Ralph Nader is unsurprisingly still a giant douchebag

[Donerail]

I find it strange that the only people I'm agreeing with entirely in this thread are both I-NY.

[Donerail]

Obama's not a war criminal in my opinion but he has been aggressive and Dubya-like in many ways.  He's certainly not the kumbaya President libs wanted.

He's exactly the president I wanted and nothing like Bush Jr. Jrwas all about sending hundreds of thousands of ground troops in at great cost, both financial and human. Obama is like a surgeon, sending in high tech drones as needed and finally getting Osama bin Laden, in Pakistan, a place the GOP was too afraid to touch.

High tech drones which have killed tons of innocent individuals, including targets wrongly accused, also including at least one American citizen.

Your point?

The point is that 1st degree murder is bad.

[Donerail]

Obama's not a war criminal in my opinion but he has been aggressive and Dubya-like in many ways.  He's certainly not the kumbaya President libs wanted.

He's exactly the president I wanted and nothing like Bush Jr. Jrwas all about sending hundreds of thousands of ground troops in at great cost, both financial and human. Obama is like a surgeon, sending in high tech drones as needed and finally getting Osama bin Laden, in Pakistan, a place the GOP was too afraid to touch.

High tech drones which have killed tons of innocent individuals, including targets wrongly accused, also including at least one American citizen.

Your point?

The point is that 1st degree murder is bad.

LOL.

If you consider that 1st degree murder, pick up a law dictionary.

Premeditated and willful killing of an innocent man is 1st degree murder, and state-sanctioned death without trial/jury/lawyer/judge is a very large step towards fascism.

[Donerail]

Obama's not a war criminal in my opinion but he has been aggressive and Dubya-like in many ways.  He's certainly not the kumbaya President libs wanted.

He's exactly the president I wanted and nothing like Bush Jr. Jrwas all about sending hundreds of thousands of ground troops in at great cost, both financial and human. Obama is like a surgeon, sending in high tech drones as needed and finally getting Osama bin Laden, in Pakistan, a place the GOP was too afraid to touch.

High tech drones which have killed tons of innocent individuals, including targets wrongly accused, also including at least one American citizen.

Your point?

The point is that 1st degree murder is bad.

LOL.

If you consider that 1st degree murder, pick up a law dictionary.

Premeditated and willful killing of an innocent man is 1st degree murder, and state-sanctioned death without trial/jury/lawyer/judge is a very large step towards fascism.

So you're saying that Obama is premeditating and deliberately ordering the murder of the innocents who are among those killed in these strikes?

That's about as crazy a conspiracy theory as I've hear...

The NY Times is known for being prone to conspiracy theories, yes.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world/obamas-leadership-in-war-on-al-qaeda.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&

[Donerail]

Obama's not a war criminal in my opinion but he has been aggressive and Dubya-like in many ways.  He's certainly not the kumbaya President libs wanted.

He's exactly the president I wanted and nothing like Bush Jr. Jrwas all about sending hundreds of thousands of ground troops in at great cost, both financial and human. Obama is like a surgeon, sending in high tech drones as needed and finally getting Osama bin Laden, in Pakistan, a place the GOP was too afraid to touch.

High tech drones which have killed tons of innocent individuals, including targets wrongly accused, also including at least one American citizen.

Your point?

The point is that 1st degree murder is bad.

LOL.

If you consider that 1st degree murder, pick up a law dictionary.

Premeditated and willful killing of an innocent man is 1st degree murder, and state-sanctioned death without trial/jury/lawyer/judge is a very large step towards fascism.

So you're saying that Obama is premeditating and deliberately ordering the murder of the innocents who are among those killed in these strikes?

That's about as crazy a conspiracy theory as I've hear...

The NY Times is known for being prone to conspiracy theories, yes.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world/obamas-leadership-in-war-on-al-qaeda.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&

Was killing Bin Laden first degree murder?

