Obama’s Secret ‘Kill List’ Unites Far Right and Far Left

“Pragmatism over ideology”
Politics • Views: 26,857

The right wing blogosphere is having yet another anti-Obama freak-out today; this time they’re ranting at Obama for doing something they would enthusiastically applaud if it were the policy of a Republican president: Secret ‘Kill List’ Tests Obama’s Principles.

This is an interesting article about the targeted assassinations of Al Qaeda leaders, and the Obama administration’s “kill list.” Finally, the far left and the far right have found something upon which they can agree, albeit for very different reasons.

WASHINGTON — This was the enemy, served up in the latest chart from the intelligence agencies: 15 Qaeda suspects in Yemen with Western ties. The mug shots and brief biographies resembled a high school yearbook layout. Several were Americans. Two were teenagers, including a girl who looked even younger than her 17 years.

President Obama, overseeing the regular Tuesday counterterrorism meeting of two dozen security officials in the White House Situation Room, took a moment to study the faces. It was Jan. 19, 2010, the end of a first year in office punctuated by terrorist plots and culminating in a brush with catastrophe over Detroit on Christmas Day, a reminder that a successful attack could derail his presidency. Yet he faced adversaries without uniforms, often indistinguishable from the civilians around them.

“How old are these people?” he asked, according to two officials present. “If they are starting to use children,” he said of Al Qaeda, “we are moving into a whole different phase.”

It was not a theoretical question: Mr. Obama has placed himself at the helm of a top secret “nominations” process to designate terrorists for kill or capture, of which the capture part has become largely theoretical. He had vowed to align the fight against Al Qaeda with American values; the chart, introducing people whose deaths he might soon be asked to order, underscored just what a moral and legal conundrum this could be.

Jump to bottom

155 comments

1 HappyBenghazi  Tue, May 29, 2012 10:49:05am

The far left and far right really ain't all that different.

2 Iwouldprefernotto  Tue, May 29, 2012 10:50:18am

re: #1 HappyWarrior

The far left and far right really ain't all that different.

Really? Except that the far left has very little voice in this country.

3 SteelGHAZI  Tue, May 29, 2012 10:50:50am

It's a convergence of stupid.

4 Daniel Ballard  Tue, May 29, 2012 10:51:16am

Deciding who makes the list-Near the top of my looong list of reasons I never want to be President. I support our President on this matter. Not entirely without misgivings related to the sheer gravity of the situation. But Obama is doing just fine IMO.

5 HappyBenghazi  Tue, May 29, 2012 10:51:21am

re: #2 Iwouldprefernotto

Really? Except that the far left has very little voice in this country.

True I meant rhetoric wise though.

6 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Tue, May 29, 2012 10:53:27am

How long have we had a kill list?

7 HappyBenghazi  Tue, May 29, 2012 10:53:45am

re: #4 Daniel Ballard

Deciding who makes the list-Near the top of my looong list of reasons I never want to be President. I support our President on this matter. Not entirely without misgivings related to the sheer gravity of the situation. But Obama is doing just fine IMO.

I always thought when I was a kid, who would want to be president, give me an ambassadorship to an exotic paradise nation we have a great relationship with and I'm golden.

8 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, May 29, 2012 10:54:35am

When the far left freaks out over this, sometimes they do it for "onoz US imperalist military-industrial complex onoz" reason and it's simply silly, and rather harmless. The other freakout reason is humanitarian, and that is the impulse that is not shameful, though coupled with ideological silliness it can lead to some misguided conclusions.

When the far right freaks out over this it's either "onoz we're next", or "why all these lists and long procedures, kill'em all and make a parking lot".

9 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Tue, May 29, 2012 10:58:02am

That was a serious question, BTW. Is this new, or has America has a kill list since 2001 or earlier?

10 EastSider  Tue, May 29, 2012 10:58:07am

Does this kill list include American citizens on foreign soil? Does it include American citizens on American soil?

11 Killgore Trout  Tue, May 29, 2012 10:58:24am

At least idiots like Glenn Greenwald are consistent. I checked the Hot Air thread on this story earlier and they were all complaining because it's Obama but of course they'd be applauding it it was Bush. If this was Bush the lefties would be screaming for arrests and war crimes trials. Morons.
If you can ignore the partisans and idiots it's a fascinating article. There are a lot of interesting practical and ethical issues. There are no easy answers.

12 Killgore Trout  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:00:26am

re: #9 Mostly sane, most of the time.

Does this kill list include American citizens on foreign soil?

Yes

Does it include American citizens on American soil?

No, I don't think that would be allowed.

13 EastSider  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:02:09am

re: #11 Killgore Trout

At least idiots like Glenn Greenwald are consistent. I checked the Hot Air thread on this story earlier and they were all complaining because it's Obama but of course they'd be applauding it it was Bush. If this was Bush the lefties would be screaming for arrests and war crimes trials. Morons.
If you can ignore the partisans and idiots it's a fascinating article. There are a lot of interesting practical and ethical issues. There are no easy answers.

The reaction of the right is a bit sad. Obama is a walking, talking Tom Clancy-esque wet dream. If he was a republican from the midwest (and, ahem, white), there would be a poster of him hanging in conservative boys bedrooms across the country.

14 Killgore Trout  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:02:30am

re: #9 Mostly sane, most of the time.

That was a serious question, BTW. Is this new, or has America has a kill list since 2001 or earlier?

Looks like the current program started in 2002
THREATS AND RESPONSES: HUNT FOR AL QAEDA; BUSH HAS WIDENED AUTHORITY OF C.I.A. TO KILL TERRORISTS

15 Daniel Ballard  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:02:47am

re: #6 Mostly sane, most of the time.

Since mid day on 9/12?

16 Achilles Tang  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:03:03am

re: #6 Mostly sane, most of the time.

How long have we had a kill list?

Since Yamamoto?

17 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:03:06am

re: #11 Killgore Trout

If this was Bush the lefties would be screaming for arrests and war crimes trials. Morons.

Nonsense, who called for arrests and war crimes trials for Bush for these particular reasons? Note that Obama's policies are a moral improvement over Bush's, all this existed back then, but with less controls and in worse execution.

PS: Plus the crime of torture, but that torturers should be investigated and prosecuted is not a controversial statement. Obama has not tortured, so nobody calls for his head on this account.

18 Eventual Carrion  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:04:31am

re: #6 Mostly sane, most of the time.

How long have we had a kill list?

Well, during Bush admin it was a card deck.

19 EastSider  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:04:37am

re: #17 I'm back in the USSR (sigh)

Obama has not tortured,

That we know of today. Honestly, I would be disappointed but not shocked to find out that a torture program has continued in some form.

20 HappyBenghazi  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:05:26am

re: #13 EastSider

The reaction of the right is a bit sad. Obama is a walking, talking Tom Clancy-esque wet dream. If he was a republican from the midwest (and, ahem, white), there would be a poster of him hanging in conservative boys bedrooms across the country.

The guy gets Bin Laden and the right rags on him for bragging about it. Hey he got a guy that his two predecessors couldn't get. He had every right to use that fact that he's capable of fighting terrorism. It may sound silly but I really think the reason why the right hates Obama's foreign policy so much isn't so much disagreement but rather anger that they won't be able to define him as weak on terrorism like they've wanted to from the get go.

