Drones and football

[Palehorse]

HH don't you know that to disagree with the current administration you have to be able to withstand being ridiculed and there are those who just cannot stand that so they will agree with anything this administration does rather than open themselves up for what they dish out.

Wow. . . the victim card. . . 

[Henry Hawk]

No, you don't have it correct. But don't let that stop you.

don't let it stop me from what?  Asking you to answer a question?

[Exterminator]

don't let it stop me from what?  Asking you to answer a question?

He did answer your question.

Now let's explore your fallacies...first of all, there is no "might" to these people...they are U.S. citizens who have publicly ackowledged that they are enemy combatants.  If Bush had been taking these people out with drones, you'd have been lining up to suck his dick.

[Henry Hawk]

He did answer your question.

He did?  I dont' have it correct by saying it is wrong for the Bush Administration to allow Water Boarding to KNOWN terrorist, who HAD vital information, that could prevent the loss of American lives by applying a method, that did NOT kill.  But is entirely okay to actually KILL someone who MIGHT be associated with terroists or the terrorist themselves? 

That is the way he answered it. 

As for the rest of your response........    Typical.

[followsthewolf]

HH don't you know that to disagree with the current administration you have to be able to withstand being ridiculed and there are those who just cannot stand that so they will agree with anything this administration does rather than open themselves up for what they dish out.

You finally got it right.

brilliant

[Palehorse]

He did?  I dont' have it correct by saying it is wrong for the Bush Administration to allow Water Boarding to KNOWN terrorist, who HAD vital information, that could prevent the loss of American lives by applying a method, that did NOT kill.  But is entirely okay to actually KILL someone who MIGHT be associated with terroists or the terrorist themselves? 

That is the way he answered it. 

As for the rest of your response........    Typical.

(Let's try it without the commentary shall we?)

No, you don't have it correct. . .

[Henry Hawk]

(Let's try it without the commentary shall we?)

No, you don't have it correct. . .

me thinks I do.

[Palehorse]

me thinks I do.

Why?

[Henry Hawk]

Had Bush been doing drone strikes YOU and others would NOT have approved.  Based upon your logic, Killing is better than harsh interrogtions.

For the record, I have zero problems with either.  As long as we are keeping Americans safe.

[Exterminator]

You have no problems with torture because you have no moral compass.

[Palehorse]

Had Bush been doing drone strikes YOU and others would NOT have approved.  Based upon your logic, Killing is better than harsh interrogtions.

For the record, I have zero problems with either.  As long as we are keeping Americans safe.

Bush did  indeed use drones, in fact the use of predator, raven, and sky hawk drone units increased substantially between 2003 and January of 2008. And they were used int he exact same ways that they are being used today.

. . .UAV usage across all the military services jumped from nearly 165,000 flight hours in the 2006 fiscal year, to more than 258,000 for the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, 2007.
Those figures, compiled by the Pentagon, include some training flights, but the overwhelming majority was on the warfront. A majority of the flights are in Iraq, which has seen the biggest increase. But they are also used extensively in Afghanistan. . .

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/22463596/#.URPnwKVmg20

I never was opposed to the use of drones, but water-boarding is another matter entirely. Torture is unacceptable in any form, and its use is more likely to elicit untruths than otherwise.

Why (2) are you now opposed to drone use when it has been used in the exact same way since the Bush Administration began using them?

[Henry Hawk]

Bush did  indeed use drones, in fact the use of predator, raven, and sky hawk drone units increased substantially between 2003 and January of 2008. And they were used int he exact same ways that they are being used today.

. . .UAV usage across all the military services jumped from nearly 165,000 flight hours in the 2006 fiscal year, to more than 258,000 for the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, 2007.
Those figures, compiled by the Pentagon, include some training flights, but the overwhelming majority was on the warfront. A majority of the flights are in Iraq, which has seen the biggest increase. But they are also used extensively in Afghanistan. . .

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/22463596/#.URPnwKVmg20

I never was opposed to the use of drones, but water-boarding is another matter entirely. Torture is unacceptable in any form, and its use is more likely to elicit untruths than otherwise.

Why (2) are you now opposed to drone use when it has been used in the exact same way since the Bush Administration began using them?

I never said I was opposed to drone use, did I?

[RC]

How about if a drone strike is used on a citizen on US soil.?

[Henry Hawk]

How about if a drone strike is used on a citizen on US soil.?

Then we could have a big problem.

[RC]

Then we could have a big problem.

If a citizen can be subject to a drone strike over seas, it is just a short leap to do it here.  We are on a slippery slope. The Constitution applies to all citizens all the time or it does not.