaeda affiliates.

The Pentagon responded – but Levin’s office told ProPublica they aren’t allowed to share it. Kathleen Long, a spokeswoman for Levin, would say only that the department’s “answer included the information requested.”

A Pentagon spokesman told ProPublica that revealing such a list could cause “serious damage to national security.”

“Because elements that might be considered ‘associated forces’ can build credibility by being listed as such by the United States, we have classified the list,” said the spokesman, Lt. Col. Jim Gregory. “We cannot afford to inflate these organizations that rely on violent extremist ideology to strengthen their ranks.”

It’s not an abstract question: U.S. drone strikes and other actions frequently target “associated forces,” as has been the case with dozens of strikes against an Al Qaeda offshoot in Yemen.

This administration wants absolutely ZERO accountability for ANYTHING it does.

And the free people of a democratic republic have a RIGHT to know who we are at war with.

Which means this republic is, if not dead, damned sure close to being dead and replaced by a fucking dictator that the oligarchs work like puppet.

We are not a Republic. Not even close.
We are a plutocracy, or kleptocracy whichever you prefer.

 

[numan]

We are not a Republic. Not even close.

We are a plutocracy, or kleptocracy whichever you prefer.

In the United States, they amount to the same thing.

.

 

[numan]

Comparing Bush to Hitler....

Welcome to my ignore list.

Thank you. I consider it an honor.

However, Bush was not just the heir of Hitler -- he was the beneficiary of fifty years of sophisticated development and refinement of totalitarian control in the militaristic American National Security State.

Hitler would have been envious.

.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

You guys had no problem with this sort of thing when Bush was doing it.

ah yes-----Mr. "two wrongs makes a right" shows up right on cue.

No, I just get a little bored with you guys who supported torture and warrentless searches and drone stirkes are suddenly all upset because those policies are being continued by the Black Guy.

It's the fact he's a black guy you have a problem with, not what he's doing.

I didn't have a problem with them in general as long as Congress does it's job and provides oversight and review.

We have a remedy for abuses, it's called Impeachment.

Correct.

And there’s another remedy for abuse – they’re called elections.

Don’t like the surveillance programs? Tell your Congressman to repeal the laws authorizing them. If he doesn’t, replace him with someone who will.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

ah yes-----Mr. "two wrongs makes a right" shows up right on cue.

No, I just get a little bored with you guys who supported torture and warrentless searches and drone stirkes are suddenly all upset because those policies are being continued by the Black Guy.

It's the fact he's a black guy you have a problem with, not what he's doing.

I didn't have a problem with them in general as long as Congress does it's job and provides oversight and review.

We have a remedy for abuses, it's called Impeachment.

The policies have changed. It has nothing to do with any "black guy". If your really bored you may wanna read up and find out what people are talking about instead of vomiting " BOOSH DID IT TOO "
Now THAT'S boring.

Partisan nonsense.

The policies are the same, the only thing that changed is the party affiliation of the Chief Executive.

 

[legaleagle_45]

.

Hitler would have been envious.

.

Not at all. Bush relinquished power voluntarily. Hitler would never had done that.

 

[legaleagle_45]

Partisan nonsense.

The policies are the same, the only thing that changed is the party affiliation of the Chief Executive.

Yeah but is is more fun to point out the hypocrisy. For example it is much more fun to harp on Larry Craig for homosexual liasons than it is Barney Frank. It is more fun to delve into the bizarre sex lives of TV evangelical ministers, than of Hugh Hefner.

 

[Osomir]

Pentagon: Who We're At War With Is Classified

In a major national security speech this spring, President Obama said again and again that the U.S. is at war with “Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and their associated forces.”

So who exactly are those associated forces? It’s a secret.

At a hearing in May, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., asked the Defense Department to provide him with a current list of Al Qaeda affiliates.

The Pentagon responded – but Levin’s office told ProPublica they aren’t allowed to share it. Kathleen Long, a spokeswoman for Levin, would say only that the department’s “answer included the information requested.”

A Pentagon spokesman told ProPublica that revealing such a list could cause “serious damage to national security.”

“Because elements that might be considered ‘associated forces’ can build credibility by being listed as such by the United States, we have classified the list,” said the spokesman, Lt. Col. Jim Gregory. “We cannot afford to inflate these organizations that rely on violent extremist ideology to strengthen their ranks.”

It’s not an abstract question: U.S. drone strikes and other actions frequently target “associated forces,” as has been the case with dozens of strikes against an Al Qaeda offshoot in Yemen.

This administration wants absolutely ZERO accountability for ANYTHING it does.

And the free people of a democratic republic have a RIGHT to know who we are at war with.

Which means this republic is, if not dead, damned sure close to being dead and replaced by a fucking dictator that the oligarchs work like puppet.

From your quote:

A Pentagon spokesman told ProPublica that revealing such a list could cause “serious damage to national security.”

“Because elements that might be considered ‘associated forces’ can build credibility by being listed as such by the United States, we have classified the list,” said the spokesman, Lt. Col. Jim Gregory. “We cannot afford to inflate these organizations that rely on violent extremist ideology to strengthen their ranks.”



