|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|
Who didn't close Ghitmo or try terrorists as he said he would , supports drone strikes on Americans and on American soil, has continued the waring and killing of foriegn nationals on other countries land ! Where is The outrage of the liberals now and the........great ACLU ?
President Obama signed an executive order to close Ghitmo the first day he was in office of his first term. His executive order was vetoed by Congress.
As for the drones, us liberals are p'd off and most of us are very vocal about it, as well as the ACLU.
Maybe if you widened your news station viewing habits, you could get your information right.
"President Obama signed an executive order to close Ghitmo the first day he was in office of his first term. His executive order was vetoed by Congress."
What???? What Congress? The democrat congress that held power for two years after Obama was elected? What are you talking about?
You see they have been deluded into believing if something they want didn't happen Republicans stopped it. They don't know it was never going to happen at all.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/22/us/po … wanted=all
Sorry, my mistake...it was his second day in office. And look! The article comes with a picture of President Obama signing the order. This "alternate news" comes from the real world. Read to educate yourselves so you stop sounding so ignorant. It is titled:
Obama Issues Directive to Shut Down Guantánamo
Stop locking yourself up in Foxland so you can find out what is going on in the world.
Yes, I am well aware that he signed an order to close GITMO. When did the republicans issue the veto you speak of?
Let's see now. The order was signed on his second day in office. We had a Democrat controlled Congress for the first two years. How in the heck did the Republicans stop Gitmo from being closed?
I'm really confused on how all of this fits together.
Ohhhhhhhhh now those Republicans....they have ways you know and we poor Democrats can't do anything to stop them from stopping us.
Not even with a super majority. Nope.
What has been done to our political system is criminal.
it's not the system .. it's the politicians .. they are all corrupt .! they split us apart in order to control us . The media (all of the media ) is in the pocket of govt. they control the media(all of the media .) Therefore you cannot believe anything they say. They tell us who is going to win the election before it happens .. Duh..... something is wrong with this picture .. open your eyes, and stop assuming that you are so intelligent , all you are doing is making an ass out of yourself (Ass..uming)???
Goodness, do I have to do the work for you? I never said republicans blocked it. I said congress did it, and both parties did it:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 … /?page=all
It's very disheartening to see so many people who are misinformed and act like they aren't. Again, educate yourselves so you don't sound...okay, ignorant (although I can think of a better word to describe this).
You be smart enough to see he was referring to WHO was supposed to have stopped the order. Nobody stopped it it was never gonna happen.
I'm sure I will see a link to something that occurred 2 years after the order was signed in an attempt to blame republicans.
Oh indeed. But let's be thankful for those here who seem to be seeing the light.
They will get a tingle up their leg about something and the darkness will envelop them again.
When will you of the hard left learn your President is no there to do your will? Hm?
The more I read this the more depressed I get. There are no words to describe this level of ignorance.
You see these poor folks have actually been educated(mis-educated) to believe no one........no one at all....in that prison is a bad person. They did nothing. They would do nothing if released. They believe that.
Right....now enlightened people realize that.
I wonder where she went? Must be looking for the article that explains how people NOT in power exerted their power.
Its in the same stack as the order to take down the World Trade Center Bush issued.
Now you know it must be there because that is all we have heard for five years and why Harry Reid won't allow any legislation but what he likes to get voted on.
It's a Republican conspiracy....right?
Of course it is a conspiracy, glad you are able to see the big picture.
Why didn't liberals listen to those of us who told you this would happen years ago?
But why should you listen to us when you had such a wonderful wise charismatic cult leader?
Now.....are you actually beginning to wake up? Or are you going to shout stuff at me about Mitt Romney and John McCain? If you do you haven't woken up.
It's right here! Anyone worth their snuff does not tow a party line in light of such atrocities.
To be fair though, the past week there's been a surge in disgruntlement over the drones from all sides, which is good.
