Democrats SUCK!!

[Palehorse]

Could is a lot differ t than would, and doesn't imply that they would. Hell a soldier could go gonzo and take out dozens. Oh wait, that has already happened!

[Exterminator]

Ok, that works.   

Hey, I'm just being honest.  A guy needs to unwind at the end of the day; right?   

[Exterminator]

Ain't this just ducky?  Makes me think of a song title, No One Knows What Goes On Behind Closed Doors.

So if the government had known that Timothy McVeigh was on his way to detonate a bomb in a populated area and had had the opportunity to take him out in an unpopulated area using a drone, you're suggesting they should not have done so?

[me]

Hey, I'm just being honest.  A guy needs to unwind at the end of the day; right?   

True..... 

[me]

So if the government had known that Timothy McVeigh was on his way to detonate a bomb in a populated area and had had the opportunity to take him out in an unpopulated area using a drone, you're suggesting they should not have done so?

That isn't the point now is it?  If Bush, or any republican for that matter, had done that ya'll would have been screamin' bloody murder and you know it. And FYI I wouldn't have liked it if the republicans had done it either.

[Palehorse]

. . . And FYI I wouldn't have liked it if the republicans had done it either.

Bullshit. You guys would have dug up some outrageous validation for it . . .

[me]

Bullshit. You guys would have dug up some outrageous validation for it . . .

You mean like you all are trying to do? 

[Palehorse]

You mean like you all are trying to do?

We're talking about domestic drone strikes here, which YOU brought up. YOU are the one attempting to elicit fear , (IE-engaging in fear mongering), and "we" are pointing out the obvious fallacies in your position. Period.

Don't try to jump subjects mid-stream. You will drown.

[me]

We're talking about domestic drone strikes here, which YOU brought up. YOU are the one attempting to elicit fear , (IE-engaging in fear mongering), and "we" are pointing out the obvious fallacies in your position. Period.

Don't try to jump subjects mid-stream. You will drown.

Uh, how is mentioning something that is going on now being a fear monger? 

[Palehorse]

Uh, how is mentioning something that is going on now being a fear monger?

Why are you bringing it up? (Drones) What purpose does it serve?

What are you implying with your statement(s) surrounding the article?

Could is not doing. Name one US citizen that has been killed or injured via the offensive use of a drone domestically.

[Henry Hawk]

Bullshit. You guys would have dug up some outrageous validation for it . . .

You cannot argue with this mentality....

[me]

Why are you bringing it up? (Drones) What purpose does it serve?

What are you implying with your statement(s) surrounding the article?

Could is not doing. Name one US citizen that has been killed or injured via the offensive use of a drone domestically.

Why does he need the authority to do that on US soil?  If you remember correctly he said we have things under control not too long ago, in his campaign speeches as a matter of fact.  Under Bush there had to be a trial for everyone and now all they need is to "suspect" someone is plotting an attack and a US citizen can be arrested and held indefinitely without trial on suspicion or get hit and killed using a drone attack.  Whats up with that.  Don't you think that should be questioned? 

[Palehorse]

Why does he need the authority to do that on US soil?  If you remember correctly he said we have things under control not too long ago, in his campaign speeches as a matter of fact.  Under Bush there had to be a trial for everyone and now all they need is to "suspect" someone is plotting an attack and a US citizen can be arrested and held indefinitely without trial on suspicion or get hit and killed using a drone attack.  Whats up with that.  Don't you think that should be questioned?

Answer my questions.

[Palehorse]

Why does he need the authority to do that on US soil?  If you remember correctly he said we have things under control not too long ago, in his campaign speeches as a matter of fact.  Under Bush there had to be a trial for everyone and now all they need is to "suspect" someone is plotting an attack and a US citizen can be arrested and held indefinitely without trial on suspicion or get hit and killed using a drone attack.  Whats up with that.  Don't you think that should be questioned?

If terrorists (domestic or foreign) were on US soil, and had a dirty bomb, which they were intent upon setting off at the mall that you happened to be at, would you want the authorities to let them go forward? Or would you be happy that they were able to take them out miles before they arrived and within an unpopulated area?

Under control is a present state situation, it is not all inclusive and encompassing. A situation can be under control in this moment and out of control in the next. The key to maintaining control is use of tools that provide a window of opportunity within which to react proactively to indications of loss of control.

Plotting and execution are two very different scenarios and you are confusing them. Right now a law enforcement officer, any one of them in this entire nation, has the authority to use deadly force whenever certain criteria are present. A drone strike would be subject to very similar criteria surrounding the prosecution of a target via use of deadly force. They are also used for observation purposes, same as the police and same as those little cameras mounted in strategic locations throughout many communities int his nation today. (Like those at intersections in Indiana today). 

[Palehorse]

You cannot argue with this mentality....

Your issue is that you cannot discern fact from fiction, truth from lies; and have no idea how to do so. ~ Palehorse 10/12/2012