21 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:05:41am

re: #19 EastSider

That we know of today. Honestly, I would be disappointed but not shocked to find out that a torture program has continued in some form.

Well, there is no evidence that it happened, so it's hardly fruitful to speculate on this.

22 Killgore Trout  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:06:28am

re: #13 EastSider

The reaction of the right is a bit sad. Obama is a walking, talking Tom Clancy-esque wet dream. If he was a republican from the midwest (and, ahem, white), there would be a poster of him hanging in conservative boys bedrooms across the country.

Yeah, I'm pretty hawkish in the War on Terror stuff and I love Obama's handling of it. Bush made a lot of mistakes. I think Gitmo was a well intentioned attempt to keep the process somewhat transparent but the project is a legal failure. I can see how Bush might have been more interested in arrests and detainment early on for intelligence gathering but I'm happy to see we're now at the point where even someone as high value as Bin Laden is simply shot on sight.

23 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:07:55am

re: #18 RayFerd

Well, during Bush admin it was a card deck.

I believe the card deck was to get people to look at and become acquainted with the faces.

Still, what do you do when the enemy combatant is a person whose aim is to kill as many American civilians as possible, there does not seem to be a way to change their minds, and they will do anything, including putting a bomb in their underwear, to kill American civilians?

24 lawhawk  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:09:03am

re: #6 Mostly sane, most of the time.

9/12/2001 (OBL top of the list, followed by Zawahiri, etc?) The current list is likely populated with various AQ, AQ affiliates, and Taliban.

What the article really gets at is just how complicated the anti-terror strategy is and how the President's course of action is far different than anyone could have even imagined.

Far from going soft, he's gone after AQ in a no-holds-barred aerial assault after top [terror - added] leaders in countries from Yemen to Afghanistan and Pakistan.

He's changed the focus from detention (think GitMo) to deterrence by airstrike). We've also changed how we conduct rendition and other intel ops, and has increased the pace of those UAV strikes (though that is due in part to having the equipment in place and the intel to work with - something that wasn't possible previously as the UAVs (Predators/Reapers, etc. were first being outfitted and tested with missiles during the latter half of the Bush presidency).

25 EastSider  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:09:11am

The thing I think we're piecing together is the following:

It has been 10 years since 9/11, and we are living a world where the "war on terror" does not appear to be going away. That sucks, but hey, the cold war lasted for nearly 50 years before we "won" that.

The American public is living in a world where the answer to the following questions (and an open debate on these questions) does not exist:

What are the rules of engagement for the war on terror?
What should be the rules of engagement for the war on terror?
How were these rules determined? Was it inside the rule of law?
How are these rules codified today?

We're going full force forward and sending smart bombs into Yemen and SEAL teams into Pakistan. We keep people locked up in Cuba without a trial, and we used torture as an interrogation/humilation device.

Is this who we are as a Country? What price the security? What price the morals?

26 makeitstopghazi  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:09:53am

re: #12 Killgore Trout

No, I don't think that would be allowed.

Dude. That's what they want you to believe....

///

27 Vicious Babushka  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:11:12am
Two were teenagers, including a girl who looked even younger than her 17 years.

I want to know more about these kids.

28 erik_t  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:11:22am

I've never been terribly comfortable the degree to which citizenship is considered relevant on this subject. If we suppose that these sorts of extrajudicial killings are justified, I think it's fair to say that they should only be conducted when the judicial system in place is unable to handle the problem. I suggest that this standard is never met within the borders of the United States, nor within any relatively stable and ideologically-aligned nation. Only in aforementioned locations does citizenship really matter (in the context of extradition and the like). And whether or not death is an appropriate penalty or action depends on the crime committed and the threat posed, not on the nationality of the subject. Any international political repercussions would be less for killings of US citizens, not more.

So why do should* we quibble so much over the extrajudicial killing of US citizens versus internationals?

29 HappyBenghazi  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:11:52am

Honestly, I never would have guessed that Obama would be this strong on national security. I didn't think he would be weak mind you but I thought his biggest strength and why I preferred him over McCain would be domestics. And he's better still than McCain or Romney would be.

30 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:12:21am

re: #26 makeitstop

Dude. That's what they want you to believe...

///

It is allowed in a sense, it's just more theoretical - in a kill-or-capture situation it's pretty easy to catch the guy on the US soil. But if you can't and he constitutes danger, you still kill him.

31 lawhawk  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:12:39am

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...] - gives some sense to the way that Obama has vastly expanded the use of UAV attacks since he took office.

32 iossarian  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:12:53am

re: #28 erik_t

So why do we quibble so much over the extrajudicial killing of US citizens versus internationals?

Because Americans tend to give less of a shit if it's the kids of people in faraway places who can be summarily executed on the basis of shoddy intel.

33 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:14:40am

re: #28 erik_t

So why do we quibble so much over the extrajudicial killing of US citizens versus internationals?

BTW, yes, righties shouldn't be shocked if Putin's agents bump off someone they consider a terrorist on the US soil.

34 EastSider  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:14:51am

re: #28 erik_t

And whether or not death is an appropriate penalty or action depends on the crime committed and the threat posed, not on the nationality of the subject. Any international political repercussions would be less for killings of US citizens, not more.

So why do we quibble so much over the extrajudicial killing of US citizens versus internationals?

There is an implied subjective judgement on "crime committed" and "threat posed." And while it is a long way off, conceptually those doing the judging could be killing people that myself (or yourself) do not deem worthy of death.

In my cookie world, being an American citizen should give you a right to a trial before a summary execution.

We are in a gray area where the rules of warfare are colliding with the rule of law. I am not sure where the right answer lies.

35 Daniel Ballard  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:15:14am

re: #29 HappyWarrior

Honestly, I never would have guessed that Obama would be this strong on national security. I didn't think he would be weak mind you but I thought his biggest strength and why I preferred him over McCain would be domestics. And he's better still than McCain or Romney would be.

Obama should win the election on the strength of his foreign policy.

36 erik_t  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:15:28am

re: #34 EastSider

There is an implied subjective judgement on "crime committed" and "threat posed." And while it is a long way off, conceptually those doing the judging could be killing people that myself (or yourself) do not deem worthy of death.

In my cookie world, being an American citizen should give you a right to a trial before a summary execution.

We are in a gray area where the rules of warfare are colliding with the rule of law. I am not sure where the right answer lies.

In my cookie world, being a human being should give you a right to a trial before a summary execution.

Citizenship doesn't have a damned thing to do with it. Supposing extrajudicial killings are ever justified, if we're not sure enough to kill one of our own, we have no business killing one of someone else's.

37 Gus  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:15:46am

I support the president.

38 HappyBenghazi  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:17:20am

re: #35 Daniel Ballard

Obama should win the election on the strength of his foreign policy.

I agree, I am just saying that I primarily prefered him to McCain in 2008 because of his domestic moderate liberalism to McCain's positions. He's been great on foreign policy and I think Clinton is probably the most popular Sec of State in recent memory.

39 EastSider  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:17:26am

re: #36 erik_t

In my cookie world, being a human being should give you a right to a trial before a summary execution.

Citizenship doesn't have a damned thing to do with it.

Fair point. On the issue of: "who gets a trial and who gets a bullet," can we agree that neither citizenship nor perceived threat level alone are sufficient inputs to determine life and death?

