Page 194 of 231 FirstFirst ... 94144184192193194195196204 ... LastLast
Results 2,896 to 2,910 of 3463
Like Tree48Likes

Thread: The American Politics thread

  1. #2896
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Top_Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Adelaide, South Australia
    Posts
    23,159
    If there's one thing that's typified a few recent spree shooters it's that they've let themselves be taken alive. Using a drone takes that possibility completely out of the equation. If they were only deployed on people hell-bound on mass destruction, that's one thing but we all know it won't stop there. They'll be deployed against gang activities in major centres. And it's not them assisting police ops which is as much a problem as them (eventually) making operational decisions themselves.

    Mind you, there were protests along similar lines when police started using helicopters and IR vision in the 80's, etc. so what the hell.
    Last edited by Top_Cat; 07-03-2013 at 05:38 AM.
    The Colourphonics

    Bandcamp
    Twitderp

  2. #2897
    International Coach uvelocity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    seamy road
    Posts
    11,786
    its a constitutional right for every free citizen to own a fleet of drones
    Quote Originally Posted by sledger View Post
    I just love all kinds of balls.

  3. #2898
    International Coach uvelocity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    seamy road
    Posts
    11,786
    a drone would cause less death anyway, perps would know they'd lose. would cause them to give up a lot more often imo

  4. #2899
    Global Moderator Spark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A Blood Rainbow
    Posts
    32,501
    Quote Originally Posted by Spikey View Post
    i've not put much thought in this, but surely government officials killing people before a court trial is pretty constitutional. i mean, cops, hired by the government, kill people who are risks to other people all the time. surely killing an admitted terrorist, through a drone, who belongs to an organization with a history of killing people (and has basically declared war on the US) isn't that much of a leap? am i missing something? the core to me is, yes, drones could be used on an US citizen who is an imminent risk to the lives of others. be it terrorist or dude on a killing spree. obviously there needs to be greater clarity, not least the imminent risk part, but yeah, it strikes me as fairly constitutional.

    then again i've never read the silly old dumb document
    Well...

    No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation
    No lawyer but it's hard to see how the summary execution of an American citizen on American soil who is not posing an imminent threat to anyone could be constitutional given that.

    The problem is that Holder, Brenner, Obama et al haven't exactly confirmed that it's constitutional or otherwise. Their response has basically been "well, it's not like we would do that if it was" which from a civil rights or mission creep POV doesn't exactly fill one with confidence, as Paul rightly says. Remember these are extrajudicial killings ordered by presidential dictat with (at this stage) little to no oversight (and certainly none before the fact).

    The police analogy doesn't really work in this case as the police can only use force, especially lethal force, on situations of imminent danger to the safety of themselves or the public - which the 5th amendment covers - and besides, in a comparable situation they've gotten a warrant too. Presidents don't need those.

    As a legitimate weapon of war I have no problems with drones at all (and drones is a stupid term anyway) but this is part of a trend of a shifting of the powers of war/peace etc to the executive in America that has been gong on for too long now (see: Libya, and Iraq to an extent), and people on the left (other than obvious exceptions like Rachel Maddow) should have been raising alarm bells over this for much longer. ****, this used to be their ballpark in 06-7.
    + time's fickle card game ~ with you and i +


    get ready for a broken ****in' arm


  5. #2900
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Spikey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    All Glory To The Nev
    Posts
    32,786
    didn't some memo the other week cite how they believe it's constitutional.

    but anyway i'm saying drones could only be used on a US citizen on US soil if that person is an imminent threat (say, terrorist.) Obviously dropping drones left right and centre just because isn't constitutional, non dropping them on car robbers. but i'm saying under a certain set of circumstances, to me it seems obvious how it's constitutional - it's a way of using lethal force. To me it seems if you find out some dudes are planning a terrorist attack, beyond doubt, you have the guys killed, through whatever means. Drone or rifle

    Obviously that's just one small aspect of the whole drone issue. I'm just neat picking on a couple of statements that I didn't think were right and a lot of people seemed to think were.
    Indians can't bowl - Where has the rumour come from as I myself and many indian friends arwe competent fast bowlers ?

