The Killing of Anwar al-Awlaki

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Christine wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Christine wrote:
^
It is not really the left wing nuts who have a problem with this.

[/quote]

That’s because Bush is out of office.
[/quote]

And its a disgrace.

If the point is reached where cheering for your team is more important than the rule of law or the republic everyone is fucked.

Alright, your team may win if you do that, it may even play in the ruins that you won all by itself…

That is shameful, no matter what political affiliation you have. [/quote]

I agree that it is a disgrace, but at the same time I am surprised there are not more right wingers who are falling in line with Paul on this one.[/quote]

You got us all wrong Christine we right wingers love it when enemies of the USA die. :)[/quote]

And you cheer it on, even if it means that America dies.

Not the United State of America, America, the idea, the ideal.

The shining city on the hill.

Shame on you.

42

Why dont they just deport all immigrants already? Legal or not.

43

[quote]clip11 wrote:
Why dont they just deport all immigrants already? Legal or not.[/quote]

Uh, what? What did you just write?

44

[quote]Dijon wrote:

[quote]clip11 wrote:
Why dont they just deport all immigrants already? Legal or not.[/quote]

Uh, what? What did you just write?[/quote]

The guy has a funny name so that must mean he would be an immigrant?

45

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Christine wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Christine wrote:
^
It is not really the left wing nuts who have a problem with this.

[/quote]

That’s because Bush is out of office.
[/quote]

And its a disgrace.

If the point is reached where cheering for your team is more important than the rule of law or the republic everyone is fucked.

Alright, your team may win if you do that, it may even play in the ruins that you won all by itself…

That is shameful, no matter what political affiliation you have. [/quote]

I agree that it is a disgrace, but at the same time I am surprised there are not more right wingers who are falling in line with Paul on this one.[/quote]

You got us all wrong Christine we right wingers love it when enemies of the USA die. :)[/quote]

And you cheer it on, even if it means that America dies.

Not the United State of America, America, the idea, the ideal.

The shining city on the hill.

Shame on you.
[/quote]

Save your bluster for those like you who don’t understand American history.
Your knowledge of America leaves a great deal to be desired. Read about what we did to our enemies during the Revolution. Read about George Washington’s use of spies. Read about the American Civil war and what the union did to take out the South. For once it would be refreshing to see one of your posts that actually made sense when addressing this great country that I live in. All you know how to do is criticize and that I believe is rooted in jealousy.

46

Orion you are on the lunatic fringe, again. How can you argue that they did not apply the rule of law? Al-Awlaki knew that he was a wanted man. The proper legal process to get a trial (which you are whining about him not getting) is one contacts their lawyer, who will then contact the authorities and arrange a surrender. Then after one surrenders, they get a trial. You see it’s really simple and easy.

Al-Awlaki chose not to surrender and go through the legal process. He chose to be a desperado on the run. He chose to incite others to commit murder which made him dangerous. It was his choice to live and die the way he did.

A consistent theme in your posts is that you cannot seem to accept that people who do bad things are asking to suffer bad consequences. You expect people to risk their lives and other peoples lives playing games with people who are dangerous. People are not going to take you seriously until you are realistic in your expectations.

47

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Christine wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Christine wrote:
^
It is not really the left wing nuts who have a problem with this.

[/quote]

That’s because Bush is out of office.
[/quote]

And its a disgrace.

If the point is reached where cheering for your team is more important than the rule of law or the republic everyone is fucked.

Alright, your team may win if you do that, it may even play in the ruins that you won all by itself…

That is shameful, no matter what political affiliation you have. [/quote]

I agree that it is a disgrace, but at the same time I am surprised there are not more right wingers who are falling in line with Paul on this one.[/quote]

You got us all wrong Christine we right wingers love it when enemies of the USA die. :)[/quote]

And you cheer it on, even if it means that America dies.

Not the United State of America, America, the idea, the ideal.

The shining city on the hill.

