Someone's going to be in a heap of poop for this:
Printed From: Tippmann Paintball
Category: News And Views
Forum Name: Thoughts and Opinions
Forum Description: Got something you need to say?
URL: http://www.tippmannsports.com/forum/wwf77a/forum_posts.asp?TID=190970
Printed Date: 27 December 2025 at 7:25am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Someone's going to be in a heap of poop for this:
Posted By: tallen702
Subject: Someone's going to be in a heap of poop for this:
Date Posted: 05 February 2013 at 7:14am
|
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/020413_DOJ_White_Paper.pdf" rel="nofollow - Enjoy ------------- <Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.> |
Replies:
Posted By: SSOK
Date Posted: 05 February 2013 at 10:00am
|
So the TLDR is it authorizes the POTUS to attack terrorists outside of areas of conflict, amirite? ------------- 
|
Posted By: tallen702
Date Posted: 05 February 2013 at 10:44am
Nope, wrong actually. It allows POTUS et al to murder US citizens without just cause or due process. ------------- <Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.> |
SSOK wrote:Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 05 February 2013 at 2:39pm
|
My understanding is that the stipulation for using drone strikes against an American citizen is that they must be involved in armed conflict with the US and that it further defines armed combat. I haven't read the entirety of it, but if that's the case it makes sense. ------------- 
|
Posted By: The Guy
Date Posted: 05 February 2013 at 5:01pm
fixed. ------------- http://www.anomationanodizing.com - My Site 
|
Posted By: choopie911
Date Posted: 05 February 2013 at 8:52pm
| Yeah there is SO much spin being put on this thing lately that you really need to be careful with wording. |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 06 February 2013 at 8:54am
|
It is hard to "spin" this... http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/05/16856963-american-drone-deaths-highlight-controversy?lite ------------- They tremble at my name... 
|
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 06 February 2013 at 9:24am
|
So let's review. Joseph P Citizen moves to Afghanistan, and in his new personna of Ali Ben-Terror sits down with the local terrorist cell. Now without probable cause or actual evidense ole HRH Obama decides he is a threat to US troops in the area and authorized a drone strike on an American citizen in a foriegn land. Now what if Ali Ben-Terror is there just to write his book on terror and is doing research, rather than being a 'enemy' combatant. We all know the state of intelligence in this fiasco, so can Obama and crew just authorize these strikes. Now move a little further up the incrimental agenda ladder. How soon using the same logic can Obama and crew justify strikes within the continental US, and the Sheeple will just nod and move along because it is Obama not Bush doing this. ------------- 
|
Posted By: evillepaintball
Date Posted: 06 February 2013 at 1:04pm
|
You really think that's all the evidence they have when making the decision to strike? Do you honestly believe your future scenario will ever happen? Really?
------------- 
|
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 06 February 2013 at 2:01pm
|
NO, but our current intelligence system is broken as well, so what is defined in this decesion as enough evidense for authorization for the strike? Or will the need to interdict and potential action by Ali Ben-Terror be seen as enough. Who ever saw the potential as cameras on stop lights to cameras damn near everywhere. You did see "Enemy of The State" we are that close to that fictional 'impossibility'. Did you ever read 1984, we are close to that as well. HG Wells saw London being bombed from the skies in one of his books from 1897, who ever believed then that there was going to be flying machines dropping bombs on London. In 1914 The French General Staff, wrote off aircraft as a useless and ineffective little 'toy'that would never amount to anything in war. Who ever thought that a President would round up a minority population and move them to camps (Japanese internment WW2, Native American 'Reservations'). Never say never when you are dealing with technology or agenda and a governments ability to abuse that technology or agenda for 'the good of all' as they define it at that time, where in reality the sole purpose is the projection of power by that government. -------------
|