    With the English bid I said: Let us be brief. If you give back the Falkland Islands, which belong to us, you will get my vote. They then became sad and left

  6. #2901
    Global Moderator Spark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A Blood Rainbow
    Posts
    32,501
    Then why doesn't Holder just come put and say that? This is the problem: there's so little oversight that seemingly basic questions like these become iprtnt, especially when the answers given area great.

  7. #2902
    The Wheel is Forever silentstriker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    37,851
    Quote Originally Posted by KungFu_Kallis View Post
    Peter Siddle top scores in both innings....... Matthew Wade gets out twice in one ball
    "The future light cone of the next Indian fast bowler is exactly the same as the past light cone of the previous one"
    -My beliefs summarized in words much more eloquent than I could come up with

    How the Universe came from nothing

  8. #2903
    Global Moderator Spark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A Blood Rainbow
    Posts
    32,501
    Hahaha solid riposte

  9. #2904
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Spikey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    All Glory To The Nev
    Posts
    32,786
    "If Mr. Paul wants to be taken seriously he needs to do more than pull political stunts that fire up impressionable libertarian kids," McCain said, adding: "I don't think what happened yesterday is helpful to the American people."

    take that spark!

  10. #2905
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Spikey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    All Glory To The Nev
    Posts
    32,786


    how'd he get the chart done so quickly

  11. #2906
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Spikey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    All Glory To The Nev
    Posts
    32,786
    i obviously haven't seeked out what Graham has said, but someone told me he said that the moment you join al-Qaeda you become an "imminent threat" which is the sort of stuff we should probably talking about

  12. #2907
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Top_Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Adelaide, South Australia
    Posts
    23,159
    McCain not above the occasional stunt himself, tbh.....

    What does joining Al Qaida mean any more? Sympathetic to them? Flew to Oman and met a guy who once had a ch00f with a Bin Laden?

  13. #2908
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Spikey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    All Glory To The Nev
    Posts
    32,786
    who knows. and that's what has to be defined. not whether, but when.

    also we should also talk about

    Holder: Big banks' size complicates prosecution efforts - The Hill's On The Money

  14. #2909
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Top_Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Adelaide, South Australia
    Posts
    23,159
    So classing them as a non-threat isn't on the table any more? I know in intel circles guys don't let go of stuff like that easily (or at all) but the question needs to be asked; how likely is an Al Qaida strike on US soil? If it's not that likely, why are bazillions still being spent on preventing them?

    You want a bigger threat on US soil, just need to look at the massive proliferation of white, survivalist types, predicted/laughed at 10 years ago but is now reality.
    Last edited by Top_Cat; 08-03-2013 at 03:58 AM.

  15. #2910
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Uppercut's Avatar
    Tournaments Won: 1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    .
    Posts
    23,650
    Quote Originally Posted by Top_Cat View Post
    Damn I'm good. He's always the 'defend the indefensible' guy. Generally get the impression he has no serious expertise in an area he's analysing other than unbelievable Google-Fu. His articles are always well-researched and referenced whilst pretty much missing or ignoring completely the real reasons why that thing he's defending are pissing people off.

    It's not only the body count, Wil.
    He also only compares it to other acts of war, but the US is using drones in countries it isn't supposed to be at war with.

    Body count isn't irrelevant either, though. TBH I'd be fine with their use if the political impact wasn't so disastrous. I think it's pretty justifiable to use drones in Pakistan, given how welcoming parts of the country can be to undisputed terrorists. It's just not sensible to alienate the country so hard.
    Quote Originally Posted by zaremba View Post
    The Filth have comfortably the better bowling. But the Gash have the batting. Might be quite good to watch.



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. The British Politics Thread
    By cover drive man in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 3937
    Last Post: Yesterday, 04:51 AM
  2. Media
    By SirBloody Idiot in forum Cricket Web Tennis
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 06-08-2011, 06:10 AM
  3. FAQ & Introduction Thread
    By Samuel_Vimes in forum Cricket Web Tennis
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 20-06-2011, 11:06 AM
  4. Finally ! A Last Word Thread
    By SJS in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 01-01-2010, 07:42 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •