ChemicalRummy: Hope you didn't notice nothing changed. The patriot act is automatically renewed, no longer controversial, and the president can now kill American citizens with no trial.Christ, my outrage from the Bush years has transformed into deep shame.
Rurouni: That's so cute. A woman writing about what's legal and illegal about war. It's like watching those adorable monkeys ride those tiny bicycles.
sprawl15: Yemen has been working with us.
TheGreatGazoo: Lost Thought 00: Leeds: Obama is the only Nobel Peace Prize recipient who maintains a "kill list."Let that sink in for a minute...Leeds: Obama is the only Nobel Peace Prize recipient who maintains a "kill list."Let that sink in for a minute...Only because all the Israeli Prime Ministers they awarded it to are deadDon't forget Yasser Arafat.John Yoo argued before Congress under Bush that it was A-OK for the president to order that a child's testicles be crushed in front of his parents if it was deemed necessary by the president to extract information from the parents.
Nem Wan: It's a mockery of the idea that this is legal authority
BullBearMS: sprawl15: Yemen has been working with us.If by working with us you mean helping us cover it up when we murder dozens of innocent women and children in a single drone strike."If you go to the village of Al-Majalah in Yemen, where I was, and you see the unexploded clusterbombs and you have the list and photographic evidence, as I do--the women and children that represented the vast majority of the deaths in this first strike that Obama authorized on Yemen--those people were murdered by President Obama, on his orders, because there was believed to be someone from Al Qaeda in that area.There's only one person that's been identified that had any connection to Al Qaeda there. And 21 women and 14 children were killed in that strike and the U.S. tried to cover it up, and say it was a Yemeni strike, and we know from the Wikileaks cables that David Petraeus conspired with the president of Yemen to lie to the world about who did that bombing.It's murder--it's mass murder--when you say, 'We are going to bomb this area' because we believe a terrorist is there, and you know that women and children are in the area. The United States has an obligation to not bomb that area if they believe that women and children are there. I'm sorry, that's murder."
qorkfiend: Are you suggesting that there has never, in the history of America, been collateral damage in any war we've fought?
MadHatter500: Use of armed force is one of the many tools that the US uses to ensure it's best interests are protected abroad, it's been this way since KoreaTripoli in 1801. If you disagree that's great but don't try to frame the question as if something new is going on.FTFY
Interceptor1: I'm going to build a drone with heavy weapons. It's task will be to kill drones. Let the drone wars begin!
miss diminutive: [img36.imageshack.us image 249x48]Drones are killing people? Why exactly aren't we just nerve stapling them?
qorkfiend: If you think the Patriot Act's renewal was not controversial, you clearly weren't paying attention.
IronOcelot: ChipNASA: IronOcelot: ChipNASA: "President" Ballrog, HUSSEIN, Sombrero, Fresh Prince of Bill Ayers, al-Chicago, Chocolate Jesus, B-Rock the Islamic Shock, Barky McTeleprompter, Wizard of Uhhs, BoBo the Clown, Oblahbla, Jug Ears, Saunas breach akimbo, Waffles The Clown, Borborygmos Hammerhiem, The Rainbow King, Bukkake O'Bunga, OBIGOT, El Jefe Chocholate, "Jace the Mindsculpter", Hopey McChangeypants, Oyobi, Bonzo the Time Traveler, La Bamba yo' Mamma, Samurai Kebab Nachos, Fartbongo, II"Need a little help with the second one......Presidential Canduhdate Mitt "The Shiat" Romney, Romneyhood, Ritz Cracka, Willard the Republitard, El Jefe Acartonado, Milli Vanilli Romni, Papaya Vagina, Romman & Roybin,Damn you.The wife sprayed coffee on me at that one.Came Hard, did she???/or was it a coffee enema//usually I have to pay *extra* for that.
BullBearMS: "...murdered... murder.. mass murder... murder..."
Tyee: Using drones or any means to kill American citizens however is a different matter.
Tyee: Without the due process guaranteed these citizens by our constitution killing them is murder and unforgivable and illegal.
James F. Campbell: Mmm. This should be an interesting thread. This is one of those issues divides real liberals from party-line Democrats.
sprawl15: The AUMF does not require any oversight. Congress can, at any point, retract or modify the AUMF to place further restrictions on Presidential determination. The Executive branch has voluntarily created vetting processes, but these aren't technically necessary.
