Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Sen. Rand Paul is Giving a Genuine Filibuster


  • Please log in to reply
85 replies to this topic

#61 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 12,566 posts

Posted 07 March 2013 - 01:08 PM

Interesting how the paleo conservatives are now suddenly against this kind of thing they were all for during Bush.

#62 stirs

stirs

    I Reckon So

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,322 posts

Posted 07 March 2013 - 01:17 PM

Keey trying Delhommey, maybe say it again in a 3rd way if somebody doesn't respond.

#63 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 12,566 posts

Posted 07 March 2013 - 01:52 PM

I can't help it you have no response.

#64 venom

venom

    oneinfiniteconsciousness

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,923 posts
  • LocationPleiades

Posted 07 March 2013 - 01:53 PM

Scenario: An American citizen is discovered preparing an attack on something inside the US. In order to prevent an attack, a drone is used instead of ground forces for some reason. Would you give Obama "a pass" on that if he didn't order the attack? Or call him a spineless liberal?

This is why there is not a definitive "no" - because we want to let everyone know that you are not going to get a lot of extra time by using an American citizen to do your dirty work.

Does it suck? Yes. Do I like it? Not Really. But saying something completely negative when asked about this would be unethical.

Yea we should probably throw due-process out the window and blow the dude and everything around him to pieces on a hunch.

#65 Harris Aballah

Harris Aballah

    Fayette-Villian

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,640 posts
  • Locationnorth carolina

Posted 07 March 2013 - 02:25 PM

Interesting how the paleo conservatives are now suddenly against this kind of thing they were all for during Bush.

I'll go ahead and bite. maybe the conservatives trusted bush's better judgement. But not Obummers?

#66 Proudiddy

Proudiddy

    The Thread Killer (Since 2004)

  • Moderators
  • 15,967 posts

Posted 07 March 2013 - 02:29 PM

Hey, if the definition is broad and non-specific, then it clears them of responsibility when they kill some guy's neighbor and their neighbor as unintended targets as well.

Cool beans. Just like we do in the Middle East.

Now, let's get back to fighting each other and calling each other names based on our worthless political party affiliation and ideologies!

#67 stirs

stirs

    I Reckon So

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,322 posts

Posted 07 March 2013 - 03:14 PM

http://washingtonexa...article/2523555


I suppose the "tweets" by all on the left, got the administration to take this a bit more seriously.

#68 CatofWar

CatofWar

    Join, or Die

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,472 posts
  • LocationGitmo

Posted 07 March 2013 - 03:23 PM

Yea we should probably throw due-process out the window and blow the dude and everything around him to pieces on a hunch.


It really is that simple. No need for stupid scenarios and what ifs. It's blatantly unconstitutional. But par for the course the constitution is only used when convenient.

#69 Proudiddy

Proudiddy

    The Thread Killer (Since 2004)

  • Moderators
  • 15,967 posts

Posted 07 March 2013 - 04:04 PM

http://washingtonexa...article/2523555


I suppose the "tweets" by all on the left, got the administration to take this a bit more seriously.

Problem is, that still isn't specified in the bill.

#70 CatofWar

CatofWar

    Join, or Die

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,472 posts
  • LocationGitmo

Posted 07 March 2013 - 04:25 PM

The only thing dems and pubs can agree on: murdering Americans on American soil.

#71 Gazi

Gazi

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,831 posts

Posted 07 March 2013 - 06:51 PM

I'll go ahead and bite. maybe the conservatives trusted bush's better judgement. But not Obummers?

lmao

#72 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,324 posts

Posted 07 March 2013 - 07:02 PM

can anyone in here think of a situation conceivable in which knocking out an individual with a drone would be beneficial to the greater good of a vast number of people?


Remember the guy who stole the tank a few years ago and drove it down main street? What if it was loaded with ammunition and he was killing people and a hell fire armed drone was the only weapon that could get to him fast enough to prevent him from killing more people?

If the Union army had drones, should they have been allowed to take out Robert E. Lee or other Confederate commanders?

Why does it even matter if its a drone or some other type of military weapon? If a government agency such as the FBI takes out a armed group with an Armored Personnel carries, like so many police groups use these days, is that ok?

#73 Happy Panther

Happy Panther

    Now even funnier.

  • ALL-PRO
  • 17,926 posts

Posted 07 March 2013 - 07:05 PM

Yea we should probably throw due-process out the window and blow the dude and everything around him to pieces on a hunch.


Agreed. With you I mean.

Americans get a trial by jury.

The exceptions are rare such as the fugitive cop killer in CA.

#74 stirs

stirs

    I Reckon So

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,322 posts

Posted 07 March 2013 - 09:18 PM

Remember the guy who stole the tank a few years ago and drove it down main street? What if it was loaded with ammunition and he was killing people and a hell fire armed drone was the only weapon that could get to him fast enough to prevent him from killing more people?

If the Union army had drones, should they have been allowed to take out Robert E. Lee or other Confederate commanders?

Why does it even matter if its a drone or some other type of military weapon? If a government agency such as the FBI takes out a armed group with an Armored Personnel carries, like so many police groups use these days, is that ok?


A guy with a tank "could" be considered something other than a non combatant

#75 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • ALL-PRO
  • 23,639 posts

Posted 07 March 2013 - 09:20 PM

Yea we should probably throw due-process out the window and blow the dude and everything around him to pieces on a hunch.



I never said it was a hunch, in fact I specifically said he was doing it. Let's pretend he was coming to blow up the school where your kid was.

There could be a lot of ways to stop him, but he could then blow up a lot of cops. Maybe your brother is one of those cops. You are going to stop him and kill him anyways since hes not going to peacefully surrender - does it matter if we stop his truck with a drone or with a bunch of meat armed with guns?

It's all hypothetical, highly unlikely, and if you would actually listen to what was said on the subject, you would realize that they are talking about a crazy like this scenario and nothing else.

No I don't like the idea. No I don't think it's going to happen. No I don't want my leaders lying to me and telling me there would be no scenario this could not happen.

When 9/11 happened, we had no idea who was taking over those planes. If we had a drone armed with air to air missiles loitering around Manhattan, would we have let the planes crash into the towers instead of shooting them down because the people who took them over might have been American citizens?

It's a very grey area, and this area existed long before drones became available.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com