1. #2381
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    Citation needed*

    Mike Pence doesn't count, he lied - https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/03/u...factcheck.html

    Just being designated a terrorist isn't enough, as the AUMF isn't that broad. Again, read the AUMF. It's broad, but not a blank check.



    Again, citation needed*

    If you're thinking of Sulaiman Abu Ghaith, that's a different Solemani - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulaiman_Abu_Ghaith

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-sin...ni-11578681560

    In their book “The Exile,” investigative journalists Cathy Scott-Clark and Adrian Levy describe the journey of many al Qaeda members who spent months and even years as “guests” of Iran. Soleimani broke bread with bin Laden’s sons, who affectionately called him Hajji Qassem, Ms. Scott-Clark and Mr. Levy write. He appointed two senior Quds Force officers to “provide the guests with whatever they needed,” including refrigerators, widescreen TVs and an “unlimited budget” to furnish a religious library. Saif al-Adel, a notorious al Qaeda explosives expert, had access to a sports complex in a posh Tehran neighborhood, where he swam laps alongside Western diplomats.

    I guess you would not consider him to have ties with alqaeda because he gave aid and shelter to Bin Laden's sons and Saif al-Adel. You may have a different definition of being associated with someone.

  2. #2382
    The Insane Orange Joe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    001100010010011110100001101101110011
    Posts
    18,171
    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel View Post
    Scumbag?... For killing people that directly attack your fellow countrymen's right to choose their own leader?
    Did they harm anyone physically? I don't think people should be killed because other people are dumb/ignorant.
    I have a fan. Seems he was permabanned.

  3. #2383
    The Insane PACOX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    The Upside Down
    Posts
    19,824
    So please tell me again why it was appropriate to flirt with a war that would have dwarfed Iraq?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by beanman12345 View Post
    Our leaderships can't even get their reasons straight why we killed him, innocents died, like i called it tens of pages ago, didn't expect it in a plane crash but still. Ugh what a complete cluster fuck.
    Right? At least make sure everyone is in on the lie. Stupidgate continues.

  4. #2384
    Quote Originally Posted by PACOX View Post
    So please tell me again why it was appropriate to flirt with a war that would have dwarfed Iraq?
    Iran does not want war. The US does not want war. That is why Trump did not make fun of the "retaliation". Look how batshit Trump gets and he was semi respectful. There will be no war..... With the caveat that the US may help if these demonstrations/protests turn in to full scale revolution. Then there may be a war of some sort.

  5. #2385
    Quote Originally Posted by TexasRules View Post
    Yes, make fun of me and provide no critical response. Very intelligent response that gives nothing to the conversation or provides anything in the means of critical arguments. You forgot to throw Trump in.
    You aren't posting because you want to debate.
    You certainly aren't interested in the least of hearing or reading any evidence, transcripts, eyewitness testimony.
    So, lucky to get any response.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Orange Joe View Post
    Did they harm anyone physically? I don't think people should be killed because other people are dumb/ignorant.
    ....some days...maybe hurt, or maim...?
    okay okay...
    Acquittal doesn't mean exoneration


  6. #2386
    The Lightbringer Blade Wolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Futa Heaven
    Posts
    3,265
    Quote Originally Posted by TexasRules View Post
    Iran does not want war. The US does not want war. That is why Trump did not make fun of the "retaliation". Look how batshit Trump gets and he was semi respectful. There will be no war..... With the caveat that the US may help if these demonstrations/protests turn in to full scale revolution. Then there may be a war of some sort.
    The current administration has a GIGANTIC hard on for war with Iran.
    "when i'm around you i'm like a level 5 metapod. all i can do is harden!"

    Quote Originally Posted by unholytestament View Post
    The people who cry for censorship aren't going to be buying the game anyway. Censoring it, is going to piss off the people who were going to buy it.
    Barret: It's a good thing we had those Phoenix Downs.
    Cloud: You have the downs!

  7. #2387
    Quote Originally Posted by Blade Wolf View Post
    The current administration has a GIGANTIC hard on for war with Iran.
    Apparently, killing sulemaine was on the table for 7 months. Guess it just took Pompeo that long to convince him.