Shame on you.
[/quote]

Save your bluster for those like you who don’t understand American history.
Your knowledge of America leaves a great deal to be desired. Read about what we did to our enemies during the Revolution. Read about George Washington’s use of spies. Read about the American Civil war and what the union did to take out the South. For once it would be refreshing to see one of your posts that actually made sense when addressing this great country that I live in. All you know how to do is criticize and that I believe is rooted in jealousy.
[/quote]

Shame.

On.

You.

People died to give you freedom and you whored it out for talking points.

Good on you mate, may you never reap what you have sowed.

But then again, your children would, so whatever you prefer, may it come to pass.

48

[quote]Sifu wrote:
Orion you are on the lunatic fringe, again. How can you argue that they did not apply the rule of law? Al-Awlaki knew that he was a wanted man. The proper legal process to get a trial (which you are whining about him not getting) is one contacts their lawyer, who will then contact the authorities and arrange a surrender. Then after one surrenders, they get a trial. You see it’s really simple and easy.

Al-Awlaki chose not to surrender and go through the legal process. He chose to be a desperado on the run. He chose to incite others to commit murder which made him dangerous. It was his choice to live and die the way he did.

A consistent theme in your posts is that you cannot seem to accept that people who do bad things are asking to suffer bad consequences. You expect people to risk their lives and other peoples lives playing games with people who are dangerous. People are not going to take you seriously until you are realistic in your expectations.

[/quote]

Look, I do not want to seem un-polite or ungenerous, but slightly drunk as I am there is this:

You, dear anynomous guy who I do not necessarily wish to alienate, aka my friend, do not quite seem to get that I am not in the rah-rah lets hear it for our team camp.

If you want to discuss this, PM me or make your own thread.

If you make your on thread, I will neither be polite, nor forgiving, but I will be honest.

Not fast, taking days to think about it, but honest.

So, if you are interested, go!, or PM me what you think would be the problem.

49

[quote]Sifu wrote:
Orion you are on the lunatic fringe, again. How can you argue that they did not apply the rule of law? Al-Awlaki knew that he was a wanted man. The proper legal process to get a trial (which you are whining about him not getting) is one contacts their lawyer, who will then contact the authorities and arrange a surrender. Then after one surrenders, they get a trial. You see it’s really simple and easy.

Al-Awlaki chose not to surrender and go through the legal process. He chose to be a desperado on the run. He chose to incite others to commit murder which made him dangerous. It was his choice to live and die the way he did.

A consistent theme in your posts is that you cannot seem to accept that people who do bad things are asking to suffer bad consequences. You expect people to risk their lives and other peoples lives playing games with people who are dangerous. People are not going to take you seriously until you are realistic in your expectations.

[/quote]

Spot on, great to see u around the boards, keep posting if u see the need.

50

[quote]aussie486 wrote:

[quote]Sifu wrote:
Orion you are on the lunatic fringe, again. How can you argue that they did not apply the rule of law? Al-Awlaki knew that he was a wanted man. The proper legal process to get a trial (which you are whining about him not getting) is one contacts their lawyer, who will then contact the authorities and arrange a surrender. Then after one surrenders, they get a trial. You see it’s really simple and easy.

Al-Awlaki chose not to surrender and go through the legal process. He chose to be a desperado on the run. He chose to incite others to commit murder which made him dangerous. It was his choice to live and die the way he did.

A consistent theme in your posts is that you cannot seem to accept that people who do bad things are asking to suffer bad consequences. You expect people to risk their lives and other peoples lives playing games with people who are dangerous. People are not going to take you seriously until you are realistic in your expectations.

[/quote]

Spot on, great to see u around the boards, keep posting if u see the need.[/quote]

If I insinuated hat you need to suck cawk to make your daily protein allotment, would you feel misunderstood?

51

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]aussie486 wrote:

[quote]Sifu wrote:
Orion you are on the lunatic fringe, again. How can you argue that they did not apply the rule of law? Al-Awlaki knew that he was a wanted man. The proper legal process to get a trial (which you are whining about him not getting) is one contacts their lawyer, who will then contact the authorities and arrange a surrender. Then after one surrenders, they get a trial. You see it’s really simple and easy.