The very thought that one man can nod his head and order the death-by-drone of an American citizen without a trial is frightening. No single individual should ever be granted this much power and authority.
This is being done on an assumption that these targets are terrorists who plan to harm the US. Perhaps they are, and they should be eliminated, but we have a process for that. After all of the suspected terrorists are killed would this trickle down to eliminating tax evaders, or those who dare to write blogs criticizing our government? I know that sounds far fetched, but is it impossible?
Bottom line is no one man should have the power to order the killing of another human being.
We have other resources than the NYPD. I would guess by your answer you are OK with one person being granted this much power?
What other resources? You claim they exist, what are they?
The president is commander in chief of our military, and ultimately responsible for protecting the country - eliminating another 911 certainly falls into that category. Who else, then, should be responsible? A vote of congress on each military decision?
And in a related thought......think more clearly now about why you believe we need gun controls??
Wilderness - You ever hear of Seal Team 6?
It is obvious you are OK with this concept of having one person making the decision to issue a "kill" order. I'm not at all comfortable with that concept. And no, I am not suggesting Congress need to make these decisions. The intended victim would die of old age long before Congress could make up their mind. Let's just hope that none of us end up on this list. Nothing I could say will change your mind, and obviously, you will never change my mind. So, we might as well just let it be what it is and hope for the best.
The person you are referring to was likely trying to get someone else to help him decide which wedge would get him on the green that day. I think he actually decides little else.
In your scenario (Seals) the president decides he wants the rogue American caught, preferably alive for trial.
The seal team assembles, along with choppers and/or other transportation, and invades a foreign country to catch the terrorist. By the time they get there the terrorist is probably gone, but say he isn't; there is a fire fight killing Seals, natives and other terrorists. They do get their man, but now have to get back out of the country; unless it's via chopper there is likely more killing.
So, either the president decides to kill one man with a drone or several and possibly dozens with a formal invasion, all so that a known terrorist can be put on trial and sentenced to a life in prison. Of the two I see the drone as preferable; you will make your own choice.
I see what you are saying.
Hey what if they kill some guy with a drone but he is not a terrorist? What then?
Oh how silly he would never do that.
Just as a group of a dozen or so Seals, firing hundreds or thousands of bullets will never kill and innocent person in a firefight in the middle of a city or village.
War will always have "collateral damage"; the trick is to figure out which method will produce the least amount and do the best we can to limit it to an absolute minimum.
I believe a drone will do a better job; you believe a small army invading foreign soil will.
No, you believe this President is competent to make those decisions, we don't!
I don't believe our current president is competent to make the decisions, no.
There are then two alternatives that I can see; either take a vote in congress (allowing the suspect to escape every time) as the only group that can legally override a presidential decision or simply do nothing and come home. Which would you prefer?
Please reread and get the intent of my statement.
Sorry, Barefoot - if you aren't saying that innocent lives will be taken, you'll have to make it a lot clearer as that is all I can see in it.
Oh sure that's what I am saying. You believe it will be accidental and I don't.
I see. Sorry, but as much as I detest Obama I do not believe that he will use his position as commander in chief to carry out political assassinations of innocent people he doesn't like or his personal enemies.
First, he would have to find those people in the war zone; his generals aren't looking for them. He will then have to arrange to have a drone in the area, and order the military to use that drone to kill said person. Not likely in the real world, I'm afraid.
There may come a day when drones are used for political assassinations, but it won't happen until the world is awash with them and definite identification cannot be made as to who sent one.
If you're thinking that Obama will decide to kill you or I as we walk down the street, well, it's simpler and more effective to send a CIA agent in with orders to kill. Not nearly the media backlash, you know.
Wilderness - You obviously have more faith than I in the ability of one person to become judge and jury regarding executing another human being. You are also assuming there is never any collateral damage or innocent people hurt or killed by a drone strike.
Why heck, we could apply this same solution to drug cartel leaders and stamp out illegal drugs. I'm starting to like this idea.