  8. #2388
    Quote Originally Posted by TexasRules View Post
    Iran does not want war. The US does not want war. That is why Trump did not make fun of the "retaliation". Look how batshit Trump gets and he was semi respectful. There will be no war..... With the caveat that the US may help if these demonstrations/protests turn in to full scale revolution. Then there may be a war of some sort.
    Trump may not want war but everyone around him does take Mike Pompeo for example he has been calling for a full scale war and regime change for years even more for Bolton's crew left in the white house. Trump may not want war but he keep surrounding himself with neo con war hawks, the same can be said for Iran. When the US walked away from the nuclear deal all the moderates got pie on their face because the extremists told them that the US could not be trusted.

    So we are in a situation that while there are leading people not wanting war they are outnumbered by extremists salivating at the prospect. As for the demonstration the US didn't do anything at the peak of demonstrations under Trump where the Iranian government killed hundreds of people doubt he will step in now. Also while those protestors maybe against the government they have no love for Donald (I love committing war crimes) Trump either.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Blade Wolf View Post
    The current administration has a GIGANTIC hard on for war with Iran.
    The secretary of defense owns stock in defense contractors he will make millions off a war with Iran.

  9. #2389
    The Unstoppable Force CommunismWillWin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The Russia that is very communist, da.
    Posts
    24,421
    Quote Originally Posted by Draco-Onis View Post
    Trump may not want war but everyone around him does take Mike Pompeo for example he has been calling for a full scale war and regime change for years even more for Bolton's crew left in the white house. Trump may not want war but he keep surrounding himself with neo con war hawks, the same can be said for Iran. When the US walked away from the nuclear deal all the moderates got pie on their face because the extremists told them that the US could not be trusted.

    So we are in a situation that while there are leading people not wanting war they are outnumbered by extremists salivating at the prospect. As for the demonstration the US didn't do anything at the peak of demonstrations under Trump where the Iranian government killed hundreds of people doubt he will step in now. Also while those protestors maybe against the government they have no love for Donald (I love committing war crimes) Trump either.

    - - - Updated - - -



    The secretary of defense owns stock in defense contractors he will make millions off a war with Iran.
    Don't forget the evangelic christians in the Cabinet(Pompeo, Pence and Barr). Something about war with Iran being part of leading to the end of the world or some other weird cult shit.
    Conservatism and its off-shoots are the most rotten idealogies to ever exist in human history.
    Liberalism = right-wing.
    Anarcho-communism =/ Stalinism.

  10. #2390
    The Unstoppable Force Skroe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    23,453
    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiac View Post
    Why do I need to provide a critical argument, lol? There's no facts present in your post to discuss.

    It's a stretch to say a 2001 AUMF that targets Al Qaeda applies equally to Sulemain as it did to Bin Laden.

    Pst: Why didn't he get a specific AUMF when he had a House majority?
    The fact is the 2001 AUMF is so overly broad, it can be used to justify almost any type of military endevour, anywhere, so long as it is in the name of fighting terrorism. That is why legally speaking, Suleimani's killing was likely perfectly legal - because the designation of Quuds Force as a terrorist group last year, and he as their leader, made him a legitimate target.

    This isn't even close to the worst abuse. That would be the War on ISIS. A war originally launched under the War Powers act, that never saw an AUMF. Congress didn't want to take a vote on it and the Obama Administration wasn't in a rush to get one. I called the ISIS War deeply illegal. Well intentioned sure, but fantastically illegal. It breached the limits of the War Powers Act. Congress allocated funds for it. But they never voted on an authorization bill which is required. Eventually after something like 18 months of in action on a new AUMF, Obama White House lawyers decided the 2001 AUMF was good enough. And strictly speaking it was. But in terms of intent, it was way way off.

    This is the lasting legal legacy of the Iraq War (and to degree, the Libyan conflict as well). The Iraq War got an AUMF, and has been a millstone around the neck of every politician who are therefore responsible for its legacy 17 years later. Joe Biden is STILL explaining it away.

