Happy Obama Day! - Page 2

HumanePain · 01-23-2009, 06:30 PM

Ok, how about some real benefits to him being elected and not just hype?

My sister works in a research facility, and one the neighboring scientists is now going to get massive funding to resume his stem cell research to repair spinal cord injuries! Too bad we could have done that 8 years ago before the economy tanked, if it hadn't been for Obama's predecessor.

badteccy · 01-24-2009, 07:56 AM

He's also closed Gitmo Bay and is ending the whole torture thang...I agree with that, but lot's of controversy is gonna be seen.

Geoluhread · 01-24-2009, 07:57 AM

It`s all what people are talking about here.
That he ended "The war on terrorism"

KontanKarite · 01-24-2009, 08:31 AM

LoL!!!!!!! Maybe it's worth them believing that lie.

badteccy · 01-24-2009, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geoluhread

That he ended "The war on terrorism"

Those people are morons.

HumanePain · 01-24-2009, 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geoluhread

It`s all what people are talking about here.
That he ended "The war on terrorism"

BZZZZZ! WRONG!

Obama authorized the missile strike on Pakistan that killed 20 people.

Geoluhread · 01-24-2009, 11:52 AM

I`m telling you what`s in the paper..
I really don`t care about those things

ArtificialOne · 01-24-2009, 05:25 PM

Close club gitmo? For propaganda reasons yes, but we need somewhere to stuff these assholes. Just look what's happened so far

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...imself-up.html

99.9% of these people were picked up during combat. There's no way to gather info and get witness statements. I can't believe there's idiots out there who think these monsters can get some kind of civi trial. It's insane!!! I think they should be interrogated after the action in the theater and then executed. Problem solved, no gitmo. I just hope some of these rabid dumbasses who are so stark raving mad about getting these people released get caught up in one of their bombings or kidnappings. Two problems solved.

Joker_in_the_Pack · 01-24-2009, 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArtificialOne

Close club gitmo? For propaganda reasons yes, but we need somewhere to stuff these assholes. Just look what's happened so far

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...imself-up.html

99.9% of these people were picked up during combat. There's no way to gather info and get witness statements. I can't believe there's idiots out there who think these monsters can get some kind of civi trial. It's insane!!! I think they should be interrogated after the action in the theater and then executed. Problem solved, no gitmo. I just hope some of these rabid dumbasses who are so stark raving mad about getting these people released get caught up in one of their bombings or kidnappings. Two problems solved.

Repeat after me:

Killing people who killed people to show people that killing people is wrong is a dumb idea.

tekajo · 01-24-2009, 09:31 PM

Killing people who killed people to show people that killing people is wrong is a dumb idea.

Got it.

But...what about simple retribution?

Albert Mond · 01-24-2009, 09:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArtificialOne

I can't believe there's idiots out there who think these monsters can get some kind of civi trial. It's insane!!!

That's assuming that the government gets everything right on the first try when sending someone to Gitmo. It's hypocritical to not allow certain people trials, as if they're somehow inherently more guilty than everyone else. The 'enemy' might do it. The 'enemy', however, also force religion on people, blow themselves up to kill others, and hate America. I wouldn't recommend the US Government stoop to their level.

Albert Mond · 01-24-2009, 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tekajo

But...what about simple retribution?

But... what's the point?

tekajo · 01-24-2009, 09:45 PM

i thought i made it very clear. Retribution.

Joker_in_the_Pack · 01-24-2009, 09:51 PM

Retribution is petty and childish.

tekajo · 01-24-2009, 09:54 PM

So is berating idiots on a bbs/forum. Still kinda fun though isn't it? lol

ArtificialOne · 01-25-2009, 07:13 AM

Killing them for me isn't retribution. Killing them will keep them from killing more of us and more people who don't follow their form of thinking. I'm not talking about going to demonstrations or braking down doors and dragging them out to shoot them, I'm talking about the ones actually caught in the act while in action. For other ones we have the UCMJ and other guidelines to follow and that shouldn't be messed with by a bunch of do gooder make me feel goods who aren't in the theater(battlefield). Also, the Geneva convention is seriously out of date to deal with these people. It never envisioned an act like 9/11 and the consequences.

As far as trials? Do you think a soldier has enough time during an attack, ambush or mission to stop get witness statements, bust out a camera and photograph the scene, write up chain of custody documents, read Miranda and book them? That's pretty much what's required in a civilian court. It'd be a farce to try that.

HumanePain · 01-25-2009, 08:21 AM

Just give them free rides on the BART rail system and let the security police handle the rest.

JCC · 01-25-2009, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArtificialOne

Killing them for me isn't retribution. Killing them will keep them from killing more of us and more people who don't follow their form of thinking. I'm not talking about going to demonstrations or braking down doors and dragging them out to shoot them, I'm talking about the ones actually caught in the act while in action. For other ones we have the UCMJ and other guidelines to follow and that shouldn't be messed with by a bunch of do gooder make me feel goods who aren't in the theater(battlefield). Also, the Geneva convention is seriously out of date to deal with these people. It never envisioned an act like 9/11 and the consequences.

As far as trials? Do you think a soldier has enough time during an attack, ambush or mission to stop get witness statements, bust out a camera and photograph the scene, write up chain of custody documents, read Miranda and book them? That's pretty much what's required in a civilian court. It'd be a farce to try that.