40 erik_t  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:17:39am

As an aside, I can't think of very many other subjects in which I feel the need to retroactively add so many clarifications and caveats.

This one is murky, muddy, messy business. I am glad that no human life directly rides on my own muddled feelings on the matter.

41 Killgore Trout  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:18:33am

re: #27 Learned Mother of Zion

I want to know more about these kids.

It is pretty tantalizing. I bet if you piled through enough news stories you might be able to find some clues. Unfortunately the article doesn't elaborate.

42 HappyBenghazi  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:19:13am

Didn't Bin Laden have a couple sons with him when the SEALs got him?

43 erik_t  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:19:37am

re: #39 EastSider

Fair point. On the issue of: "who gets a trial and who gets a bullet," can we agree that neither citizenship nor perceived threat level alone are sufficient inputs to determine life and death?

I don't think that I think that any future action or intent can be criminalized. At this minute, nothing for me matters besides the severity of the crime already committed and the degree to which regular judicial channels are unable to bring the criminal to justice.

44 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:20:05am

re: #36 erik_t

In my cookie world, being a human being should give you a right to a trial before a summary execution.

Citizenship doesn't have a damned thing to do with it. Supposing extrajudicial killings are ever justified, if we're not sure enough to kill one of our own, we have no business killing one of someone else's.

I don't think of it as an execution, it's more of an act of war, which some see as legally complicated by citizenship (although that shouldn't be of much concern - if you're on battlefield against your country, does it matter if you're still a citizen?).

45 Vicious Babushka  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:20:06am

re: #16 Achilles Tang

Since Yamamoto?

Since Mary Surratt?

46 Charles Johnson  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:21:14am

The morality of this targeted assassination policy is absolutely a valid topic of discussion, and I have to agree that it's a troubling policy. But there is no doubt whatsoever that the targeted people are terrorists who would commit mass murder if they could, and the alternative to targeted killings is a wider war, in which many more people would be killed including innocent non-combatants.

This seems to me to be the best solution in a morally murky situation. If there's ever any evidence that these expanded executive powers are being abused, though, all hell will break loose.

47 erik_t  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:22:18am

re: #44 I'm back in the USSR (sigh)

I don't think of it as an execution, it's more of an act of war, which some see as legally complicated by citizenship (although that shouldn't be of much concern - if you're on battlefield against your country, does it matter if you're still a citizen?).

This is really at the heart of what I was trying to say. Whether it's war or execution... that's a very tricky matter for me. War would imply you could kill anybody who was on the wrong 'side' and posed some kind of nebulous threat, which could be an exclusively thought- and speech-based situation. I'm dramatically less comfortable with that idea.

48 dragonath  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:22:34am

Hey, here's a WND article from a couple of years ago:

G. GORDON LIDDY: WIKILEAKS CHIEF DESERVES TO BE ON "KILL LIST"

lol

49 EastSider  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:23:00am

re: #43 erik_t

I don't think that I think that any future action or intent can be criminalized. At this minute, nothing for me matters besides the severity of the crime already committed and the degree to which regular judicial channels are unable to bring the criminal to justice.

Interesting. Your comment brings up two thought exercises:

-Would you have authorized deadly force (e.g. drone strike) against a Mcveigh like individual on his way to explode a civilian target in the US?

-How do you define the boundaries of judicial channels ability to bring criminals to justice? E.g., could our courts have put OBL through a trial if he were captured alive?

50 Killgore Trout  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:23:21am

re: #42 HappyWarrior

Didn't Bin Laden have a couple sons with him when the SEALs got him?

Yeah, the adult aged ones were killed. One of his teenaged sons went mysteriously missing in the raid. There was an initial report that one prisoner was taken but that has since been denied. I was hoping maybe his wives would give an interview mentioning the missing son but I haven't seen a follow up.

51 iossarian  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:23:34am

re: #46 Charles Johnson

The morality of this targeted assassination policy is absolutely a valid topic of discussion, and I have to agree that it's a troubling policy. But there is no doubt whatsoever that the targeted people are thought to be terrorists who would commit mass murder if they could, and the alternative to targeted killings is a wider war, in which many more people would be killed including innocent non-combatants.

I had to insert the extra words emphasized above. This is why the reliability and political independence of the intelligence service is of critical importance in this debate, and why, for me, the actions of the Bush administration undermined the moral capacity of the US government to act in this way.

52 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:24:06am

re: #46 Charles Johnson

This seems to me to be the best solution in a morally murky situation. If there's ever any evidence that these expanded executive powers are being abused, though, all hell will break loose.

And they can be made a mess of even without intent to abuse. If a dim wingnut who has the "best intentions" is unable to sort through the intel and tell the shoddy stuff apart from the real stuff, it will still lead to grievous consequences.

Which is why it's crucial not to let wingnuts head the process.

53 iossarian  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:24:38am

re: #52 I'm back in the USSR (sigh)

Which is why it's crucial not to let wingnuts head the process.

Exactly.

54 erik_t  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:25:40am

re: #49 EastSider

-Would you have authorized deadly force (e.g. drone strike) against a Mcveigh like individual on his way to explode a civilian target in the US?

-How do you define the boundaries of judicial channels ability to bring criminals to justice? E.g., could our courts have put OBL through a trial if he were captured alive?

In the former, McVeigh has already committed a variety of crimes related to conspiracy-to-commit such-and-such, violating all sorts of laws against building big-ass bombs, and so on. Combined with law enforcement's relative inability to stop him on the necessary timeline, I think the strike would be justified.

In the latter, I have no idea. I'm sure there is a veritable warehouse-full of relevant and/or binding international law, precedent and so forth.

55 EastSider  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:25:47am

re: #46 Charles Johnson

If there's ever any evidence that these expanded executive powers are being abused, though, all hell will break loose.

All that is needed is the appearance of abuse for enemies (either domestic political opponents, or international terror cells) to make hay out of it.

Hell, you wouldn't even need the appearance. The existence is enough: How hard would it be for a radical cleric to spin this story to his advantage in Syria or Yemen or elsewhere right now?

Not saying I disagree with your assessment, rather explictly agreeing that it is indeed murky territory, and the tradeoffs are huge and difficult to calculate for every choice.

56 wrenchwench  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:26:45am

Frank Barack says:

I don't want to spend my whole life explaining myself. Either you get it, or you don't!

57 Daniel Ballard  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:27:17am

re: #46 Charles Johnson

Frankly I don't consider a drone strike morally any different than a squad attack or an artillery shell. These are enemy combatants. As such shoot to kill. Fancy tech hardly changes that. At least not to me.

Previously we would either have to let them get away or kill too many others in collateral damage. Sniping away at terror combat cells with missiles makes perfect sense to me especially as compared to big operations to get the same guys.

If we had treasonous citizens in with the enemy in WW1 or WW2 or now it seems the same to me. Drop the hammer.

58 Killgore Trout  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:28:27am

re: #49 EastSider

-How do you define the boundaries of judicial channels ability to bring criminals to justice? E.g., could our courts have put OBL through a trial if he were captured alive?

We probably could have arrested tried and convicted Bin Laden if we wanted to. However, for the majority of the people on the kill list trials might be difficult. The intel comes from military, CIA, NSA, etc. These agencies are looking for actionable intelligence and operate under different rules. They don't need a warrant to tap a cell phone in Kenya. Much of the evidence would probably not be allowed in a civilian court.

