RE: Lies repeated and repeated and repeated...

RE: Lies repeated and repeated and repeated... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Irishknight -> RE: Lies repeated and repeated and repeated... (5/26/2008 11:57:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomAviator All partisan debate aside - a president does not NEED a reason to deploy forces or to start a war. Nowhere in the presidential powers listed in the constitution does it require a valid reason. Much less what "some" consider to be a valid reason. Legally, the president of the united states could have invaded iraq because saddam farted at the UN... There is nothing to charge him with... He is CINC of the armed forces and can use them as he sees fit.... He could have nuked every man woman and child in Iraq simply by telling the officer following him to open the nuclear football. Bush was 100% right in that HE is "the decider"... You are right in part. Bush could have ordered the invasion. He could legally send troops in and he could even have have you flyers bomb the enemy into the stone age and beyond. He cannot declare a war without congress. In fact, congress has to make the official declaration. Without their support it has to be called a "police action" or some other nonsense and the whole affair becomes a worse nightmare of rotating troops in and out of the region so that they don't get deployed for too long.

DomAviator -> RE: Lies repeated and repeated and repeated... (5/26/2008 12:55:11 PM)
True, I was using "war" in the colloquial sense of "sending the military to kick ass" rather than the legal sense. We haven't had a "war" since WW2 - everything since was as you noted a "police action" or "containment of communism" or "peacekeeping" I believe this one was called a "regieme change". You are absolutely right only the congress can declare war. My point was that to those who say "bush lied" or "bush didnt have a good reason" or "there were no WMD's!" etc are barking up the wrong tree. Bush is in fact "the decider" and he can send troops anywhere, any time for any reason or no reason. He is the CINC and can invade Luxemborg if he catches their ambassador peeking up Jenna's skirt! LOL It doesnt matter if he found WMD. George Bush could legally wake up tommorrow, see a picture of Kim Il on TV and say "Gawd Damn I hate that kimchee eatin motherfucker... Get me the nuclear football! Im sick of Koreans" and thats it the birds fly.... Its easy to blame Bush for the war, but deciding when and where to send troops is his job. Its the troops job to say "YES SIR!" and go do what they are told. What the Bush bashers forget is that we have a separation of the sword and the purse in this country. Thats the system of checks and balances. The president can send the troops anywhere anytime, but the Congress has to fund it to keep them there. Bush sent the troops, but CONGRESS kept them there by funding them again and again and again.

rulemylife -> RE: Lies repeated and repeated and repeated... (5/26/2008 12:59:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro I don't really know why torture became the focus of this thread. [8\|] My two OPs are about the lies told in the run-up to the Iraq War/Invasion and how Bush should ultimately be held accountable for the lies that have cost so many so very much. Some have opined that we should move quickly beyond concerns about whom to hold responsible and yet that seems so odd to me. We have right-wingers endlessly talking about personal accountability all the fucking time. And yet when it comes time to talk about Bush they want to give him a pass - as if the greater the crime the easier we should be on him. I feel the exact opposite way... I think that for the future good of this country we MUST hold Bush accountable. He may be just the figurehead of the movement he represents, but it would send an important message to the world community that Bush was an aberration and that he will be held responsible for his crimes against humanity. Now, does anyone really disagree with that? And if so, why? Never happen.. All this was known about Bush before the 2004 election and he still was elected to a second term. There was talk of impeachment after the Democrats took Congress in '06. If he couldn't be held accountable then he's surely not going to be held accountable now with just a few months left in office. Let's just hope he doesn't invade Iran and start WWIII before he leaves.

LadyEllen -> RE: Lies repeated and repeated and repeated... (5/26/2008 1:11:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomAviator He is the CINC and can invade Luxemborg if he catches their ambassador peeking up Jenna's skirt! LOL It doesnt matter if he found WMD. This is cause for concern; so, if the ambassador for Luxembourg went looking up Jenna's skirt for WMDs, this would be sufficient reason for the US to invade Luxembourg? Presumably, this invasion would be intended to keep the truth from getting out, about what exactly is up Jenna's skirt? Why all this bush secrecy? E

FullCircle -> RE: Lies repeated and repeated and repeated... (5/26/2008 1:18:21 PM)
She doesn't have a bush intelligence leads us to believe.[8\|]

Irishknight -> RE: Lies repeated and repeated and repeated... (5/26/2008 2:33:14 PM)
I am more than willing to look up Jenna's skirt if that will calm Luxembourg. I will get the truth on the Bush bush for the sake of peace.

