New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

About them doggone drones.

your delusions of grandeur are highly entertaining. hitler couldnt even invade england let alone canada. and if he wasnt so busy on the eastern front, you cowards would still be stuck on omaha beach!!

Without help from the US the UK would have been starved into submission. Hitler would not have needed to invade.
 
What does international law say about targeted killings in response to unrest, chaos, emergencies?



http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Executions/Pages/InternationalStandards.aspx

The Committee notes with concern the restrictive interpretation made by the State party of its obligations under the Covenant, as a result in particular of (a) its position that the Covenant does not apply with respect to individuals under its jurisdiction but outside its territory, nor in time of war

The position of the US is that the covenant doesn't apply in wartime....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Covenant_on_Civil_and_Political_Rights

It is completely idiotic to reward people like Awalaki by saying if they are in areas where there is no law enforcement, they can operate with impunity.
 
Without help from the US the UK would have been starved into submission. Hitler would not have needed to invade.



Off-topic:


When the U.S. flyboys were over in the UK during WWII, their legendary success with the English women was no small irritation to the Brits in uniform. The common complaint to the Yanks was that they were "Over-paid, over-sexed, and over here!". The typical American reply to their hosts was that the Brits wee "Under-paid, under-sexed, and under Eisenhower."

I imagine that went over real well.
 
So accessibility (along with lat. and long.) determine if it's murder or not?

If we killed Awlaki in the U.S it would have been murder.
If we killed Awlaki in Yemen (which we did), it's not murder because of location and accessibility.

Coming from a land of "innocent until proven guilty", this seems a bit shakey to me. And yes, I'm being an idealist here.

Based on your logic, if we kill soldiers on the battlefield, it is murder. Make no mistake. Yemen is a battlefield and has been our ally. Al Qaeda is making war on them. If it was legal to kill Yamamoto by ambushing his transport aircraft many miles away from the battlefield then killing Awalaki was certainly legal.

If someone is within the territory of the United States then due process of law is mandated unless the danger to law enforcement officers is too great. If someone is using deadly force to resist arrest then they'd certainly be killed. In Yemen there were three choices....let Awalaki continue to direct military action against the United States, hope that Yemeni law enforcement or military forces could eventually capture or kill him or kill him ourselves....can you think of any other options?

Awalaki was on the list of targets for over a year...he knew it. His father filed a lawsuit to get his name removed. Did Awalaki offer to surrender? Did he issue a statement explaining that he wasn't at war with the US?

Your idealism is commendable but unrealistic. Would you suggest that we should not have killed members of the Japanese or German military without legal action first?
 
big brave american heroes. havent declared war on someone their own size since 1812!! only too eager to take on the little guys tho!! hahahahaahahahahahaa

Yeah, clearly we were picking on a 90lb weakling when we went to war against Germany, Japan, Italy and their allies...and what shining light of civilization are you from Gabe?
 
His idealism is stupid, just like that of most demented Liberals. Rather than give [Unwelcome language removed] like Awalaki special consideration because they went through the process to become an American citizen, I would turn them into stew-meat first before any other enemies.

Based on your logic, if we kill soldiers on the battlefield, it is murder. Make no mistake. Yemen is a battlefield and has been our ally. Al Qaeda is making war on them. If it was legal to kill Yamamoto by ambushing his transport aircraft many miles away from the battlefield then killing Awalaki was certainly legal.

If someone is within the territory of the United States then due process of law is mandated unless the danger to law enforcement officers is too great. If someone is using deadly force to resist arrest then they'd certainly be killed. In Yemen there were three choices....let Awalaki continue to direct military action against the United States, hope that Yemeni law enforcement or military forces could eventually capture or kill him or kill him ourselves....can you think of any other options?

Awalaki was on the list of targets for over a year...he knew it. His father filed a lawsuit to get his name removed. Did Awalaki offer to surrender? Did he issue a statement explaining that he wasn't at war with the US?

Your idealism is commendable but unrealistic. Would you suggest that we should not have killed members of the Japanese or German military without legal action first?
 
' ...................bring them to them United States and put them on trial'

[video=youtube_share;lkbJw5oyKlw]http://youtu.be/lkbJw5oyKlw[/video]

And lose more REAL Americans trying to capture them. No thanks, I say set the bastards on fire from afar.
 
Without help from the US the UK would have been starved into submission. Hitler would not have needed to invade.

We were healthier after the War than we had been before it

http://www.cooksinfo.com/british-wartime-food

At the point in the War, when the US was asked in, Churchill had a chance of making terms for peace with Germany. We may never know why an old War Horse did not choose Peace, was it Pride ? Money ? Or just the fun of the chase ? We can only surmise, but he lost the British Empire in choosing War over Peace and turn loose on the World a devastation which is an unquenchable monster, the machine which is 'insidious' cruel and brutal The Corperate American Empire. And also left the brutalities of what has been falsely named 'Communism' in the game un challenged, its people hopelessly cut off. Splitting the World in two in an imagined 'Cold War' giving the bastard Arms Barons unlimited Power to destroy and carry on destroying our beauty, forever and ever Amen. The Devil rules ..................... it has swallowed Americas soul completely. And you love it ?
 
6 missiles fired and only 5 killed. We're not getting our money's worth.

News item:

Five killed in US terror drone attack in northwest Pakistan


At least five people have been killed and many others wounded in an attack carried out by a US assassination drone in northwestern Pakistan.


The US killer drone fired six missiles at targets in the Pakistani tribal region of North Waziristan on Wednesday.

Pakistan’s tribal regions are attacked by US terror drones almost regularly with Washington claiming that militants are the targets. However, casualty figures clearly indicate that civilians are the main victims.

The killing of Pakistani civilians, including women and children, has strained relations between Islamabad and Washington.







Complete text: http://www.presstv.com/detail/2013/02/06/287588/us-drone-attack-kills-5-in-nw-pakistan/



Do you believe the children were likely terrorists?

I suppose it's possible, and I can't prove they weren't. Does that make it okay then?

Would your answer change if George Bush was in the White House?
 
Using that standard Obama could order drone strikes on the DNC and The White House.

Them doggone drones.....can be used on American citizens if they are "believed to be" the enemy. No warrants, no Congressional approval, just a belief is good enough:


A confidential Justice Department memo concludes that the U.S. government can order the killing of American citizens if they are believed to be “senior operational leaders” of al-Qaida or “an associated force” -- even if there is no intelligence indicating they are engaged in an active plot to attack the U.S.



Complete text: http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_new...egal-case-for-drone-strikes-on-americans?lite



Are we okay with that? Democrats, would you be okay with that if there were a Republican in the White House? Republicans, are you okay with that when there is a Democrat in the White House? If you answer is no to either one, it should be no to both.
 
I'm an independent, and when I heard that I got pissed. So no, I wouldn't be okay with either party doing it.
 
Look, being worried about drone strikes TODAY on US is like being worried that B-52 bombers would bomb US citizens!

Really you PREPPERS need to sit the f down and shut the f up. You are being utterly retarded.
 
Look, being worried about drone strikes TODAY on US is like being worried that B-52 bombers would bomb US citizens in 1968!

Really you PREPPERS need to sit the f down and shut the f up. You are being utterly retarded.
 
Back
Top