Hail To The Chief (Read Mod Warning In OP)

Skylinehead · 26-01-2017 05:37PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Under Bush, hundreds of people captured and taken to Guantanamo.

What you suggest with a 'don't know' leaves it open to interpretation that Obama may have operated secret prisons, or instead he killed them...

If Trump goes back to the Bush policy with Guantanamo, we will know they were simply killed.

Under Bush hundreds of thousands of people were also killed so that doesn't really work for me. The sheer scale of the two wars he started means that inevitably there's going to be more capturing and more killing than Obama's tenure.

BabyCheeses · 26-01-2017 05:39PM

RobertKK wrote: »

They shouldn't thank Bush as they were not treated humanely. They should only be thankful they were captured and and are still alive to tell their story, unlike the people who are killed in drone strikes and who get no trial.

Do you think it would be better to be a family member and maybe witness family members blown to bits instead?

Don't worry, now the families will also be dead.

I find it hard to accept you are really concerned about innocent people being killed when you support a man who has said he wants to target wives, children, and parents.

ScumLord · 26-01-2017 05:40PM

orubiru wrote: »

I thought the problem with the drone strikes is that it turns the USA into judge jury and executioner in the cases where drones are used?

They are anyway. It's not like a pilot in a plane flying overhead can tell what's inside a house below anymore than the guy sitting back in the US, they're both looking through the same camera.

I'm not sure of the extent of collateral damage, if there is any at all, when drones are used but this would surely be an issue too?

It's probably roughly the same. The only difference I could imagine is that maybe the drone can't carry larger missiles so would create less damage. They may not be able to take on multiple targets because of that lack of space.

A human sitting in an F22 is still the most lethal thing in the sky. Drones don't come close.

BlinkingLights · 26-01-2017 05:41PM

This is just the culmination of decades of very broken politics in the USA.

They need to get back to basics again.

orubiru · 26-01-2017 05:42PM

Jelle1880 wrote: »

I actually think the use of drones is a step forward in warfare, it eliminates the risk of pilots and planes being shot down.

The main issue is that confirmation of targets seems to be a lot more difficult and hence civilian casualties are a reality.

Obviously from a cold, logical, perspective the use of drones is a step forward. If "our" side are the ones using the drones.

Clearly though the relatives of a child killed by a drone strike are unlikely to say "well at least there was no risk to Americas pilots and planes".

It's unavoidable though, I know.

How should this stuff impact the public's perception of their leaders?

I am kind of not OK with the idea that people were fine with drone strikes under Obama but flipped their lids over the "grab em by the pussy" stuff. It seems dishonest and hypocritical.

RobertKK · 26-01-2017 05:47PM

Skylinehead wrote: »

Under Bush hundreds of thousands of people were also killed so that doesn't really work for me. The sheer scale of the two wars he started means that inevitably there's going to be more capturing and more killing than Obama's tenure.

Obama had more drone strikes in year 1 of his presidency than Bush had during his entire presidency.

There were ten times more air strikes in the covert war on terror during President Barack Obama’s presidency than under his predecessor, George W. Bush.

https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2017/01/17/obamas-covert-drone-war-numbers-ten-times-strikes-bush/

RobertKK · 26-01-2017 05:49PM

orubiru wrote: »

Obviously from a cold, logical, perspective the use of drones is a step forward. If "our" side are the ones using the drones.

Clearly though the relatives of a child killed by a drone strike are unlikely to say "well at least there was no risk to Americas pilots and planes".

It's unavoidable though, I know.

How should this stuff impact the public's perception of their leaders?

I am kind of not OK with the idea that people were fine with drone strikes under Obama but flipped their lids over the "grab em by the pussy" stuff. It seems dishonest and hypocritical.

Some people choose to when they have a conscience.
For some politics decides it for them, and who is the accused.

Skylinehead · 26-01-2017 05:49PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Obama had more drone strikes in year 1 of his presidency than Bush had during his entire presidency.

https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2017/01/17/obamas-covert-drone-war-numbers-ten-times-strikes-bush/

10 times more drone strikes. Important distinction. Now add in the F16s, tomahawks etc and the number will be vastly skewed in the other direction.

Jelle1880 · 26-01-2017 05:50PM

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/josh-rogin/wp/2017/01/26/the-state-departments-entire-senior-management-team-just-resigned/?utm_term=.c2d477a2f013

The entire senior staff of the Department of State just resigned.

wonderfullife · 26-01-2017 05:53PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Obama had more drone strikes in year 1 of his presidency than Bush had during his entire presidency.

https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2017/01/17/obamas-covert-drone-war-numbers-ten-times-strikes-bush/

To be fair Bush had an absolute ton of troops on the ground for most of his Presidency and drone technology has also improved no end.