SugarMyChurro -> RE: Lies repeated and repeated and repeated... (5/26/2008 2:59:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife Never happen... I don't disagree that it will never happen. I wish it were otherwise though. That's exactly why the U.S. will never regain international respect and why the experiment here has ended badly. If there is no accountability for obvious crimes, then there is no law. If there is no law then this is the jungle. [:-]

Irishknight -> RE: Lies repeated and repeated and repeated... (5/26/2008 3:15:18 PM)
If you can establish a clear chain of evidence that Bush is responsible for these things, he can most certainly be tried. You will have to make it clear and unbroken so that he can be guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt. Then, you have to find an impartial jury .... Good frakkin luck on that. Just getting evidence that hasn't been tanpered with by either side that shows a direct link between the president and any of the torture "scandals" and other bullshit will be IMPOSSIBLE. That is one reason why presidents delegate to their staff. They can deny ever seeing anything related to the bullshit that goes down.

Alumbrado -> RE: Lies repeated and repeated and repeated... (5/26/2008 6:24:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Irishknight If you can establish a clear chain of evidence that Bush is responsible for these things, he can most certainly be tried. You will have to make it clear and unbroken so that he can be guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt. Then, you have to find an impartial jury .... Good frakkin luck on that. Just getting evidence that hasn't been tanpered with by either side that shows a direct link between the president and any of the torture "scandals" and other bullshit will be IMPOSSIBLE. That is one reason why presidents delegate to their staff. They can deny ever seeing anything related to the bullshit that goes down. And why there were no successful prosecutions of presidents for the Gulf of Tonkin, the cruise missiles in the Sudan, the previously mentioned 1990s approved kidnap/torture policies, the SOA, the Bay of Pigs, etc.

Irishknight -> RE: Lies repeated and repeated and repeated... (5/26/2008 7:32:26 PM)
Alumbrado, you hit the nail on the head.

pollux -> RE: Lies repeated and repeated and repeated... (5/26/2008 7:56:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Irishknight quote: ORIGINAL: JohnWarren However, there real terror is you have no control. You are literally at the mercy of the merciless. That makes the pain much worse. You know it will go on and on until you die and soon you come to pray for that moment That kind of reminds me of my first marriage. I LOL'd.

farglebargle -> RE: Lies repeated and repeated and repeated... (5/27/2008 4:54:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Irishknight If you can establish a clear chain of evidence that Bush is responsible for these things, he can most certainly be tried. You will have to make it clear and unbroken so that he can be guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt. Then, you have to find an impartial jury .... Good frakkin luck on that. Just getting evidence that hasn't been tanpered with by either side that shows a direct link between the president and any of the torture "scandals" and other bullshit will be IMPOSSIBLE. That is one reason why presidents delegate to their staff. They can deny ever seeing anything related to the bullshit that goes down. So, you're saying there's one law for Marion Jones and Martha Stewart, but a DIFFERENT set of laws for Bush and Cheney? Jones and Stewart can serve time in a Federal Prison for statements made WHILE NOT UNDER OATH, but Bush is immune from the same statute? That's not a President, that's a Dictator -- Immune from the Laws everyone else is subject to . On that note, why should the Bush Gang bother to leave office? It's not like anyone is going to hold him ACCOUNTABLE TO THE LAW, are they?

