I thought the days of preemptive strikes were over. I guess Pres Obama is digging the Patriot Act as much as GW did. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/21/washington/21policy.html?hp
man.. i was driving behind a dude with an Obama sticker, a "no war" sticker and a peace sign sticker on the car. How could someone have a peace sign on their car and a bumper sticker supporting such a warmonger like Obama?
And I bet if we unconditionally withdrew all our troops immediately you'd be complaining that we're not focusing on real terrorists in Pakistan Sorry he hasn't brokered Middle East peace in his first 30 days Maybe we can impeach him if he doesn't balance the budget by Sunday
i'm not asking him to broker middle east peace.. he's the president of the US not the president of the middle east. and if he withdrew all troops and shutdown all bases around the world you wouldn't hear one complaint out of me man. as far as balancing the budget? LOL as long as we keep up the "stimulus packages" and the bombings, the deficit will keep growing and growing. i think we're around 1.6 trillion for 2009 already.. and it's only February.
i just don't understand why preemptive strikes without the approval of congress are ok all of a sudden
It is un-American to go abroad in search of monsters to destroy... especially when it means bankrupting your children. Bring em home. Defense. Defense.
I never said I was in favor of bombing Pakistan, I just have a hunch that no matter what move is made, people are going to complain.
Yes, but maybe the President should try listening to a different group of complainers this time, no? Change? Peaceniks never get their say in our permanent war economy.
yeah i agree with this.. but that goes for anything. When you have so many different ideals and opinions there's no way to keep everyone happy. i guess my point was that this Obama is far from the anti war guy that so many "hoped" he would be. i know we need to give him time, but i have a feeling that we'll still be dropping bombs 4 and 8 years from now. Unless we kill every "terrorist" somehow. I'm still waiting for them to come out with an actual definition of what a terrorist is.
So what national defense measures would you be in favor of? Identification materials that are harder to counterfeit? A national ID? RFID chips in passports? Tighter aiport security? These are all ways to control the passage of potential threats in and out of our country, but I see more people that feel the government has nothing better to do than track them remotely 24/7. Opponents can trot out all the 18th century founding father quotes available, but either we crack down on security at home or we take out terrorists abroad. If we just sit on our thumbs we're not learning from the past.
i hear you sky.. i'm just wondering if these wars (Iraq, Pakistan, and Afghanistan) are for the sole purpose of keeping "terrorists" from bombing the USA. anytime billions of dollars are involved, i get a little suspicious.
Wait ... who defines what is or is not "American"? This rhetoric is getting unbearable. I feel like I'm listening to a politician address a crowd with these malfeasant lowest-common-denominator emotional appeals. I think it's rubbing off on your, Aaronman. On a totally unreleated topic, I watch Harold and Kumar Escape from Gitmo the other day. It was brilliant in some parts (depressingly vapid at others). Ron Fox: You see this cute little white girl, Beecher? Dr. Beecher: Yeah. Ron Fox: Do you want her to get raped and murdered? Dr. Beecher: Of course not. Ron Fox: You sure? Cause this is America. Do you want to rape America? Dr. Beecher: No. Ron Fox: Then stop fucking with me
Terrorism is an exaggerated threat. Even with our pre-Patriot Act levels of intelligence we knew 9/11 was coming. How many soldiers have we lost fighting terrorism? Over 4,000 lives and hundreds of thousands permanently injured. Did those deaths make us any safer? The very act of removing our over-seas presence would increase our security greatly, as this is the number one reason cited by anti-American terrorist.
Makes perfect sense to attempt to appease a long-dead colonialist. It's not like things ever change anyways.
How do the missile strikes in Pakistan have anything to do with the Patriot Act? As far as the policy of continuing the missile strikes, it's sure to destablize the Pakistani government even more, increase anti-American sentiments in the region and provide a new propaganda weapon for the salafis that they desparately needed. Again with Obama being anti war? I think you're preaching to the choir on that issue. Most of the people that thought Obama was pro-peace were confusing withdrawing from Iraq as being pro peace and were not paying attention I guess. In the same speech Obama would talk about withdrawing from Iraq but would reiterate the desire to pursue missile strikes "if the Pakistani government is not willing or able". And wars are never fought for a sole purpose ie: spreading democracy or preventing another terrorist attack.