Missiles are so precise it would only kill the one targeted. Its amazing.
You mean like our Southern border???????????????????????
And you seem to think it needs to be a vote of some kind before each attack as well as believe that the "collateral damage" from a group of Seals and all their support structure is likely to be less than a drone when invading a foreign country. I disagree.
We have given the president the authority and responsibility of carrying out a war; let him do his job without second guessing him. When he screws up too badly or too often, remove him from that task but in the meantime leave him alone.
Governing by committee has resulted in a mess at home; fighting a war by committee is a sure way to lose. Responsibility must reside in only one person; in our country that person is the President.
Armed drones are being used as weapons in a war declared on the US and, as far as I know, only in that war. When they begin flying over American soil, searching for and destroying American citizens I'll worry about that just as I will when B1B's begin bombing American cities.
Wilderness.....you actually believe he makes these decisions?
You are how old?
Old enough to understand that this is life, not a political game. Are you?
Obama undoubtedly delegates many of the decisions to his field commanders; an absolute necessity as no one person can possibly know everything going on at every minute or have the ability to keep up in any but the most general way while also carrying out the duties of President. That's life and reality, not the pretend game of being arm-chair President.
Yes I am well old enough.
Let me put it this way...a person like me who disagrees publicly in a forum like this now wonders whether its a good idea to leave the country.
And no....I don't put it past them.
I fear you put far too much faith (or fear) in your own importance. You aren't a fleabite on Obama any more than I am. Once more, this is real life, not a conspiracy game being played on your dining room table.
If, however, you are stupid enough to go to Afghanistan looking for terrorists you will a much greater chance of seeing an incoming drone.
Merely using myself as an example.
If they didn't care about Benghazi they won't care about any of the rest.
True - people's reputation and even lives are sacrificed every day for political expediency. A passive refusal to help or save someone, though is quite a ways from active murder, and I'm just not ready to think that Obama (or anyone else in our govt.) is powerful enough yet to do that and get away clean with it.
Like I mentioned, give any of them a good reason, put yourself in harms way (like a war zone or collaborating with terrorists) and the story can and will change radically. Merely voicing politics isn't enough, though.
Wilderness - I guess you just trust his decision making process more than I. What if he is having a bad day, could that influence his decision? To grant this power to one individual borders on insanity. Hitler would have loved this idea.
I personally trust Obama about as far as I could throw him; the man is a socialist through and through and will, with the best of intentions, destroy the country if he can.
Unfortunately the office of President is vested in him; he is our commander in chief whether you and I like it or not. Nor does he operate and make decisions in a vacuum; he is not going to pick names out of a phone book and order them killed. Someone is telling him that so-and-so is a terrorist, where they can be found and whether they can be killed without undue harm to others. None of that is a single person; it is a conglomerate of people with the president having the final say and that is exactly as it should be.
The use of drones is another question, and honestly one I'm not well educated on. From what I've seen though, the use a drone is far preferable to a physical invasion by armed soldiers. It is much better at limiting unwanted death in both native and US citizens, it is cheaper and it has a better success record than invasions. Armed drones seem to be the preferred choice of the professional military people that are conducting this war; I prefer that decision over someone that listens to a biased and emotional laden media and makes decisions based on that rather than actual experience and intimate knowledge of each individual situation.
Those of us old enough all saw the results of letting politicians, media and the public run a war in Vietnam and we saw the results when the military did the work in Kuwait. Let's not repeat the mistake of Vietnam and let the professionals conduct this war. If or when it becomes unpalatable we can bring the soldiers home and take the consequences of that but until then let those with the knowledge and ability make the decisions, not the public or the politicians.
Based on this response, you and I are closer on this than you might think. It is interesting that Obama can hardly say "Terrorist," yet has no problem issuing orders to kill one. Like you, I see no problem with killing terrorists, and your also right, Obama is fed this info from others. And your right, we don't need another Vietnam.