    In a rational world and a rational country, the case is pretty simple: it's the jobs of leaders to lead and make the best decision they can at the time, and sometimes that doesn't work out. What the legacy of the Iraq War has been instead is to make politicians skittish about AUMFs in general, and three successive White Houses not interested in spending political capital seeking one, especially since the public at large basically does not care. I mean that's the Obama political argument for the War on ISIS. Sure, from a political philosophy standpoint an AUMF was required... but did the public care? Would the public turn against the Obama for not seeking a AUMF to kill some terrorists? Of course not. Certainly says the American public is unworthy of their system and poor custodians of it.


    The 2001 AUMF needs to be repealed. It's one of the worst pieces of legislation written in the past half century. It's kind of ironic that people spent years shitting the bed over the overblown USA PATRIOT Act that was 95% pretty boring bureaucratic reform and 5% questionable stuff, when the 2001 AUMF, which received little scruitny, is now in it's 19th year and still justifying pretty much anything.

    To me, this is one of the great ironies of our time. In Obama we had a fairly strong executive. Bush too was a fairly strong executive. Trump is the weakest President in 100 years, but still even his skeleton crew White House is able to blockade the White House because the executive is still strong. And here we are in 2020, trying to pick which among 12 Democrats will be our next great leader.

    We need a Democrat in the White House who will sabotage the power of the executive branch from within. One who will sign a repeal of the 2001 AUMF, one who will sign a bill that makes the President subject to prosecution. One that restores the Special Prosecutor's office. One that ends this insane "executive privlege" nonsense that has dogged our government for decades (branches should argue about interpretation of facts, not conceal the existence of facts). One that will sign bills that prevents a repeat of Trump's corruption and handcuff the next ten Presidents to being more at the mercy of Congress.

    It is the most important thing the next President can do - to break the back of the Imperial Presidency and restore the power of the legislature. It's more important than healthcare or jobs. Retirements or education. Infrastructure or defense spending. Our Democracy is at stake because the strong executive has become a shortcut due to the lost art of compromise. It's a short cut that needs to be burned to the ground.

    The legality or illegality of Sulimani's killing is kind of besides the point. That's like arguing about the pocketing of a Snickers after an armed robber just gunned down 12 people at a Gas Station.
    We're Taking Your President Away From You. | Users with <20 posts and ignored posters are invisible. Find out how to do that here and clean up MMO-OT!

  11. #2391
    https://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...mminent-threat

    As evidenced by Esper, it was all about his 'gut feeling', not evidence.
    R5 3600 | Noctua NH-D14 | Asus ROG Strix B350-F | Corsair Vengeance 16GB 3000MHz CL15 | Asus GTX 1060 Strix | Samsung 860 EVO 500GB | Seasonic M12II Evo 620W | NZXT S340-B
    Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
    Do you guys not have phones?!

  12. #2392
    The Unstoppable Force CommunismWillWin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The Russia that is very communist, da.
    Posts
    24,421
    Quote Originally Posted by Hextor View Post
    https://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...mminent-threat

    As evidenced by Esper, it was all about his 'gut feeling', not evidence.
    "gut feeling" = Pompeo told Trump to do it because the nice bearded man in his head told him it was a good idea.
    Conservatism and its off-shoots are the most rotten idealogies to ever exist in human history.
    Liberalism = right-wing.
    Anarcho-communism =/ Stalinism.

  13. #2393
    Scarab Lord Thekri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A highly disgruntled constituent of Lindsey Graham.
    Posts
    4,367
    Quote Originally Posted by CommunismWillWin View Post
    "gut feeling" = Pompeo told Trump to do it because the nice bearded man in his head told him it was a good idea.
    Fake news. Putin doesn't have a beard.
    "I would have gotten away with it too, if it wasn't for that meddling ANTIFA!" - Adolf Hitler
    "I really wish Ghostpanther would stop misquoting me" - Abraham Lincoln

  14. #2394
    Quote Originally Posted by Blade Wolf View Post
    The current administration has a GIGANTIC hard on for war with Iran.
    You got a citation for that? Please show me where it has been reported that they want to go to war? Nobody wants to go to war.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Draco-Onis View Post
    Trump may not want war but everyone around him does take Mike Pompeo for example he has been calling for a full scale war and regime change for years even more for Bolton's crew left in the white house. Trump may not want war but he keep surrounding himself with neo con war hawks, the same can be said for Iran. When the US walked away from the nuclear deal all the moderates got pie on their face because the extremists told them that the US could not be trusted.