As for Trump, he's a lunatic.

Pure and simple he's a lunatic. Narcissistic sociopath.

Doesn't give a monkeys about anyone but himself and any sycophants who support him.

The fact he's getting his opinions and ideas from Fox and not from intelligence briefings is also pretty frightening.

State-run TV is usually exactly that - run by the State.

USA is now TV-run State. Trump switches on Fox, sees whatever the current right-wing opinion is and makes it his own opinion and, by extension, policy.

The USA is now being run by Bill O' Reilly.

orubiru · 26-01-2017 05:54PM

BabyCheeses wrote: »

I find it hard to accept you are really concerned about innocent people being killed when you support a man who has said he wants to target wives, children, and parents.

It doesn't make ANY sense.

One could equally say "I find it hard to accept you are really concerned about targeting wives, children, and parents when you support a man who issued orders that led to innocent people being killed".

Which is kind of where the whole accusation of double standards comes from.

You can't "support" a politician or a political party in the same way that folks support football teams but so many people are doing exactly that.

orubiru · 26-01-2017 05:55PM

wonderfullife wrote: »

The USA is now being run by Bill O' Reilly.

Do not give them ideas!

gandalf · 26-01-2017 06:06PM

Jelle1880 wrote: »

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/josh-rogin/wp/2017/01/26/the-state-departments-entire-senior-management-team-just-resigned/?utm_term=.c2d477a2f013

The entire senior staff of the Department of State just resigned.

They probably didn't want to be cleaning up the complete and utter disaster that America's foreign policy will become under the Trumppenfuhrer! Who'd blame them.

RobertKK · 26-01-2017 06:08PM

Skylinehead wrote: »

10 times more drone strikes. Important distinction. Now add in the F16s, tomahawks etc and the number will be vastly skewed in the other direction.

While candidate Obama came to office pledging to end George W Bush’s wars, he leaves office having been at war longer than any president in US history. He is also the only president to serve two complete terms with the nation at war.
President Obama did reduce the number of US soldiers fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq, but he dramatically expanded the air wars and the use of special operations forces around the globe. In 2016, US special operators could be found in 70% of the world’s nations, 138 countries – a staggering jump of 130% since the days of the Bush administration.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/09/america-dropped-26171-bombs-2016-obama-legacy

The air wars were expanded from what Bush did.

in 2016 alone, the Obama administration dropped at least 26,171 bombs. This means that every day last year, the US military blasted combatants or civilians overseas with 72 bombs; that’s three bombs every hour, 24 hours a day. While most of these air attacks were in Syria and Iraq, US bombs also rained down on people in Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan. That’s seven majority-Muslim countries.
One bombing technique that President Obama championed is drone strikes. As drone-warrior-in-chief, he spread the use of drones outside the declared battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq, mainly to Pakistan and Yemen. Obama authorized over 10 times more drone strikes than George W Bush, and automatically painted all males of military age in these regions as combatants, making them fair game for remote controlled killing.

While the switch from US troops on the ground to airstrikes and special forces has saved US lives, untold numbers of foreign lives have been snuffed out. We have no idea how many civilians have been killed in the massive bombings in Iraq and Syria, where the US military is often pursuing Isis in the middle of urban neighborhoods. We only sporadically hear about civilian killings in Afghanistan, such as the tragic bombing of the Doctors Without Borders hospital in Kunduz that left 42 dead and 37 wounded.

Given that drones account for only a small portion of the munitions dropped in the past eight years, the numbers of civilians killed by Obama’s bombs could be in the thousands. But we can’t know for sure as the administration, and the mainstream media, has been virtually silent about the civilian toll of the administration’s failed interventions.

Trump inherits this foreign policy war mess from Obama.

ScumLord · 26-01-2017 06:21PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Obama had more drone strikes in year 1 of his presidency than Bush had during his entire presidency.

I spent more time online in 2016 than I did in 2006. There are a number of reasons for that. It's not that I wouldn't have spent more time online in 2006, it's just that it wasn't as possible back then.

Saying Obama made more use of a technology that wasn't as widely available in GWBushes time doesn't really mean much. GWBush may well have used the same amount of drones if they were as good and as widely available back then.

BabyCheeses · 26-01-2017 06:29PM

orubiru wrote: »

It doesn't make ANY sense.

One could equally say "I find it hard to accept you are really concerned about targeting wives, children, and parents when you support a man who issued orders that led to innocent people being killed".