59 William Barnett-Lewis  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:28:35am

Sigh. Trying so hard not to drop bombs on a different web about this article. Got a whiney little "anarcho-syndicalist" gun nut who is. I believe, still active duty whining about Obama being a war monger. Take a Paulbot & replace "Atlas Shrugged" with Kropotkin's "The Conquest of Bread" and you'll get him.

ARRGH!

60 General Nimrod Bodfish  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:31:16am

I think one of the reasons why the US has moved more towards the "kill with drones" part over the "capture" is political and diplomatic relations with some of our, lukewarm, allies. It's easier to deal with a hole in a foreign nation's soil than it would be sending a small military group in a foreign nation. Look at the OBL mission for an example of some of the issues with sending a military force into a foreign nation.

Another reason for the drone strikes is reducing risks to military personnel. It's a lot easier to replace a drone than one special forces operative, a bit more expensive though.

Not that the above makes President Obama's tactics "right" or "wrong", it all really matters in the context of how they are employed. He's surrounded himself with people who he trusts their competency and judgements on issues such as the legalities of drone strikes and such. I trust his judgement on terrorism over anyone the Right puts up as an "expert".

61 EastSider  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:34:25am

re: #58 Killgore Trout

Much of the evidence would probably not be allowed in a civilian court.

And there's the rub.

The presumption of innocence is suspended, and a persons life is sorted through. They can be picked up, interrogated (for weeks or months or years), shipped to a different country, and in extreme circumstances: killed without trial or other mention.

How do you control power like that? How do you wield it morally, and effectively? Truman's decision was excruciatingly difficult but swift and simple. Today the lines are murky and must be re-evaluated every day.

62 EastSider  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:35:52am

Another fun thought exercise for those in support of this policy:

What happens when another country uses a drone or other assassination device to kill a person on US soil based on the knowledge that they are a credible threat?

63 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:36:07am

And yes, if Romney becomes the president, expect these questions to flare up anew. And this will be legitimate. Yes, because Romney is not Obama. Those are not simple mindless partisan reasons. The difference is crucial. Romney can't be trusted with making the right decisions in such cases.

bbl

64 aagcobb  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:37:48am

re: #62 EastSider

Another fun thought exercise for those in support of this policy:

What happens when another country uses a drone or other assassination device to kill a person on US soil based on the knowledge that they are a credible threat?

Are we assuming that the U.S. was harboring this person with the knowledge that he/she was wanted for terrorist attacks and refused to arrest and/or extradite the person?

65 JeffM70  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:38:40am

re: #62 EastSider

You know the answer to that. The War on Terror is fraught with double standards.

66 EastSider  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:39:30am

I apologize for all my gloomy questions. I guess my conclusion is this:

This will not end well. There is no way to effectively run this policy consistently over an extended period of time without creating a significant number of new enemies.

If we couldn't figure out the end-game for Iraq or Afghanistan, we'll never figure out an end-game for a global, extra judicial investigation, capture, interrogation, and assassinate program.

67 Vicious Babushka  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:39:36am

re: #62 EastSider

Another fun thought exercise for those in support of this policy:

What happens when another country uses a drone or other assassination device to kill a person on US soil based on the knowledge that they are a credible threat?

What other country is capable of carrying out such an action? (I can think of one, but not going to say. They would probably choose another method than a drone attack.)

68 Vicious Babushka  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:40:13am

re: #67 Learned Mother of Zion

What other country is capable of carrying out such an action? (I can think of one, but not going to say. They would probably choose another method than a drone attack.)

THOSE CANUCKS!

69 ProGunLiberal  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:43:22am

OT, but my parents are big on Chiropractors. I lack understanding of it, but am suspicious.

Somebody tell me your thoughts?

70 Vicious Babushka  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:44:29am

re: #69 ProGunLiberal

OT, but my parents are big on Chiropractors. I lack understanding of it, but am suspicious.

Somebody tell me your thoughts?

It's quackery. Not every medical condition is caused by spinal misalignment.

71 Shropshire_Slasher  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:45:09am

re: #69 ProGunLiberal
Quackery.
My boss saw one for years, swore by him, then at him. His back pains were from a bone spur, he had to be operated on to relieve the pain.
Just my 0.02 cents

72 Achilles Tang  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:47:09am

re: #36 erik_t

In my cookie world, being a human being should give you a right to a trial before a summary execution.

Citizenship doesn't have a damned thing to do with it. If we're not sure enough to kill one of our own, we have no business killing one of someone else's.

This would be true if we had a world where there was a reasonable chance of capturing such people alive, and accepting proofs that were based on spying without warrants (also irrelevant in this context), or even in the extreme could sentence them to death in absentia.

So, as nice and civil as your sentiments are, all they say is that you accept safe haven for our enemies, without fear of retribution and you hope that if we behave nicely towards them, so that they do not have any reason to fear us, then they will stop trying to kill us.

Why don't you just call yourself a pacifist and be done with it?

73 efuseakay  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:49:06am

The right had no problem with Bush's deck of cards for OIF... How soon they forget. And how easily they make fools out of themselves.

74 Achilles Tang  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:49:13am

re: #69 ProGunLiberal

OT, but my parents are big on Chiropractors. I lack understanding of it, but am suspicious.

Somebody tell me your thoughts?

Stay suspicious.

75 ProGunLiberal  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:49:27am

re: #70 Learned Mother of Zion

re: #71 Tommy's cone of shame

Thought so. See, I try as much as possible to do this logically, up to and including my faith. This may be why I am having such massive mental health issues right now. After 10 months of crap, and seeing that all my work to try and compensate for the Autism were all for nothing, I see no reason why it would get better.

Or reason to keep working against my Autism for that matter. Logic as always worked for me, and Logic says it won't get better based on current conditions.

76 aagcobb  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:49:30am

re: #66 EastSider

I apologize for all my gloomy questions. I guess my conclusion is this:

This will not end well. There is no way to effectively run this policy consistently over an extended period of time without creating a significant number of new enemies.

If we couldn't figure out the end-game for Iraq or Afghanistan, we'll never figure out an end-game for a global, extra judicial investigation, capture, interrogation, and assassinate program.

I have a real problem with telling the Bin Ladens of the world that as long as they stay in a country that can't or won't act against them, they are free to plot terrorist attacks on Americans without fear of retaliation.

77 dragonath  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:50:25am

Well, this is interesting:

[Link: blogs.voanews.com...]

Former Japanese prime minister Naoto Kan has told the Japanese parliament to abandon nuclear power, and says he was partly responsible, as the head of government, for the nuclear disaster triggered by last year's devastating earthquake and tsunami.

Mr. Kan spoke Monday to lawmakers, criticizing the role of the Tokyo Electrical Power Company and decades of lobbying by the nuclear power industry.

“TEPCO and the Electric Power Companies of Japan have dominated the nuclear power industry for the last 40 years. Through this nuclear clique and the rules they created, they expelled and isolated industry experts, politicians and bureaucrats who were critical, while the rest just looked on because of self-protection and an attitude of peace-at-any-cost. I'm saying this because I feel partly responsible.”