Publikwerks: odinsposse: That's US law. Killing people overseas would fall under international law. Which is what the article addresses.Well, since the United States is not a participant in the International Criminal Court, it's laws mean fark all to us.
StoPPeRmobile: This chicken-shiat, cowardly, remote murdering, is useless and a detriment to the way of life of a supposedly great nation.
Tetzlaff: Yet the U.S. uses tort...sorry...I mean "enhanced interrogation".
Name_Omitted: You are absolutely correct. The AUMF requires no oversight, which is exactly the problem. It needs to be repealed and replaced with at the very least a military tribunal. That tribunal can still set up a kill list that allows for quick use of intelligence, but 10 years after 9/11, it is time for us to re-assert checks and balances.
dwrash: Legal according what laws...Is the constitution the supreme law of our land or is international law?
Tetzlaff: And you know a weapon is really ethically questionable if even the Germans won't touch it
BullBearMS: James F. Campbell: Mmm. This should be an interesting thread. This is one of those issues divides real liberals from party-line Democrats.ThisThe usual suspects from the Politics tab have quickly put in an appearance to defend murdering innocent women and children as long as it's their team doing it./real liberals don't defend murder
Tomahawk513: I don't think anyone defends murder. Murder != killing someone who is an active participant of an organization that advocates for my death and has demonstrated the wherewithal to do it.
MugzyBrown: Tomahawk513: I don't think anyone defends murder. Murder != killing someone who is an active participant of an organization that advocates for my death and has demonstrated the wherewithal to do it.What if the person isn't an active participant and was misclassified as such? Ahh then it is murder.If only we could develop a system where one side could present evidence and another present a defense to that evidence...
lennavan: I'm pretty sure we'd be happy to put them to trial if they'd just turn themselves in.
Banned on the Run: Why is this an issue? Honestly.What difference does it make whether we bust in and shoot him (Osama), or a drone fires a missile (every al Queda #2 ever)?U.S. law doesn't distinguish between murder with a sniper rifle or murder with a knife.I don't get it. Dead is dead.
vygramul: Not anymore. One of Obama's first executive orders.
Tomahawk513: BullBearMS: James F. Campbell: Mmm. This should be an interesting thread. This is one of those issues divides real liberals from party-line Democrats.ThisThe usual suspects from the Politics tab have quickly put in an appearance to defend murdering innocent women and children as long as it's their team doing it./real liberals don't defend murderI don't think anyone defends murder. Murder != killing someone who is an active participant of an organization that advocates for my death and has demonstrated the wherewithal to do it.It might not be self-defense, but it sure ain't murder.
urban.derelict: qorkfiend: Are you suggesting that there has never, in the history of America, been collateral damage in any war we've fought?that's RIGHT... and now THE ENTIRE PLANET is a war zone. which means they can kill anybody they want for any f*cking reason.ChipNASA: images.cheezburger.comfail, dude... you misspelt 'sammich'
sprawl15: Tyee: Using drones or any means to kill American citizens however is a different matter.Why do you think citizenship has any bearing on the government's responsibility to provide due process?Tyee: Without the due process guaranteed these citizens by our constitution killing them is murder and unforgivable and illegal.Our Constitution doesn't guarantee rights to citizens, it guarantees rights to human beings.
MugzyBrown: lennavan: I'm pretty sure we'd be happy to put them to trial if they'd just turn themselves in.Trial in absentia
sprawl15: The problem with this approach is that when the military bombs a Taliban supply dump in Afghanitan that's building IEDs, they do so under AUMF authorization. To take this route, you would require a military tribunal before allowing that bombing - or, more generally, before any action that isn't immediately defensive in nature.
sprawl15: MugzyBrown: lennavan: I'm pretty sure we'd be happy to put them to trial if they'd just turn themselves in.Trial in absentiaIllegal and unconstitutional. Google 'habeas corpus'.
Tyee: The USA also has no standing, no powers, no jurisdiction, and no obligation to impose our "rights", or your view of what our rights entail on the citizens of other nations.
Tyee: For example, the USA has no standing in the voting rights or for that matter the existence of such rights anywhere beyond the boarders of the USA.
Want the rest of the Farking story? Try
More threads. More community. More Farking.
Sign up for the Fark NotNewsletter!
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Nov 18 2017 22:55:53
Runtime: 0.597 sec (596 ms)