Which is kind of where the whole accusation of double standards comes from.

You can't "support" a politician or a political party in the same way that folks support football teams but so many people are doing exactly that.

One situation is innocents getting killed by accident. Here we have Robert complaining about Obama not being careful enough while supporting Trump who wants to target innocent people.

Someone might get shot in the crossfire between police and a criminal, it is very different to have the police shoot the crowd down on purpose in order to get a better shot of the criminal.

listermint · 26-01-2017 06:29PM

It is abundantly clear at this point Robert that you are going to continue the pre election campaign of pointing at Obama or hillary for all the ills of the world rather than holding Trump who is now on power to your illustrious high standards and the latest campaign you have stuck to is from strikes and foreign deaths its also quite clear you have no interest in holding trump accountable for the same.

You are like a parody twitter account.

RobertKK · 26-01-2017 06:29PM

ScumLord wrote: »

I spent more time online in 2016 than I did in 2006. There are a number of reasons for that. It's not that I wouldn't have spent more time online in 2006, it's just that it wasn't as possible back then.

Saying Obama made more use of a technology that wasn't as widely available in GWBushes time doesn't really mean much. GWBush may well have used the same amount of drones if they were as good and as widely available back then.

It was February 4th, 2002 that the first predator drone was used by the US.
Yet you claim there was a massive technological revolution in drones from 2008 to 2009.

B0jangles · 26-01-2017 06:30PM

B0jangles wrote: »

Do you want an insight into where Trump is getting his information about rampant voter fraud?

According to multiple witnesses, it comes from such reliable sources as mis-remembered anecdotes from people like professional golfer Bernhard Langer

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/01/25/us/politics/trump-bernhard-langer-voting-fraud.html?_r=0&referer=https://t.co/MU5TAHryYL

So an investigation must take place based on a garbled racist (see underlined part) urban legend that Trump has repeated multiple times

For anyone who's interested, Bernhard Langer has actually issued a statement on this:

https://twitter.com/WillGrayGC/status/824659537852407808/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

Trump is basing his election fraud narrative on an honest-to-god Urban Legend

Sonics2k · 26-01-2017 06:34PM

orubiru wrote: »

Trump is bad, yeah, but WTF have Americans been ignoring through the last 8 years?

Let's clear something up.

I detested Obamas war policy, and I'd happily say most "liberal" people do and did.

However, let's make this clear, nothing will change under Trump. He campaigned on two things. Bringing troops home, and murdering terrorists. The only logical way to achieve this is the use of Drones.

The U.S. has an appalling track record of civilian deaths and has done since the days of Nixon, if not before.
Bush's invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq resulted in countless civilian deaths by US troops, both during the invasion (and yes, it was an invasion) but also in the years after wards.

Under Bill Clinton, the US Air Force bombed the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade, which very nearly resulted in war between China and America.

Nothing is going to change under Trump, and any Trump supporter is honestly deluded if they think otherwise.

RobertKK · 26-01-2017 06:36PM

listermint wrote: »

It is abundantly clear at this point Robert that you are going to continue the pre election campaign of pointing at Obama or hillary for all the ills of the world rather than holding Trump who is now on power to your illustrious high standards and the latest campaign you have stuck to is from strikes and foreign deaths its also quite clear you have no interest in holding trump accountable for the same.

You are like a parody twitter account.

I did not mention Hillary or the election, that was you.

It is surprising that a man can lead a country for 8 years, be given a free ride by many on this site and elsewhere, who then find their conscience because of Trump, when pointed out the previous president was also not good, it becomes a major inconvenience, especially when they want to ignore it is Trump who has inherited Obama's foreign policy mess.

Where were all the people who suddenly have a conscience?
It is like those celeb singers who sang for dictators in North Africa and the Middle East, and who suddenly found their conscience and refused to sing for Trump.
It is all these people who make themselves a parody, as it is hard to take people seriously who have double standards.

Billy86 · 26-01-2017 06:37PM

astradave wrote: »

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/824616644370714627

Someone really needs to change his password on twitter

Aaaand...

https://twitter.com/cnni/status/824664590525067265?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

"This morning we have informed the White House that I will not attend the meeting scheduled for next Tuesday with the POTUS," Peña Nieto tweeted.

Wrll done Donald, you astounding gobsh*te. If anything, it'll be easier to push forward those wars you want with those pesky experts in the State Department out of the way.