This nuclear clique, which has been created by the vested interest, is similar to the former Imperial Japanese military. We have to totally destroy and eradicate the organizational structure of the vested interests and (the) influence it has on the public. I think this should be the first step in reforming the nuclear industry.”

OK, the guy's marginally more popular than fried spam but... Japan is kind of freaked, and who can blame them.

78 Achilles Tang  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:52:25am

re: #62 EastSider

Another fun thought exercise for those in support of this policy:

What happens when another country uses a drone or other assassination device to kill a person on US soil based on the knowledge that they are a credible threat?

Dumb analogy.

79 efuseakay  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:52:51am

re: #66 EastSider

I apologize for all my gloomy questions. I guess my conclusion is this:

This will not end well. There is no way to effectively run this policy consistently over an extended period of time without creating a significant number of new enemies.

If we couldn't figure out the end-game for Iraq or Afghanistan, we'll never figure out an end-game for a global, extra judicial investigation, capture, interrogation, and assassinate program.

You assume there is an endgame...

80 ProGunLiberal  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:52:54am

re: #77 Be Zorch, Daddio

He has a point. TEPCO did the ultimate regulatory capture, and look what happened. A cautionary tale, much like Deepwater Horizon.

I'm still pro-Nuclear by the way.

81 EastSider  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:54:16am

re: #78 Achilles Tang

Dumb analogy.

why?

82 lawhawk  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:54:17am

re: #57 Daniel Ballard

Frankly I don't consider a drone strike morally any different than a squad attack or an artillery shell. These are enemy combatants. As such shoot to kill. Fancy tech hardly changes that. At least not to me.

Previously we would either have to let them get away or kill too many others in collateral damage. Sniping away at terror combat cells with missiles makes perfect sense to me especially as compared to big operations to get the same guys.

If we had treasonous citizens in with the enemy in WW1 or WW2 or now it seems the same to me. Drop the hammer.

The UAV strike is no different than a manned aircraft dropping ordnance. The outcome is the same.

The real issue isn't the use of UAVs. There are a couple of issues that are related. It's the persons being targeted and where they're being targeted. The moral question is how that person got to be considered a terrorist worthy of being targeted in the first place. Who determines whether evidence is credible and sufficient to warrant targeting. What safeguards are in place and are they sufficient to prevent someone from being wrongly targeted.

Once you've made that determination - and here I'm assuming that there are safeguards in place that someone is truly a target, the legalities of going after them come into play.

Targeting a foreign-born terrorist (AQ and/or Taliban) in Afghanistan? Not a problem because it's a theater of operations for direct military action, the targeted person is considered enemy combatant under rules of engagement and laws of war.

Targeting a foreign-born terrorist (AQ and/or Taliban) in the frontier provinces of Pakistan? Quite problematic because while the targeted person is an enemy combatant under rules of engagement, we're dealing with a country that is a nominal ally and we're not supposed to attack allies. It's even more problematic when attacking targets within Pakistan proper - such as Abbottabad (on the OBL raid), which can be construed as an attack on a sovereign nation and casus belli for war against the US. The issues are similar for raids in Yemen.

Americans that have joined with the terrorists still have rights of American citizens unless they've renounced their citizenship or otherwise acted against American interests. Joining AQ, such as with Adam Gadahn or Anwar Awlaki, acting as their propaganda wing or recruiter, would be considered those steps - and trial isn't needed.

What's different now is that the technology makes reaching out and hitting these individuals is so much easier. 50 years ago, you couldn't target these guys without a substantial military force and large amounts of ground forces. 30 years ago you would still need substantial forces on the ground and multiple airstrikes. 10 years ago, you'd still need multiple airstrikes, but a smaller ground presence due to the improved satellite tracking.

Now? With satellite tracking and UAVs, you could have a small team of operators at a remote airfield hitting multiple targets thousands of miles away.

Does the ease with which hitting these targets raise new moral questions?

83 Shropshire_Slasher  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:55:20am

A friendly yellow lab who is foaming at the mouth is at my screen door, should I let him in?

84 efuseakay  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:55:28am

re: #78 Achilles Tang

Dumb analogy.

Not really. What would you think of Yemen/Pakistan using drone strikes on our soil?

85 ProGunLiberal  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:57:10am

re: #83 Tommy's cone of shame

The foaming at the mouth sez no.

86 Killgore Trout  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:57:12am

re: #17 I'm back in the USSR (sigh)

Nonsense, who called for arrests and war crimes trials for Bush for these particular reasons?

It was commonly mentioned in the list of reasons.
George Bush War criminal

31. Extrajudicial Executions

treaty basis for the crime:
Civil and Political Rights Covenant, 1967, Art. 6. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life. . . Art. 14. (2). Everyone charged with a criminal offense shall have the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.

example:
Unmanned airplanes have been used to kill various persons along the Afghan-Pakistani border. In Iraq, the “deck of cards” pursuit resulted in the trial of Saddam Hussein and executions of the rest.

You could use google to search for other examples if you're interested.

87 Vicious Babushka  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:57:29am

re: #84 efuseakay

Not really. What would you think of Yemen/Pakistan using drone strikes on our soil?

That it's an act of war?

88 aagcobb  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:58:05am

re: #84 efuseakay

Not really. What would you think of Yemen/Pakistan using drone strikes on our soil?

We don't allow known terrorists living in the US to plot attacks on civilians.

89 Shropshire_Slasher  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:58:07am

re: #85 ProGunLiberal

My co-worker asked if there was any peanut butter in the office, then the dog ran away.

90 Achilles Tang  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:58:50am

re: #81 EastSider

why?

aagcobb explained it well enough above. You simplify realities to the point of absurdity.

91 Achilles Tang  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:03:29pm

re: #84 efuseakay

Not really. What would you think of Yemen/Pakistan using drone strikes on our soil?

Another absurd simplification. First of all Yemen allows the drone strikes, as does Pakistan under the table, although they are losing control of even their own organizations it seems. They tolerate this because their territories affected are not within their own control and in any practical sense are not even part of their country as a result.

I could go on, but this kind of childish vision of the real world reminds me of ones I had when I was 10.

92 lawhawk  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:04:25pm

re: #62 EastSider

A major difference is whether that foreign nation attempted to contact the US government to try and capture said person. Is the US government harboring said person? Is the US government actively protecting person?

With the case of UAV strikes in Afghanistan, we're dealing with a foreign government that has allowed the US to operate there. The US has a more tenuous relationship with Pakistan, and the UAV strikes there are big problem for the Pakistani government. The frontier provinces are autonomous with limited oversight from the Pakistani government in Islamabad. There is some assent to the US strikes in the frontier provinces, but they're rightfully pissed about the OBL raid that was in Pakistan proper.

UAV strikes in Somalia or Yemen are probelmatic because they're in foreign countries but they're also failed states with no/limited central government and no way to control the countries. Yemen had a strongman that assented to US operations there in going after AQ. Somalia has militias, including some tied with AQ.

93 dragonfire1981  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:07:58pm
94 makeitstopghazi  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:16:31pm

Obama campaign calls Mittens out...

“Mitt Romney’s continued embrace of Donald Trump and refusal to condemn his disgraceful conspiracy theories demonstrates his complete lack of moral leadership. Now he’s even standing by silently as Trump assails John McCain’s courage in standing up to the most extreme and hateful voices in the Republican Party—all in order to raise money for himself. If Mitt Romney lacks the backbone to stand up to a charlatan like Donald Trump because he’s so concerned about lining his campaign’s pockets, what does that say about the kind of President he would be?”

