 |
 |
New Obama controversy
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Completely ignoring Barry's recent decision to authorise black ops* in 75 countries then?
(* Basically, instead of taking enemy combatants to Gitmo, just kill them in place so you don't have to bother with silly things like trials or riling the anti-Gitmo protestors.)
|
|
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status:
Offline
|
|
Yes, the video does seem to ignore that...
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Well, since you posted the title "New Obama controversy" and that's the only one I can think of, I automatically assumed you were going to talk about that. Imagine how miffed I was when I clicked on the thread and found that you're not talking about that.
|
|
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status:
Offline
|
|
I tell you what. I'll talk about it anyway.
Obama secretly deploys US special forces to 75 countries across world - Times Online
President Obama has secretly sanctioned a huge increase in the number of US special forces carrying out search-and-destroy missions against al-Qaeda around the world, with American troops now operating in 75 countries.
The dramatic expansion in the use of special forces, which in their global span go far beyond the covert missions authorised by George W. Bush, reflects how aggressively the President is pursuing al-Qaeda behind his public rhetoric of global engagement and diplomacy.
According to The Washington Post, Mr Obama has also approved pre-emptive special forces strikes to disrupt terror plots, and has given the units powers and authority that was not granted by Mr Bush when he occupied the White House.
Didn't you guys have a word for this kind of thing a few years back? What was it again? On the tip of my tongue... ...wait... ..."warmonger!". Yes, that was it, wasn't it?
|
|
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by besson3c 
Did you enjoy the video?
I didn't watch it. Bandwidth suckage. Did it have boobies?
|
|
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Doofy
I didn't watch it. Bandwidth suckage. Did it have boobies?
I think there were some boobies in the video dancing around. Not naked ones though.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by besson3c
I think there were some boobies in the video dancing around. Not naked ones though.
What's the point in that then?
|
|
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Doofy
Actually that's the way it should be done. The so-called "War on Terror" should have been a covert, special-ops war from jump. Invading Iraq was a boneheaded move. Afghanistan should have been quickly ratcheted down after the Taliban was run out of power and another government installed. Then keep the pressure on Al-Qaeda with special forces. Incredibly less expensive. Doesn't stretch the military thin. And doesn't inflame the Muslim world into thinking that we are conducting a crusade against their lands.
OAW
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by OAW
Actually that's the way it should be done. The so-called "War on Terror" should have been a covert, special-ops war from jump.
Yeah. That's all well and good if you ignore accountability issues and don't mind the possibility that some dude from Delta decides that you're somehow financing terrorists and thus takes you out.
I take it from this stance that you wouldn't have minded Gitmo operating just as long as it was secret and nobody knew about it?
|
|
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Doofy
Yeah. That's all well and good if you ignore accountability issues and don't mind the possibility that some dude from Delta decides that you're somehow financing terrorists and thus takes you out.
I take it from this stance that you wouldn't have minded Gitmo operating just as long as it was secret and nobody knew about it?
If we had taken care of the Taliban in Afghanistan and then used SpecOps guys to take care of the stragglers/freelancers operating outside of Afghanistan there would have been no need for a Camp X at Gitmo . . . at all.
|
|
One should never stop striving for clarity of thought and precision of expression.
I would prefer my humanity sullied with the tarnish of science rather than the gloss of religion.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status:
Offline
|
|
I can't believe I'm reading this. So you guys are completely OK with your black ops guys taking out people at will with no trial and under no declaration of war?
I guess you'll be OK with the SAS and SRR coming over there and taking out any Irish peeps involved in IRA funding then? No, thought not.
|
|
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2005
Status:
Offline
|
|
So it's heinous and totalitarian to detain terrorists at Gitmo, but it's OK just to kill them. 
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status:
Offline
|
|
Whomp There It Is... Whoomp There It Is!!
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy
If we had taken care of the Taliban in Afghanistan and then used SpecOps guys to take care of the stragglers/freelancers operating outside of Afghanistan there would have been no need for a Camp X at Gitmo . . . at all.
Exactly.
And to answer your question directly Doofy ... I don't have an issue with Gitmo. What I have an issue with is indefinite detention without charge. So if Gitmo is closed and prisoners continue to be held in this manner on US soil in another facility then AFAIC that is simply a distinction without a difference.
OAW
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Doofy
I can't believe I'm reading this. So you guys are completely OK with your black ops guys taking out people at will with no trial and under no declaration of war?
There hasn't been an official Declaration of War since like what? WWII? That's a quaint notion at this stage in the game. The bottom line is that the US is at war with Al-Qaeda. That organization is not a nation-state ... so it's pretty silly to fight it as such with huge armies, navies, etc. Covert, special-forces operations are the way to go against them. And no ... the Green Berets and Navy Seals and Delta Force are not law enforcement officers looking to take someone to trial. That's not their role. That is the role of the FBI, ATF, etc. to perform for domestic threats.
Originally Posted by Doofy
I guess you'll be OK with the SAS and SRR coming over there and taking out any Irish peeps involved in IRA funding then? No, thought not.
And what makes you think they don't? If they were truly that much of a threat to the British government that is?
But again ... this is why they call it covert ops. Most any operation of that nature will cause blowback from the local population if it is made public. Am I "ok" with it? Let's just say that I recognize the realities of the world. And the way the world is versus the way I would have it be is not always the same thing.
OAW
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Doofy
I can't believe I'm reading this. So you guys are completely OK with your black ops guys taking out people at will with no trial and under no declaration of war?
Umm, we had a declaration of war. Remember that whole War on Terror thing Bush started?
Of course, if we had focused all our efforts on Afghanistan after 9/11 and taken care of all the bad guys there--while not ever getting involved in Iraq--there would not be a whole bunch of bad guys all over the place needing to be taken out by our black ops guys. There would have been some stragglers going into Pakistan but that would have been about it.
We, the US, have in effect created the problem we now face. Instead of fighting a war against the nation and its political parties that attacked us (Afghanistan and the Taliban) we decided we needed to make war on an idea. As a result, people all over the world embraced that idea as a way to counter/thwart US hegemony. So now we've got a "fine old mess" of our own making, a mess that has us going after bit players all over the world.
Originally Posted by Doofy
I guess you'll be OK with the SAS and SRR coming over there and taking out any Irish peeps involved in IRA funding then? No, thought not.
You mean like how they were working in Colombia keeping an eye on the IRA fighters there? Or how about all the SAS, and some SBS, folks working with the US in Afghanistan?
You and I both know that the UK and US have been running black ops/black bag jobs all over the world for the better part of six decades with ridiculous amount of collateral damage caused in the countries where these jobs take place. So, why are you so up in arms about this now?
|
|
One should never stop striving for clarity of thought and precision of expression.
I would prefer my humanity sullied with the tarnish of science rather than the gloss of religion.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Zip, Boom, Bam
Status:
Offline
|
|
Is this Colbert trying to be relevant or funny or something? 
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top