And this is actually an incredibly legitimate rationale. Most Al Qaeda "affiliates" have little to nothing to do with Al Qaeda, they are mostly either small regional or desperate jihadi groups hoping to gain "street cred" with young jihadis by utilizing the Al Qaeda brand name. Calling them Al Qaeda plays directly into their hand and recruitment / financing tactics. It would be irresponsible for national security and global security purposes to do that; and is incredibly irresponsible of our media to do so which it tends to do every single day.

 

[JoeB131]

[

The policies have changed. It has nothing to do with any "black guy". If your really bored you may wanna read up and find out what people are talking about instead of vomiting " BOOSH DID IT TOO "
Now THAT'S boring.

no, they really haven't. Now I know you Obama haters spend every day exchanging conspiracy theories, but you really need a grip on reality here.

 

[JoeB131]

You guys had no problem with this sort of thing when Bush was doing it.

And you guys have no problem when Obama does it.

So what was all that hatred directed at Bush for?

Oh yeah, blind partisanship.

I'm indifferent to either one of them doing it.

I fully expect the government to do this sort of thing. I don't need to know who they are going after. As long as they know who they are going after, and they get the right guys, I kind of don't care.

At least Obama is killing the right guys, like Bin Laden. Bush couldn't even attack the right fucking country.

 

[laughinReaper]

so much for transparency.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

You guys had no problem with this sort of thing when Bush was doing it.

And you guys have no problem when Obama does it.

So what was all that hatred directed at Bush for?

Oh yeah, blind partisanship.

When there’s a republican president, likely in 2017, and he announces the continuation of the surveillance programs, which he undoubtedly will, we expect you and others on the right to be just as aggressively and vocally opposed to the programs under that republican’s administration, as under Obama’s.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

So, let me make sure I've got this straight.

The military doesn't want possible al-queda affiliates to know that we're targeting them, and you guys are outraged about that?

 

[numan]

'

Red herring.

The "logic" I would expect from most doctors.

The profession with the highest percentage of Nazi Party members in Hitler's Germany was the doctors.

.

 

[Papageorgio]

You guys had no problem with this sort of thing when Bush was doing it.

ah yes-----Mr. "two wrongs makes a right" shows up right on cue.

No, I just get a little bored with you guys who supported torture and warrentless searches and drone stirkes are suddenly all upset because those policies are being continued by the Black Guy.

It's the fact he's a black guy you have a problem with, not what he's doing.

I didn't have a problem with them in general as long as Congress does it's job and provides oversight and review.

We have a remedy for abuses, it's called Impeachment.

It's wrong on both sides, wrong is wrong.

 

[Papageorgio]

You guys had no problem with this sort of thing when Bush was doing it.

And you guys have no problem when Obama does it.

So what was all that hatred directed at Bush for?

Oh yeah, blind partisanship.

When there’s a republican president, likely in 2017, and he announces the continuation of the surveillance programs, which he undoubtedly will, we expect you and others on the right to be just as aggressively and vocally opposed to the programs under that republican’s administration, as under Obama’s.

Didn't this President promise transparency? You honestly think we've had it? Nope!

Do I suspect the next President will change policy? Nope!

Does party matter in the matter? Not to me!

You seem to be happy with it.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

So, let me make sure I've got this straight.

The military doesn't want possible al-queda affiliates to know that we're targeting them, and you guys are outraged about that?

When a democrat’s in the WH, yes.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Pentagon: Who We're At War With Is Classified

In a major national security speech this spring, President Obama said again and again that the U.S. is at war with “Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and their associated forces.”

So who exactly are those associated forces? It’s a secret.

At a hearing in May, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., asked the Defense Department to provide him with a current list of Al Qaeda affiliates.

The Pentagon responded – but Levin’s office told ProPublica they aren’t allowed to share it. Kathleen Long, a spokeswoman for Levin, would say only that the department’s “answer included the information requested.”

A Pentagon spokesman told ProPublica that revealing such a list could cause “serious damage to national security.”

“Because elements that might be considered ‘associated forces’ can build credibility by being listed as such by the United States, we have classified the list,” said the spokesman, Lt. Col. Jim Gregory. “We cannot afford to inflate these organizations that rely on violent extremist ideology to strengthen their ranks.”

It’s not an abstract question: U.S. drone strikes and other actions frequently target “associated forces,” as has been the case with dozens of strikes against an Al Qaeda offshoot in Yemen.

This administration wants absolutely ZERO accountability for ANYTHING it does.

And the free people of a democratic republic have a RIGHT to know who we are at war with.

Which means this republic is, if not dead, damned sure close to being dead and replaced by a fucking dictator that the oligarchs work like puppet.

We are not a Republic. Not even close.
We are a plutocracy, or kleptocracy whichever you prefer.

The government laid out in the Constitution is a democratic-Republic, but I fear you are right, but I would say we have a kleptocratic oligarchy.

 

[JimBowie1958]

So, let me make sure I've got this straight.

The military doesn't want possible al-queda affiliates to know that we're targeting them, and you guys are outraged about that?

Yes, as we SHOULD be.

Hell, these pricks are SUPPOSED to be getting a declaration of war, instead of repeated emergency declarations that are without end, in effect.

They owe the public to at least tell us who the fuck we are bombing.