"Complete lack of moral leadership." Yep, sounds about right.

95 AK-47%  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:23:38pm

Obama will do its best at reminding us what's at stake in November.

Face it: Mitt and Obama are both beholden to the same special interests, their economic policies will not differ that greatly,

But the GOP is hell bent to set us back at least 50 years on all the gains we have made in women's, minority and gay rights. We cannot let that happen.

96 Kragar  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:24:20pm

Porter: 'Every Shred of Social Science Research' Proves the Bible is True

On today's broadcast of James Robison's "Life Today" television program, Robison featured Janet Porter, Jay Richards, and Mark Davis discussing "how Christians can bring about a new direction for America."

Not surprisingly, the solution the three advocated was for Christians to stand up in defense of the Bible and God's plan for mankind, which prompted Porter to declare that Christians have an innate advantage in this debate because "every shred of social science research" proves that the Bible is correct and the Founding Fathers created this nation for the purpose of spreading the Gospel and occupying until Jesus returns:

97 dragonath  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:24:58pm

re: #94 makeitstop

I'd love to see Trump's enemy list. I bet it would make Nixon look like Miss Manners.

98 Targetpractice  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:26:54pm

re: #97 Be Zorch, Daddio

I'd love to see Trump's enemy list. I bet it would make Nixon look like Miss Manners.

#1 on the list: Himself.

99 Daniel Ballard  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:27:05pm

re: #82 lawhawk
re: #82 lawhawk

Does the ease with which hitting these targets raise new moral questions?

IMO-It reduces them in important ways. No big invasion, less collateral damage. Even the consequences of a miss are less just because it is a missile or two not a big huge bomb load trying to destroy an area like a whole base.

100 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:28:02pm

Having time to cogitate on the matter: A tribunal should be held before someone's put on the kill list. Evidence should be reviewed. I understand we can't necessarily contact someone living in a cave in Pakistan to get themselves a lawyer, but we could appoint someone to be their advocate in the matter.

There should be a hearing, even if there can't be a trial.

101 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:29:14pm

re: #96 Kragar

mmmm culty

102 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:29:56pm

re: #81 EastSider

why?

BECAUSE AMERICA THAT'S WHY YEE HAW ROOTIN TOOTIN

103 efuseakay  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:30:21pm

re: #91 Achilles Tang

Another absurd simplification. First of all Yemen allows the drone strikes, as does Pakistan under the table, although they are losing control of even their own organizations it seems. They tolerate this because their territories affected are not within their own control and in any practical sense are not even part of their country as a result.

I could go on, but this kind of childish vision of the real world reminds me of ones I had when I was 10.

But both Yemen and Pakistan are failing as states. It was clear with the OBL raid, that Pakistan has been complicit. Yemen? Well that place was lost awhile ago. Permission from Governments of aforementioned nations doesn't really add up to anything. I do understand what you're saying. But the same would hold true for us. As a US citizen, would you be ok if your government gave tacit approval to a foreign nation to launch air strikes within your country?

It's a slippery slope, and while I do approve of what we are doing, it may come back to haunt us... As usual.

104 wrenchwench  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:31:57pm

Relative humidity in NM right now: 3%. Or as Larry Rice says, "Lip crackin' low."

105 Targetpractice  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:32:37pm

re: #100 Mostly sane, most of the time.

Having time to cogitate on the matter: A tribunal should be held before someone's put on the kill list. Evidence should be reviewed. I understand we can't necessarily contact someone living in a cave in Pakistan to get themselves a lawyer, but we could appoint someone to be their advocate in the matter.

There should be a hearing, even if there can't be a trial.

Oh, I'm sure that a "hearing" is heard, where somebody puts down the evidence on the table, a few high-level officials declare "guilty," and an assassin...er, UAV is dispatched to take care of the terrorist.

In fact, I think we've seen this movie before.

106 efuseakay  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:33:00pm

re: #88 aagcobb

We don't allow known terrorists living in the US to plot attacks on civilians.

We don't allow it, but it still happens.

107 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:33:02pm

re: #66 EastSider

I apologize for all my gloomy questions. I guess my conclusion is this:

This will not end well. There is no way to effectively run this policy consistently over an extended period of time without creating a significant number of new enemies.

If we couldn't figure out the end-game for Iraq or Afghanistan, we'll never figure out an end-game for a global, extra judicial investigation, capture, interrogation, and assassinate program.

The end game will be when we can't afford all this shit anymore :D

108 Targetpractice  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:33:12pm

re: #104 wrenchwench

Relative humidity in NM right now: 3%. Or as Larry Rice says, "Lip crackin' low."

"It's a dry heat!"

109 Kragar  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:33:15pm

Romney Silent On Trump, Demanded Perry ‘Repudiate’ Pastor Who Called Mormonism A Cult

Mitt Romney refused to directly repudiate Donald Trump’s claims that President Obama was born in Kenya just hours before he is scheduled to appear with the reality T.V. star for a fund raiser in Las Vegas, NV. “A candidate can’t be responsible for everything that their supporters say,” Romney spokesperson Eric Fehrnstrom told CNN on Friday, before insisting that the former Massachusetts governor “accepts the fact that [Obama] was born in Hawaii.”

But Romney has previously demanded that his political opponents publicly rebuke supporters who make false accusations about Mormonism. In October, Romney aggressively confronted evangelical pastor and Rick Perry backer Robert Jeffress, who claimed that Romney is not Christian and is part of a Mormon cult. Romney called on Perry to denounce Jeffress:

110 Eventual Carrion  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:34:03pm

re: #108 Targetpractice

"It's a dry heat!"

Like in an oven.

111 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:34:08pm

re: #109 Kragar

my cult good! Good my cult!

112 Targetpractice  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:34:10pm

re: #109 Kragar

Romney Silent On Trump, Demanded Perry ‘Repudiate’ Pastor Who Called Mormonism A Cult

You're not holding your breath for a repudiation, are ya?

113 Kragar  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:35:57pm

re: #108 Targetpractice

"It's a dry heat!"

Shut up Hudson.

114 Vicious Babushka  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:36:37pm

re: #103 efuseakay

As a US citizen, would you be ok if your government gave tacit approval to a foreign nation to launch air strikes within your country?

Can you give a scenario in which something like this could possibly happen?

Let's say some crazy separatist from Canada crosses over into Montana and is being protected by a gang of white separatists? Would it be OK for the Canadians to drone-bomb their guy?

115 Kragar  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:36:50pm

re: #112 Targetpractice

You're not holding your breath for a repudiation, are ya?

Just waiting for it to get to 50.1%

116 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:38:18pm

re: #114 Learned Mother of Zion

Can you give a scenario in which something like this could possibly happen?

supernatural motorcycle gangs

117 Achilles Tang  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:38:44pm

re: #107 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]

The end game will be when we can't afford all this shit anymore :D

Is that a joke?

118 Targetpractice  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:40:20pm

re: #113 Kragar

Shut up Hudson.

That reminds me, Prometheus comes out soon, doesn't it?

