Discussion for article #228177
Sad but true. Wingers always wail about the Obama âdictatorshipâ, but the one thing they donât mention in their diatribes is the drone strikes, which is the one thing I might actually agree with them on.
1 Like
ooops.
As Oliver says, I donât like to think about it. Thatâs because the open-ended approach to extra-judicial killings, the sloppy, any-old-how approach weâve taken is a continuation of what we hated about George W. Bush and a major disappointment from Obama. He curtailed other serious abuses but this remains, and itâs very troubling.
1 Like
This show should be retooled as âLast Week Every Night.â
Are you saying youâre glad that right-wing media has focused on nonsense like birth certificates and Benghazi instead of illegal drone strikes?
Perhaps Republican media intentionally distracts its right-wing audience from the issue of illegal drone strikes because Republicans are in lockstep agreement with Democrats that the president has the legal (and imperial) authority to order these bombings anywhere in the world?
Judging by the lack of protest from Democrat voters I must infer that they too have this issue in common with their Republican voting brothers and sisters.
You called these drone attacks a âdisappointmentâ and âserious abusesâ.
Do you believe they represent crimes?
It is indeed sad that such a young boy prefers grey skies instead of blue ones. I am sure the drones will go away the day his people will stop concocting terrorists plans to do harm to the rest of us. I hope he will soon enjoy those beautiful blue skies once again.
I, for one, have never seen Harvey Keitelâs balls. However, Oliverâs point is well taken.
What I believe is that Iâve said what I think. Iâm not terribly interested in what you believe I ought to think but that doesnât seem to have slowed you down much in the past.
I asked you a question which you refuse to answer:
Do you believe these drone strikes represent crimes?
Why wonât you answer?
Can you provide any evidence that âterroristsâ in the tribal region of Pakistan present an imminent threat to the U.S.?
Because Iâve read your comment history and donât think thereâd be much point in bandying words with you. I have a few things to do today and being the object of your loaded questions and free-floating hostility is not on the agenda.
My comment history should be irrelevant to answering a simple and straightforward question.
Whatâs relevant is your choice not to answer.
My guess is, however, that when a foreign nation not under the influence of D.C. begins a drone bombing campaign in a sovereign country they claim is harboring terrorists youâll be quick to label such strikes as crimes.
John doesnât seem to understand. Itâs just how we roll here.
You called these drone attacks a âdisappointmentâ and âserious abusesâ.
Do you believe they represent crimes?
No, theyâre a failure of Congress to properly legislate oversight and accountability on the use of drones.
If the Shah of Iran drone bombed Tel Aviv using the same domestic laws and âterroristâ rationale the U.S. is using would you defend the legality of such strikes?
Or would you state that itâs an issue to be handled by the Iranian congress?
I am sure the darkies concocting terrorists plots will go away the day your people drop this hillbilly Hatfield and McCoy bullshit.
Are you perhaps suggesting that President Obama is âdroningâ those areas just for fun?
You should explain that to whoever is approving the drone strikes in those areas.