It wouldn't surprise me. At 74 (if the profile isn't out of date) you've seen and understand exactly what I'm talking about in 'Nam and what it means to have enemies capable of hurting us.
I may not like the man, but I try (hard, sometimes ) to give due where it is earned. So far Obama seems to be giving the military a goal (capture/kill bin Laden for example) and letting them do their thing which is exactly what he should be doing. To date, I've even agreed with at least most of his apparent military goals and the general way they're being met (or not).
That's the year I got out of high school.
Now 75, need to update my profile. I also fear we are not the only country who can build drones capable of killing. To some other countries, we are the terrorists. How long will it be before they target one of us and take us out using a drone? Will drones join the ranks of nuclear weapons and be regulated by some agency in the future? Just speculating.
One thing about it there are two sides to the accountability coin! The ACLU would be screaming impeachment now ! If it were Bush or MaCain in office ........ The Democracy Now Queen would be frothing at the mouth ! I watch it all-- from all sides ! And I'm telling you there are two different faces to liberal ideals ! One on each side and both covered in a socialist mask !
Ok, whosit and I having been having a bit of fun here.
Fact of the matter is we all told you in 2008 you were not going to get what you thought and we were told vehemently....even violently sometimes....to shut up.
Now you see what we mean.
Meet the new boss....same as the old boss.
And now he has nothing to lose and no one to answer to and can do whatever he pleases.
I say that because you guys have proven you won't make him responsible for anything.
The president and the military have the authority to kill belligerents on a battlefield. What they seek is the authority to kill anyone, anywhere, without question.
Every tyranny begins with the suppression of dissent!
Step one: disarm the people
Your comment mirrors my biggest fear. Killing terrorists at will is just the first step. Who would be next on the list when they run out of terrorists? What other countries would start sending their drones over here? After all, some of us are terrorists to them. An all out drone war between countries would not be something to look forward to.
That's what it's looking like.. http://www.examiner.com/article/russia- … technology ...starting to remind me of the "arms race" during the cold war...
Yep. and now N. Korea is firing rockets. They certainly have the technology to manufacture drones. It will be like walking through a park full of pigeons never knowing what is going to land on your head.
Scary thought, I shiver hearing planes these days...Oh too be an ostrich...
Speaking of pigeons, look how tiny these are...Big Brother is watching...
Fortunately people , You live in America ! The drone technology leads only to future anti- drone technology , so don't worry . America is still the leader in research and developement of warfare ! There is but Still an invisible shield over your sleepy little minds at night !
"Fugitive alleged LAPD-killer is first drone target on U.S. soil"
http://now.msn.com/christopher-dorner-i … on-us-soil
by ptosis16 months ago
The poorly crafted Executive Order without consulting the people who have to enforce it seems - hamfisted."Mr. Schneiderman said that the executive order was unconstitutional and that he and other attorneys general...
by Jack Lee16 months ago
The executive order to suspend entry from 7 middle east countries for 90 days.Before you answer, consider the following,1. Is this order Constitutional?2. Was there precedence for this type of order by previous...
by leeberttea8 years ago
Executive order 12425 was signed by Obama back in December. It essentially gives Interpol freedom to act as they deem necessary in the USA without regard to restraints of the constitution or US law. Unfortunately this...
by Mike Russo16 months ago
Is Trump going to govern by executive order only?He has only been president for less than a week and he has already issued a multitude of executive orders. If he continues to do this, he will be bypassing...
by GA Anderson3 years ago
There is a lot of talk about the prospect of President Obama using an executive order to initiate some type of immigration reform before the new Congress takes office.Many pundits are speculating this might occur around...
by TMMason6 years ago
Could this be true? If it is he, is out and should be arrested... and given a long sentence. Not to mention every law with his signiture on it is null and void."Registration transcript states ~ Name: Barry Soetoro...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.