119 Achilles Tang  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:40:37pm

re: #103 efuseakay

But both Yemen and Pakistan are failing as states. It was clear with the OBL raid, that Pakistan has been complicit. Yemen? Well that place was lost awhile ago. Permission from Governments of aforementioned nations doesn't really add up to anything. I do understand what you're saying. But the same would hold true for us. As a US citizen, would you be ok if your government gave tacit approval to a foreign nation to launch air strikes within your country?

It's a slippery slope, and while I do approve of what we are doing, it may come back to haunt us... As usual.

I really don't follow your logic.

If we were a failed state we wouldn't have any say in what foreign governments did, except bitch about not having our own failings respected.

120 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:40:59pm

re: #117 Achilles Tang

Is that a joke?

of course it is! America will last forever! Praise America Jesus!

121 wrenchwench  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:41:23pm

re: #110 RayFerd

Like in an oven.

Especially in some parts.

Some parts are more like a smoker.

122 blueraven  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:41:24pm
123 Achilles Tang  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:42:47pm

re: #120 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]

of course it is! America will last forever! Praise America Jesus!

You should stick to dings today.

124 Kragar  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:44:04pm

re: #118 Targetpractice

That reminds me, Prometheus comes out soon, doesn't it?

Think so, but the trailer turned me off. Total lack of interest in seeing it now.

125 Targetpractice  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:45:49pm

re: #124 Kragar

Think so, but the trailer turned me off. Total lack of interest in seeing it now.

Blasphemy!

//

126 PhillyPretzel  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:46:59pm

OT: I need a little bit of help. I remember several months ago Charles was complaining about the cost of checks and someone here gave him a very cheap price on checks and it came from a place one would not expect checks to come from. Can anyone here remember that place?

127 Kragar  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:47:33pm

re: #125 Targetpractice

Blasphemy!

//

I saw the whole movie in about 3 minutes for free. Why would I spend $15 bucks to watch it for 2 hours?

128 Achilles Tang  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:48:56pm

re: #126 PhillyPretzel

OT: I need a little bit of help. I remember several months ago Charles was complaining about the cost of checks and someone here gave him a very cheap price on checks and it came from a place one would not expect checks to come from. Can anyone here remember that place?

Someone else's mailbox?

129 Targetpractice  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:49:03pm

re: #127 Kragar

I saw the whole movie in about 3 minutes for free. Why would I spend $15 bucks to watch it for 2 hours?

See, that's the great thing, having family working at AMC. I can just go for free.

130 Kragar  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:50:45pm

Went down to the soda machine, bought one for .75 using a buck. It gave me 2. I go to get my change, and the last few people forgot to get theirs, so I ended up with .75 back in my pocket along with the 2 sodas.

THE DAY IS MINE!

131 Kragar  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:51:23pm

re: #129 Targetpractice

See, that's the great thing, having family working at AMC. I can just go for free.

Commie.

132 Targetpractice  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:51:30pm

re: #130 Kragar

Went down to the soda machine, bought one for .75 using a buck. It gave me 2. I go to get my change, and the last few people forgot to get theirs, so I ended up with .75 back in my pocket along with the 2 sodas.

THE DAY IS MINE!

Alright, that's it, you and me are goin' to Vegas!

//

133 William Barnett-Lewis  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:51:54pm

re: #69 ProGunLiberal

OT, but my parents are big on Chiropractors. I lack understanding of it, but am suspicious.

Somebody tell me your thoughts?

I'd say, mostly quackery. The joint alignment does help the pain in my lower back from an old army injury when nothing but narcotics will otherwise. The rest of their stuff is as la-la land as it gets.

134 Targetpractice  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:53:16pm

re: #131 Kragar

Commie.

You say that like it's a bad thing, Comrade Kragar.

135 b_snark  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:54:43pm

re: #114 Learned Mother of Zion

Can you give a scenario in which something like this could possibly happen?

Let's say some crazy separatist from Canada crosses over into Montana and is being protected by a gang of white separatists? Would it be OK for the Canadians to drone-bomb their guy?

We don't drone bomb people.
Most of the separatists are from Quebec, although there are a few in Western Canada.

If it was a Quebec separatist, we would just monitor and block shipments of poutine going into Montana.

If it was a Western separatist, we'd lure him/her back with a trail of bitumen.

136 lawhawk  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:55:53pm

The FB unlike continues. Now trading at $29.02. For those keeping track (score), that's another 9% drop over last week's close, and an overall drop from the opening day close of $38.02 of a staggering $10 a share. It's even worse if you consider the intraday opening day high of $45.

And the share price keeps dropping as I write.

137 b_snark  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:56:23pm

re: #126 PhillyPretzel

OT: I need a little bit of help. I remember several months ago Charles was complaining about the cost of checks and someone here gave him a very cheap price on checks and it came from a place one would not expect checks to come from. Can anyone here remember that place?

Greece.

138 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:56:30pm

re: #86 Killgore Trout

It was commonly mentioned in the list of reasons.
George Bush War criminal

You could use google to search for other examples if you're interested.

Fail! The same guy considers Obama a war criminal. Show me the ones who did it re: drones with Bush but are silent under Obama.

[Link: www.uswarcrimes.com...]

139 Kragar  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:57:30pm

re: #134 Targetpractice

You say that like it's a bad thing, Comrade Kragar.

Just making an observation.

140 b_snark  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:57:55pm

re: #136 lawhawk

The FB unlike continues. Now trading at $29.02. For those keeping track (score), that's another 9% drop over last week's close, and an overall drop from the opening day close of $38.02 of a staggering $10 a share. It's even worse if you consider the intraday opening day high of $45.

And the share price keeps dropping as I write.

Tell me when it becomes a penny stock and then I'll buy.

141 Gus  Tue, May 29, 2012 12:58:23pm
142 Kragar  Tue, May 29, 2012 1:00:41pm

Mitt Romney: U.S. strength deters war

Yes, it was that great strength, such as buying planes too dangerous to fly or body armor which doesn't work and keeping contractors rolling in cash, which prevented terrorist attacks and kept us from fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

What a second...

143 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, May 29, 2012 1:02:48pm

re: #141 Gus

Oh jeez. This is stupid: Obama campaign releases blatantly anti-Arab video ad

He has a point, though I would not make much of it. I don't think it was McCain's intent to sound racist, but he did. I also think it shouldn't have been put in the ad, although again there was no racist intent in that too, more like tone deafness. I won't get outraged either way ;)

144 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, May 29, 2012 1:02:55pm

bbl

145 Targetpractice  Tue, May 29, 2012 1:04:50pm

re: #142 Kragar

Mitt Romney: U.S. strength deters war

Yes, it was that great strength, such as buying planes too dangerous to fly or body armor which doesn't work and keeping contractors rolling in cash, which prevented terrorist attacks and kept us from fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

What a second...

Yes, U.S. strength, which has seen us in various conflicts, invasions, and "wars" since WWII. We've not had a 10 year stretch of peace since the day Japan capitulated.

146 PhillyPretzel  Tue, May 29, 2012 1:06:14pm

re: #128 Achilles Tang

re: #137 Folded Flat

Thank you for your cute quips. But seriously I am looking for duplicate checks at a fairly cheap price. I do have a little bit of time before I have to reorder and I know the credit union charges at least $10 a box.