RobertKK · 26-01-2017 06:39PM

Billy86 wrote: »

Aaaand...

https://twitter.com/cnni/status/824664590525067265?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

"This morning we have informed the White House that I will not attend the meeting scheduled for next Tuesday with the POTUS," Peña Nieto tweeted.

Wrll done Donald, you astounding gobsh*te. If anything, it'll be easier to push forward those wars you want with those pesky experts in the State Department out of the way.

It suits the Mexican president according to CNN, as the Mexican president never recovered in the polls after he met Trump during the election.

listermint · 26-01-2017 06:41PM

RobertKK wrote: »

I did not mention Hillary or the election, that was you.

It is surprising that a man can lead a country for 8 years, be given a free ride by many on this site and elsewhere, who then find their conscience because of Trump, when pointed out the previous president was also not good, it becomes a major inconvenience, especially when they want to ignore it is Trump who has inherited Obama's foreign policy mess.

Where were all the people who suddenly have a conscience?
It is like those celeb singers who sang for dictators in North Africa and the Middle East, and who suddenly found their conscience and refused to sing for Trump.
It is all these people who make themselves a parody, as it is hard to take people seriously who have double standards.

There is not double standards here. You are making that up.

The only double standards here are you.

Your giving Trump a free pass.

Laughable.

Your not even bothering reading posts stating this.

Billy86 · 26-01-2017 06:41PM

RobertKK wrote: »

It was February 4th, 2002 that the first predator drone was used by the US.
Yet you claim there was a massive technological revolution in drones from 2008 to 2009.

I downloaded I 50GB file the other day in an hour, it's frankly hilarious that you're suggesting I could have done that in 1995 because the internet existed back then too.

jobbridge4life · 26-01-2017 06:41PM

RobertKK wrote: »

I did not mention Hillary or the election, that was you.

It is surprising that a man can lead a country for 8 years, be given a free ride by many on this site and elsewhere, who then find their conscience because of Trump, when pointed out the previous president was also not good, it becomes a major inconvenience, especially when they want to ignore it is Trump who has inherited Obama's foreign policy mess.

Where were all the people who suddenly have a conscience?
It is like those celeb singers who sang for dictators in North Africa and the Middle East, and who suddenly found their conscience and refused to sing for Trump.
It is all these people who make themselves a parody, as it is hard to take people seriously who have double standards.

The irony is just unbelievable.

Billy86 · 26-01-2017 06:43PM

RobertKK wrote: »

It suits the Mexican president according to CNN, as the Mexican president never recovered in the polls after he met Trump during the election.

It's Mexico calling Trump's bluff, and we all know how Trump reacts to snubs and challenges. This is only going to make matters worse, and bring things one step closer to war. You seem grand with that, but most of us aren't.

jobbridge4life · 26-01-2017 06:44PM

RobertKK wrote: »

It suits the Mexican president according to CNN, as the Mexican president never recovered in the polls after he met Trump during the election.

Nor should he have. He met with a man who slurred his people, repeatedly and has an agenda specifically designed to damage Mexico.

Firefox11 · 26-01-2017 06:46PM

Sonics2k wrote: »

Let's clear something up.

I detested Obamas war policy, and I'd happily say most "liberal" people do and did.

However, let's make this clear, nothing will change under Trump. He campaigned on two things. Bringing troops home, and murdering terrorists. The only logical way to achieve this is the use of Drones.

The U.S. has an appalling track record of civilian deaths and has done since the days of Nixon, if not before.
Bush's invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq resulted in countless civilian deaths by US troops, both during the invasion (and yes, it was an invasion) but also in the years after wards.

Under Bill Clinton, the US Air Force bombed the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade, which very nearly resulted in war between China and America.

Nothing is going to change under Trump, and any Trump supporter is honestly deluded if they think otherwise.

Are you joking?? :eek:

Trump has already made massive changes in regards to climate change, immigration etc in just the first few days of his term!

He is squaring of for confrontation or at least a serious foreign policy crisis with the chinese in regards to trade or in the south china sea.

ScumLord · 26-01-2017 06:47PM

RobertKK wrote: »

It was February 4th, 2002 that the first predator drone was used by the US.
Yet you claim there was a massive technological revolution in drones from 2008 to 2009.

I never even mentioned those date. The American military have been experimenting with drones for decades, long before 2002. There are a number of technologies that could be considered drone technology that go all the way back to before WW2. At one point they tried making missiles guided by pigeons.

But I think it would be naive to think there's been no progress made in drone technology since 2002. The better they get the more their used. Comparing the first use of a new technology to how it's used as a tried and tested technology just isn't a fair comparison.

Hail To The Chief (Read Mod Warning In OP)

Comments