    So we are in a situation that while there are leading people not wanting war they are outnumbered by extremists salivating at the prospect. As for the demonstration the US didn't do anything at the peak of demonstrations under Trump where the Iranian government killed hundreds of people doubt he will step in now. Also while those protestors maybe against the government they have no love for Donald (I love committing war crimes) Trump either.

    - - - Updated - - -



    The secretary of defense owns stock in defense contractors he will make millions off a war with Iran.
    So please link some sort of source showing Trump's people want to go to war. I will link several sources that will show it means jack shit because Trump can not, even if he wanted to, start a war. Feel free to throw up those links of his people saying they want to go to war.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    Citation needed*

    Mike Pence doesn't count, he lied - https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/03/u...factcheck.html

    Just being designated a terrorist isn't enough, as the AUMF isn't that broad. Again, read the AUMF. It's broad, but not a blank check.



    Again, citation needed*

    If you're thinking of Sulaiman Abu Ghaith, that's a different Solemani - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulaiman_Abu_Ghaith
    I gave you a citation, where is your response? Or did you give up like usual and just back away.

  15. #2395
    Quote Originally Posted by TexasRules View Post
    I gave you a citation, where is your response? Or did you give up like usual and just back away.
    I've been trying to find a non-paywalled version of the article so I can read it in-full before responding. Haven't had any luck so far, but if you've found anything I'd be very interested to read.

  16. #2396
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    I've been trying to find a non-paywalled version of the article so I can read it in-full before responding. Haven't had any luck so far, but if you've found anything I'd be very interested to read.
    The wall street journal was not paywalled for me the first time , but was the second time. It's okay, I know you don't believe the quote I provided anyways. No one on here believes people even when linked.

  17. #2397
    Merely a Setback cubby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    the Quiet Room
    Posts
    25,933
    Quote Originally Posted by TexasRules View Post
    The wall street journal was not paywalled for me the first time , but was the second time. It's okay, I know you don't believe the quote I provided anyways. No one on here believes people even when linked.
    God that's adorable. You don't even read things when people are trying to be helpful - where is your evidence of people not believing the links you provide again? We don't believe you because you never read the things you link. You say something, then link something else, which typically doesn't prove (or even relate) what you said.

    The irony is that I think you and I are on the same page with the assassination.
    No one is above the law!

  18. #2398
    Quote Originally Posted by TexasRules View Post
    Since he is designated as a terrorist by the US government and had ties to alqaeda, doesn't that mean we can kill him according to the AUMF?

    - - - Updated - - -



    Well he had ties to alqaeda which means you can kill him according to the aumf, right? Because I obviously do not know what it covers, according to you.
    The irony of course is how the US assisted Osama Bin Laden in his terrorist activities against the USSR.

    And no point in linking an article behind a paywall, you might aswell link nothing whatsoever then.

  19. #2399
    Quote Originally Posted by Orange Joe View Post
    Did they harm anyone physically? I don't think people should be killed because other people are dumb/ignorant.
    cat_saying_Do_you_think_this_is_a_motherfucking_game.jpg

    Next time when Russia or China messes with US elections and someone worse than Trump is elected, it will be 100% on people who didn't take it seriously enough the last time.

  20. #2400
    Herald of the Titans Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Vienna
    Posts
    2,640
    Well, in Iran people get arrested for shooting down a plane full of civilians IN ERROR.

    In America, people assassinating civilians at an airport are heros.


    And people are surprised why we don't hail this assassination as a step to world peace...

Posting Permissions

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