147 funky chicken  Tue, May 29, 2012 1:09:03pm

re: #2 Iwouldprefernotto

Really? Except that the far left has very little voice in this country.

I don't know about that. Here's one example:

[Link: www.pe.com...]

148 funky chicken  Tue, May 29, 2012 1:10:09pm

re: #114 Learned Mother of Zion

Can you give a scenario in which something like this could possibly happen?

Let's say some crazy separatist from Canada crosses over into Montana and is being protected by a gang of white separatists? Would it be OK for the Canadians to drone-bomb their guy?

Fire away!

149 aagcobb  Tue, May 29, 2012 1:11:26pm

re: #106 efuseakay

We don't allow it, but it still happens.

If a foreign government has sufficient information on the location of a known terrorist in the U.S. to target that person with a drone, then they can certainly provide that information to the U.S. government so that we can arrest that person.

150 b_snark  Tue, May 29, 2012 1:16:15pm

re: #146 PhillyPretzel

re: #137 Folded Flat

Thank you for your cute quips. But seriously I am looking for duplicate checks at a fairly cheap price. I do have a little bit of time before I have to reorder and I know the credit union charges at least $10 a box.

Sorry for being annoying.

I no longer use cheques, I use a debit card or credit card. I didn't see the thread you mentioned.

151 erik_t  Tue, May 29, 2012 1:43:45pm

re: #72 Achilles Tang

This would be true if we had a world where there was a reasonable chance of capturing such people alive, and accepting proofs that were based on spying without warrants (also irrelevant in this context), or even in the extreme could sentence them to death in absentia.

So, as nice and civil as your sentiments are, all they say is that you accept safe haven for our enemies, without fear of retribution and you hope that if we behave nicely towards them, so that they do not have any reason to fear us, then they will stop trying to kill us.

Why don't you just call yourself a pacifist and be done with it?

I thought 'cookie world' was pretty clearly a reference to a world that we'd like to have exist, not one we feel is ever remotely plausible.

But, y'know, keep tilting at those strawmen.

152 Tigger2  Tue, May 29, 2012 2:19:16pm

re: #6 Mostly sane, most of the time.

How long have we had a kill list?

153 Tigger2  Tue, May 29, 2012 2:21:17pm

re: #152 Tigger2

Probably since the founding of our Country.

My comment for some reason didn't post with the quote.

154 Eclectic Infidel  Tue, May 29, 2012 9:13:21pm

re: #93 dragonfire1981

America, FUCK yeah!

Health insurers to "reorganize" prescription drug plans so they can charge you more

Well, that's what we get for allowing insurance companies to operate for profit.

155 CuriousLurker  Tue, May 29, 2012 11:16:58pm

re: #146 PhillyPretzel

re: #137 Folded Flat

Thank you for your cute quips. But seriously I am looking for duplicate checks at a fairly cheap price. I do have a little bit of time before I have to reorder and I know the credit union charges at least $10 a box.

I don't know if this is the one mentioned to Charles (or if you'll even see this), but Walmart prints checks cheap: [Link: www.walmartchecks.com...]


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2016-01-01 10:29 am PST
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds Tweet

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Square Cash Shop at amazon
as an LGF Associate!
Recent PagesClick to refresh
All Time Low: Some Kind of Disaster [OFFICIAL VIDEO] All Time Low's official music video for 'Some Kind Of Disaster' from their upcoming album Wake Up, Sunshine - available everywhere April 3rd via Fueled By Ramen. fbr.lnk.to Listen to 'Some King Of Disaster' here: atl.lnk.to Follow All Time ...
Thanos
3 days, 16 hours ago
Views: 361 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 2 • Share to Facebook
I Am There for You - Huey Lewis Provided to YouTube by BMG Rights Management (US) LLC I Am There For You · Huey Lewis & The News Weather ℗ 2019 NEW HULEX, LLC under exclusive license to BMG Rights Management (US) LLC Drums, Percussion: Bill GibsonBackground ...
Thanos
3 days, 17 hours ago
Views: 421 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1
Tweets: 0 • Share to Facebook
#Thegreatpoolpondconversion - 200209The the last six months or so was “sand, sandbags, pounding, sand, sand, sand”... it was by far the most physically grueling (54,000 pounds of sand we moved - just the two of us), and the longest on the timeline. ...
#thegreatpoolpondconversion (dangerman)
1 week, 2 days ago
Views: 607 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 4
Tweets: 0 • Share to Facebook
AP VoteCast: NH Democrats Angry, Seek Alternative to Trump While everyone does the usual horse race comparisons as if NH results really matter, this journalist focuses on the essential. WASHINGTON (AP) — Democratic voters in Tuesday’s New Hampshire primary were angry at President Donald Trump’s administration and eager ...
Thanos
1 week, 3 days ago
Views: 705 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 2
Tweets: 1 • Share to Facebook
James Taylor - American Standard: Teach Me Tonight (Official Music Video) Order James Taylor’s upcoming album American Standard here: found.ee Written in 1954, “Teach Me Tonight" has become a jazz standard and been covered dozens of times. Dinah Washington’s version, an R&B hit in 1954, was inducted into the GRAMMY ...
Thanos
1 week, 3 days ago
Views: 757 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1
Tweets: 16 • Share to Facebook
Oh Wonder - in and Out of Love (Official Video) 'In And Out Of Love from the upcoming album ‘No One Else Can Wear Your Crown’, out 7th February 2020. Pre-order the album on signed vinyl, CD and cassette - ohwonder.lnk.to Tickets for Oh Wonder's 2020 World Tour are ...
Thanos
1 week, 4 days ago
Views: 703 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 1 • Share to Facebook
Summertime - Billy Strings & Marcus King A pair of today's best performing a timeless tune! Billy Strings and Marcus King play "Summertime" live at Carter Vintage Guitars in Nashville, TN. Billy is playing a '36 000-28 and Marcus is playing a '54 Telecaster cartervintage.combillystrings.commarcuskingband.com ...
Thanos
1 week, 4 days ago
Views: 785 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 19 • Share to Facebook
ANNA MEREDITH - Sawbones Sawbones is taken from Anna Meredith's latest album FIBS: smarturl.it Anna and band announce a US tour for 2020 amidst a sell-out run in the UK. Get tickets for all shows at annameredith.com FEBRUARY5 - London, EartH [SOLD OUT]6 ...
Thanos
1 week, 4 days ago
Views: 785 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 9 • Share to Facebook
Whitney - Friend of Mine (Live on KEXP)kexp.org presents Whitney performing "Friend Of Mine" live in the KEXP studio. Recorded October 25, 2019. Host: Cheryl WatersAudio Engineer: Kevin SuggsCameras: Jim Beckmann, Alaia D'Alessandro, Kendall Rock & Justin WilmoreEditor: Justin Wilmore kexp.orgwhitneytheband.com
Thanos
1 week, 4 days ago
Views: 759 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 1 • Share to Facebook
Green Day - I Was a Teenage Teenager (Official Audio) "I Was A Teenage Teenager" from Father Of All... out now!! 🦄 greenday.lnk.to Play it loud and play it on repeat🤘 Catch the Hella Mega Tour presented by Harley-Davidson w/ Green Day, Fall Out Boy, & Weezer - get ...
Thanos
1 week, 4 days ago
Views: 688 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1
Tweets: 1 • Share to Facebook