Al-Awlaki chose not to surrender and go through the legal process. He chose to be a desperado on the run. He chose to incite others to commit murder which made him dangerous. It was his choice to live and die the way he did.

A consistent theme in your posts is that you cannot seem to accept that people who do bad things are asking to suffer bad consequences. You expect people to risk their lives and other peoples lives playing games with people who are dangerous. People are not going to take you seriously until you are realistic in your expectations.

[/quote]

Spot on, great to see u around the boards, keep posting if u see the need.[/quote]

If I insinuated hat you need to suck cawk to make your daily protein allotment, would you feel misunderstood?

[/quote]

Now now sweetie, there’s that projection again, I’ve told u about that before but hey u a kinda thick aren’t u.

Why don’t u continue to crawl into that bottle of etoh, BTW how’s that going with your training?.

You really need help, seek help whatever u can, change is hard but i have faith in u, u will thank me in the future.

52

Thanks Orion, you gave me a good laugh with the part about protein allotments. On a more serious note I’ll say this. Al-Awlaki was actively involved with killing people who did not deserve to die. I have friends in the Army who were at Fort Hood when one of his followers killed a lot of people. It wasn’t fun waiting to find out if they were alright.

I’m glad that son of a bitch has been stopped.

53

[quote]orion wrote:

Timothy Mc Veigh…[/quote]

How do you even compare the two and manage not to feel embarrassed?

54

[quote]ZEB wrote:
I will once again give President Obama credit (as I did when he took out Osama) for killing Anwar al-Awlaki. I will also add that Obama is proving himself to not be nearly as bad a foreign policy leader as he is a domestic leader.

[/quote]

I’ve come to agree with you on that ZEB. Obama has stepped up night raids in Afganistan, drone attacks in Pakistan and he has extended drone attacks into Yemen and Somalia. Since May, more information has come into the public domain about the administration’s efforts in Pakistan as well. Obama deserves credit for this.

55

I agree with orion.

56

[quote]clip11 wrote:
Why dont they just deport all immigrants already? Legal or not.[/quote]

Anders Berhing Breivik is that you Lol

( For you who dont know, Anders B Breivik is the fucker who killed alot of
kids in norway this summer. And actually relevant to the topic: Even though he is a
terrorist scumfuck, he where not killed on the spot, he are getting a trial. And I think thats how it should be ).

ps.
For a forum where people on a regular basis scream out “the rule of law” and the danger of government, I am supprised that so few are not supporting orion on this.

57

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Christine wrote:
^
It is not really the left wing nuts who have a problem with this.

[/quote]

That’s because Bush is out of office.
[/quote]

Exactly. And it’s about time the left realised that Obama’s foreign policy has, to a large extent vindicated Bush’s foreign policy.

58

[quote]Christine wrote:
^
It is not really the left wing nuts who have a problem with this.

It is Roh Paul’s latest talking point.

[/quote]

(Christine, this isn’t necessarily directed at you, but the quote was small)

This isn’t a “Left” or “Right” issue. This is an issue of law and precedent IMO. I don’t know what the right answer is.

Was this guy a terrorist? No doubt. Was he an American citizen. Yeah.

At best it makes it “awkward”.

Ron Paul is consistent. The “Left” thinks he’s Right. The Right thinks he’s Left. That’s OK.

(L)ibertarians also don’t condone the “War on Drugs”, either. The “Left” largely doesn’t blink over legalized pot, the “Right” has a hissy-fit. Ditto some First Amendment issues-- think “Flag Burning” where “the Right” is off their rocker.

If Ron Paul wanted to spend Trillions on Welfare, he’d be a posterboy for the “Left”. The only thing that makes him “Right” is adherence to Constitution and fiscal responsibility. Both the Left and Right hate libertarians for that. Rep’s and Dem’s are the Parties of Big Nanny Government.

At first glance, I think his comments about this terrorist are spot on. I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t happy this guy is dead, but there’s also a part of me saying “Well, what if ‘terrorist’ comes to be defined as someone who says ‘Fuck’ a lot-- now I’m a terrorist-- fire at will”.

