|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,793 Year: 4,050/9,624 Month: 921/974 Week: 248/286 Day: 9/46 Hour: 1/3 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: More Awesome Obama . . . | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dronestar Member Posts: 1417 From: usa Joined: Member Rating: 6.4
|
Because the Awesome Obama thread is in summation mode, I am creating this third thread to highlight Obama's on-going war crimes.
Rahvin writes: I think, if we consider sovereignty to be at all relevant (including considering our own ability to control our own territory such as denying the use of our national airspace to a foreign military), that if Afghanistan or Pakistan withdraw consent to allow drone attacks within their airspace, we would be obligated to stop, else be considered a rogue nation committing an act of war by the international community. quote: quote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dronestar Member Posts: 1417 From: usa Joined: Member Rating: 6.4
|
Apparently, drone use is too special to keep in just one part of the world. How lucky for earthlings that Obama is expanding their use. Not to worry though, the president is too hampered by congress and constitutional/international laws for that to happen.
quote: quote: Edited by dronester, : clarity
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
I am creating this third thread to highlight Obama's on-going war crimes. What do you mean by "war crime"?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1.61803 Member (Idle past 1530 days) Posts: 2928 From: Lone Star State USA Joined: |
we pay good money to bomb them. It's not like we aren't paying to invade their sovereignty.
"You were not there for the beginning. You will not be there for the end. Your knowledge of what is going on can only be superficial and relative" William S. Burroughs
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1493 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Far be it from me to argue with the always-accurate "Z Communications", but an alternative view from within Pakistan:
quote: http://www.reuters.com/...an-wikileaks-idUSTRE74J3UV20110520 Pakistan, in January, reaffirmed its agreement with the United States to allow drone attacks on its soil. Despite the "official" line from Pakistan - necessary to avoid inflaming a jihadist backlash - these drone attacks are carried out with their permission. Edited by crashfrog, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dronestar Member Posts: 1417 From: usa Joined: Member Rating: 6.4 |
Crash writes: (Reuters) - Pakistan's top military leader not only tacitly agreed to the controversial drone campaign against militants, in 2008 he asked Washington for "continuous Predator coverage" over tribal areas, according to recently released U.S. State Department cables. "in '08?" Thanks Crash, but do you have any news that isn't hugely out of date? Even your unlinked January report doesn't include the recent happenings in Pakistan.
Crash writes: Far be it from me to argue with the always-accurate "Z Communications" It seems you accidentally missed my other corroborating sources. Seems to be an on-going problem: http://www.washingtonpost.com/...04/29/gIQAIprqpT_story.html Page not found – Brookings
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dronestar Member Posts: 1417 From: usa Joined: Member Rating: 6.4 |
1.6 writes: we pay good money to bomb them. It's not like we aren't paying to invade their sovereignty. Huh? Perhaps I am mistaken, but it seems you share Madeleine Albright's (previous United States Secretary of State) mindset. When asked about the 500,000 Iraqi children killed by US led sanctions in the '90s, after careful consideration she replied, "we think the price is worth it." Madeleine Albright - Wikipedia
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dronestar Member Posts: 1417 From: usa Joined: Member Rating: 6.4
|
CS writes: What do you mean by "war crime"? CS, it seems my first two posts were unclear. Can you be more specific?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
CS writes:
CS, it seems my first two posts were unclear. Can you be more specific? What do you mean by "war crime"? What makes the things that are described in those articles count as war crimes?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dronestar Member Posts: 1417 From: usa Joined: Member Rating: 6.4 |
CS writes: What makes the things that are described in those articles count as war crimes? CS, is there a specific part of Rahvin's message in the first post, Message 1, that you find unclear?:
Rahvin writes: I think, if we consider sovereignty to be at all relevant (including considering our own ability to control our own territory such as denying the use of our national airspace to a foreign military), that if Afghanistan or Pakistan withdraw consent to allow drone attacks within their airspace, we would be obligated to stop, else be considered a rogue nation committing an act of war by the international community. In addition to violating the sovereignty of Pakistan, Obama is apparently now violating the sovereignty in the Philippines Message 2. Obama has directed drones to Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, and now the Philippines. When I read the following article, I thought about the term "chickens coming home to roost":
quote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1493 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Thanks Crash, but do you have any news that isn't hugely out of date? I don't see that it's "out of date", but that it supports my contention that Pakistan might be saying one thing and asking us for another.
Even your unlinked January report doesn't include the recent happenings in Pakistan. How would a report in January include something that hadn't happened yet?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
CS, is there a specific part of Rahvin's message in the first post, Message 1, that you find unclear? No. What is unclear is how these articles are showing "war crimes".
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dronestar Member Posts: 1417 From: usa Joined: Member Rating: 6.4
|
Crash writes: I don't see that it's "out of date", but that it supports my contention that Pakistan might be saying one thing and asking us for another. Yes, it does support your contention that Pakistan might have said one thing and asked for another . . . in 2008. Err, good job Crash. Kudos.
Crash writes: How would a report in January include something that hadn't happened yet? Well . . . , since it couldn't, maybe it would've been more useful for you to post something more recent and germane to the topic?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 420 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
What is it that US citizens should worry about related to drone bases in the US?
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dronestar Member Posts: 1417 From: usa Joined: Member Rating: 6.4 |
CS writes: What is unclear is how these articles are showing "war crimes". Do you not agree that drone-attacks that violate sovereignty is an act of war? If Cuba or Iran used drone attacks on the USA, then would you consider it an act of war? CS, give me a clue, are you only quibbling about semantics or a wishfully arguable legal definition? (the definition of "is" perhaps?)
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024