People are killed all the time in this manner because we have to protect this country. Deal with it, buddy.

I wasn't talking about bin Laden, I was talking about people like al-Aulaqi, who was senselessly murdered for doing things that threaten the security of this country like having a blog and a Facebook and making YouTube videos.

[Donerail]

I wasn't talking about bin Laden, I was talking about people like al-Aulaqi, who was senselessly murdered for doing things that threaten the security of this country like having a blog and a Facebook and making YouTube videos.

I'll ask the question again... who cares?

Not many people, because it can't be sensationalized and inserted into pop culture. Doesn't mean it isn't deeply disconcerting.

[Donerail]

I wasn't talking about bin Laden, I was talking about people like al-Aulaqi, who was senselessly murdered for doing things that threaten the security of this country like having a blog and a Facebook and making YouTube videos.

I'll ask the question again... who cares?

Not many people, because it can't be sensationalized and inserted into pop culture. Doesn't mean it isn't deeply disconcerting.

No.  People don't care because the guy was afforded EVERY opportunity to stroll into the nearest US Embassy, Consulate, or military base and give himself up.  Had he done so and coughed up a few of his Al Qaeda chums he would have been "punished" by having to attend a few terrorist rehab classes in Saudi and then free to live his life in peace.  He chose to aid terrorists and live on the run with Al Qaeda in Yemen.  People don't care because even with the war monger Bush in office it was pretty easy for 99.99999% of Americans to avoid getting droned.  Not hard.  Really you should be more concerned about lightning strikes.  Objectively they are a far greater threat to you than Bush/Obama drones.  Other than crazy terrorists who lays awake worried about stuff like this?

So his options were either stay out there and possibly live or turn himself in and be handed over to the gentle hands of the Saudis? Anybody would take freedom and possible death over torture and possible death.

[Donerail]

I wasn't talking about bin Laden, I was talking about people like al-Aulaqi, who was senselessly murdered for doing things that threaten the security of this country like having a blog and a Facebook and making YouTube videos.

I'll ask the question again... who cares?

Not many people, because it can't be sensationalized and inserted into pop culture. Doesn't mean it isn't deeply disconcerting.

No.  People don't care because the guy was afforded EVERY opportunity to stroll into the nearest US Embassy, Consulate, or military base and give himself up.  Had he done so and coughed up a few of his Al Qaeda chums he would have been "punished" by having to attend a few terrorist rehab classes in Saudi and then free to live his life in peace.  He chose to aid terrorists and live on the run with Al Qaeda in Yemen.  People don't care because even with the war monger Bush in office it was pretty easy for 99.99999% of Americans to avoid getting droned.  Not hard.  Really you should be more concerned about lightning strikes.  Objectively they are a far greater threat to you than Bush/Obama drones.  Other than crazy terrorists who lays awake worried about stuff like this?

So his options were either stay out there and possibly live or turn himself in and be handed over to the gentle hands of the Saudis? Anybody would take freedom and possible death over torture and possible death.

Errr... the Saudis are not "torturing and killing" people that are sent through their terrorist reform program.  It's a pretty relaxed deal.

http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/2010/nea/154472.htm

[Donerail]

I have a question to Spanish Moss and the other libertarians/chomskyites. How would you stop terrorism. Lief is right. You've either got invasion, killing them, or nothing.

We can't stop terrorism any more than we can stop murder, so I wouldn't stop terrorism. As for reducing terrorism, I would target the root causes, such as US troops being stationed in the Middle East and ridiculously high US support for Israel. A cessation of foreign interventionism would go a long way towards stopping terrorism. Additionally, taking some measures against treatment of Muslims in the US would help too. Of course, taking environmental measures could do some to reduce terrorism. "You have destroyed nature with your industrial waste and gases more than any other nation in history. Despite this, you refuse to sign the Kyoto agreement so that you can secure the profit of your greedy companies and industries."--OBL.