Like many of Paul’s comments, they don’t translate well into soundbites and snippets (think his comments at the recent debate). They usually require a deeper understanding of the issues at hand. I don’t give a lot of confidence in much of the electorate and particularly the “party faithful” (of either side) to give such issues much thought behind soundbite.

So, for now-- “Amerrrrica! Fuck Yeah!”

59

[quote]SteelyD wrote:
(Christine, this isn’t necessarily directed at you, but the quote was small)

This isn’t a “Left” or “Right” issue. This is an issue of law and precedent IMO. I don’t know what the right answer is.

Was this guy a terrorist? No doubt. Was he an American citizen. Yeah.

At best it makes it “awkward”.

Ron Paul is consistent. The “Left” thinks he’s Right. The Right thinks he’s Left. That’s OK.

(L)ibertarians also don’t condone the “War on Drugs”, either. The “Left” largely doesn’t blink over legalized pot, the “Right” has a hissy-fit. Ditto some First Amendment issues-- think “Flag Burning” where “the Right” is off their rocker.

If Ron Paul wanted to spend Trillions on Welfare, he’d be a posterboy for the “Left”. The only thing that makes him “Right” is adherence to Constitution and fiscal responsibility. Both the Left and Right hate libertarians for that. Rep’s and Dem’s are the Parties of Big Nanny Government.

At first glance, I think his comments about this terrorist are spot on. I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t happy this guy is dead, but there’s also a part of me saying “Well, what if ‘terrorist’ comes to be defined as someone who says ‘Fuck’ a lot-- now I’m a terrorist-- fire at will”.

Like many of Paul’s comments, they don’t translate well into soundbites and snippets (think his comments at the recent debate). They usually require a deeper understanding of the issues at hand. I don’t give a lot of confidence in much of the electorate and particularly the “party faithful” (of either side) to give such issues much thought behind soundbite.

So, for now-- “Amerrrrica! Fuck Yeah!”[/quote]

In the end, I think this comes down to the fact that this was a very special case. This killing - which is rightful in my opinion - would never have happened on American soil, because we have infinitely more resources here to bring to bear. Al-Awlaki knew he was on the kill list, and I think that he made the fatal mistake of assuming he was somewhat shielded by his citizenship. Had he gotten on an airplane that landed on US soil, I’m sure he would have been detained at the gate. Instead we extended our reach via high explosives. If anything I think the precedent this sets is that if you prove yourself an enemy of high value, we will wage war on you, no matter who you are.

60

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Christine wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Christine wrote:
^
It is not really the left wing nuts who have a problem with this.

[/quote]

That’s because Bush is out of office.
[/quote]

And its a disgrace.

If the point is reached where cheering for your team is more important than the rule of law or the republic everyone is fucked.

Alright, your team may win if you do that, it may even play in the ruins that you won all by itself…

That is shameful, no matter what political affiliation you have. [/quote]

I agree that it is a disgrace, but at the same time I am surprised there are not more right wingers who are falling in line with Paul on this one.[/quote]

You got us all wrong Christine we right wingers love it when enemies of the USA die. :)[/quote]

And you cheer it on, even if it means that America dies.

Not the United State of America, America, the idea, the ideal.

The shining city on the hill.

Shame on you.
[/quote]

Save your bluster for those like you who don’t understand American history.
Your knowledge of America leaves a great deal to be desired. Read about what we did to our enemies during the Revolution. Read about George Washington’s use of spies. Read about the American Civil war and what the union did to take out the South. For once it would be refreshing to see one of your posts that actually made sense when addressing this great country that I live in. All you know how to do is criticize and that I believe is rooted in jealousy.
[/quote]

Shame.

On.

You.

People died to give you freedom and you whored it out for talking points.

Good on you mate, may you never reap what you have sowed.

But then again, your children would, so whatever you prefer, may it come to pass. [/quote]

Answer my points. Do you understand American history? Have you done any research to back up your crazy ideas? Nope. You just rant one and on about something you know nothing about. I am bordering on the belief that you have a mental disorder at least when it comes to the US.