If they were detained without trial, and then you want to kill them without trial, that means that they never get a trial.

I can't say that I'm surprised to be hearing such stupid things from you, but for everyone else, I think that killing someone without even knowing whether they've done anything wrong is poor judgment.

ArtificialOne · 01-25-2009, 10:26 AM

JCC you don't pay attention very well do you?

First I said we can't have civi trials for them due to the circumstances in which they were captured.

Second, we already have proof that they'll be going back to the fight. I've already posted the link previously so I won't repeat myself in those regards.

Third, I said nothing about killing the ones we already have in custody. I'm sure the victims of Abdullah Mehsud would think otherwise.

I believe that Mr Obama's just making a purely political move to appease people like you. It would have been more prudent to thoroughly sort out what needs to be done before setting a deadline to close it. Given the the fact that detainees already appear to be returning to their past lives of jihad, and no country really wants to take them, I mean would you want to invite one of these guys into your house?

Killing them on the battlefield however I'm all in for. Then we have no problems whatsoever with the above.

JCC · 01-25-2009, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArtificialOne

Second, we already have proof that they'll be going back to the fight. I've already posted the link previously so I won't repeat myself in those regards.

You proved that one killed HIMSELF to avoid being arrested, that hardly reflects on the recidivism of other prisoners.

As for Obama doing this to appease liberals, yes, he did. There are plenty of other US prisons worldwide doing the same thing, it was inevitable that he was going to close the biggest PR disaster he faced in his new presidency.

bleedingheart344 · 01-25-2009, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joker_in_the_Pack

You know what? It's been two days since Obama has become president, and I'm already absolutely sick and tired of hearing his name. He went to what, ten inauguration parties? Good grief people are acting like it's the third coming of Jesus for crying out loud. I've already gone ahead and told my friends not to tell me anything about him, I've heard enough. I can't even stand watching the news anymore.

Enough people. He's just another president, except with a black paint job. Get over him, seriously.

Late response, but I agree entirely. The guy wants us to spend our way out of a recession, yeah, that'll work. But that's just where it begins. They threw ten parties for the guy, all totaling in cost over 1 million dollars from what I've seen in news coverage. This is all money that could be used pulling the government out of debt. It's kind of like a poor family still celebrating christmas. It's a nice thought, but we have important uses for all of that money.

ArtificialOne · 01-25-2009, 11:39 AM

I've already agreed that gitmo was a propaganda mistake. That being so, doesn't mean the problem with picking these people up is a forgone one.

Recidivism of others? Are you willing to bet others' life on your opinion?

The whole thing about his first 100 days is that I'll believe he's going to do things just to appease his constituents and not anything that's going to work. Just like 8yrs after the New Deal we still had double digit unemployment, almost unchanged (15-20%) as when FDR started. A lot and I mean a lot of similarities between what obama wants to do and what fdr did. After reviewing the new plan it looks a lot like the FDR plan. Thing was it never really worked. Check out stuff on the NRA and AAA.. also building projects only get certain people working, not all. His plan is more of a US fed budget than an actual stimulus package.

On NRA
http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1663.html

On AAA
http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/history/A0802770.html

I could bore any to death on all the info on these items, but both of them led to far reaching laws that were partially good and some remain today. But the bad was very very bad. Paying farmers not to produce food during famine. Fixing prices on goods so that not only could some not afford them at all, but also driving business out that could otherwise have charged a fair amount and kept competition going. FDR had no real plan to speak of. He kept changing things biweekly hoping to fix things and they never really got fixed. The war came shortly after so the item is relatively contentious on what actually fixed the great depression, but if after 8yrs things didn't really change. I think you can be certain that the majority of the govts fixes did little.

Solumina · 01-25-2009, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArtificialOne

Also, the Geneva convention is seriously out of date to deal with these people. It never envisioned an act like 9/11 and the consequences.

How have you come to this conclusion? There had been plenty of major terrorist attacks by non-government groups before the Geneva convention was written, just not one in the US.

ArtificialOne · 01-25-2009, 12:41 PM

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/EUgeneva.htm

The convention was mainly and still is concerned with combat between recognized govts and countries. It touches on non legal combatants and whatnot, but the scope of fighting a non regular army or force is not well adapted to modern conditions. It's nice to parade it about now and then, but of all countries no one really treats it as "set in stone", more of a series of guidelines. If I was a bad guy, of all the countries I know of, I'd want to be captured by the US. Yes, of all countries we follow the convention more than the rest.

CptSternn · 01-26-2009, 01:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArtificialOne

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/EUgeneva.htm

The convention was mainly and still is concerned with combat between recognized govts and countries. It touches on non legal combatants and whatnot, but the scope of fighting a non regular army or force is not well adapted to modern conditions. It's nice to parade it about now and then, but of all countries no one really treats it as "set in stone", more of a series of guidelines. If I was a bad guy, of all the countries I know of, I'd want to be captured by the US. Yes, of all countries we follow the convention more than the rest.

Really? I'd disagree. I mean, I basically disagree with about 99% of everything else ye said above, but most people have called ye out on that, so I'll take up the last point your obviously wrong about - all the EU countries follow the convention better than the US. In fact, many have passed nationwide resolutions condemning the US actions since bush took office, and even in Ireland they passed national legislation outlawing the types of actions the US has taken, even though we never had been involved in such, just to make sure we never are.