farglebargle -> RE: Lies repeated and repeated and repeated... (5/27/2008 5:04:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Irishknight If you can establish a clear chain of evidence that Bush is responsible for these things, he can most certainly be tried. You will have to make it clear and unbroken so that he can be guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt. Then, you have to find an impartial jury .... Good frakkin luck on that. Just getting evidence that hasn't been tanpered with by either side that shows a direct link between the president and any of the torture "scandals" and other bullshit will be IMPOSSIBLE. That is one reason why presidents delegate to their staff. They can deny ever seeing anything related to the bullshit that goes down. Isn't the LEGAL STANDARD a REASONABLE DOUBT? Why are you suggesting a different legal standard for Bush than YOU YOURSELF are held to?

kdsub -> RE: Lies repeated and repeated and repeated... (5/27/2008 8:35:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife Never happen... I don't disagree that it will never happen. I wish it were otherwise though. That's exactly why the U.S. will never regain international respect and why the experiment here has ended badly. If there is no accountability for obvious crimes, then there is no law. If there is no law then this is the jungle. [:-] I’m not about to defend our transgressions as a country but I would not say we are an experiment that ended badly. I’d say we have been and are the best so far, in human civilization, of the great powers on earth warts and all. Butch

Irishknight -> RE: Lies repeated and repeated and repeated... (5/27/2008 8:46:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle Isn't the LEGAL STANDARD a REASONABLE DOUBT? Why are you suggesting a different legal standard for Bush than YOU YOURSELF are held to? You are correct that I worded it wrong. It doesn't change the fact that what I'm saying holds up. There is no chance of getting a clear chain of evidence or an impartial jury. I didn't say it was right just that it happens to be the way it is. You merely assume that I support it. My observation in no way supports the crooks who are in Washington or those before them. The last 2 administrations have been so incredibly dirty that we all heed to take a bath after each state of the union. Unfortunately, Nixon taught them a bit about covering their tracks after he got caught on tape. Do I wish we could get the goods and send the bad ones to jail? You bet. Do I think that we have a snowball's chance in hell? Nope. As for Martha Stewart, after the way her directions ruined my dinner party they should have never let her out. (j/k)

Alumbrado -> RE: Lies repeated and repeated and repeated... (5/27/2008 9:07:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub quote: ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife Never happen... I don't disagree that it will never happen. I wish it were otherwise though. That's exactly why the U.S. will never regain international respect and why the experiment here has ended badly. If there is no accountability for obvious crimes, then there is no law. If there is no law then this is the jungle. [:-] I’m not about to defend our transgressions as a country but I would not say we are an experiment that ended badly. I’d say we have been and are the best so far, in human civilization, of the great powers on earth warts and all. Butch And that is the irony that one has to face in dealing with the real world. Anything we can do wrong, the rest of the planet has already turned into an art form.

kittinSol -> RE: Lies repeated and repeated and repeated... (5/27/2008 9:10:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub I’d say we have been and are the best so far, in human civilization, of the great powers on earth warts and all. You either have your blinders on; or your idea of 'the best so far' differs greatly from what is commonly accepted as 'civilisation'.

Alumbrado -> RE: Lies repeated and repeated and repeated... (5/27/2008 9:19:25 AM)
Main Entry: civ·i·li·za·tion [image]http://www.merriam-webster.com/images/audio.gif[/image] Pronunciation: \ˌsi-və-lə-ˈzā-shən\ Function: noun Date: 1772 1 a: a relatively high level of cultural and technological development; specifically : the stage of cultural development at which writing and the keeping of written records is attained http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/civilization Interestingly enough, the modern usage of the word seems to have coalesced at exactly the time the US came into being...[:D]

kittinSol -> RE: Lies repeated and repeated and repeated... (5/27/2008 9:30:25 AM)
Used as the opposite of 'barbaric', 'civilised' came out of the Enlightement in the XVIIIth Century, but I wouldn't say the word's new meaning emerged in America. It's probably Scottish more than anything. Anyway, it doesn't make America more or less civilised than an other society, especially when one considers this thread. Many would argue, in fact, that as a country, America is singularly lacking in civilising influences, and again, within the context of this thread, this is evident shrug. If it makes people feel better to believe otherwise, however, good for them. I hear religion can be soothing.

Alumbrado -> RE: Lies repeated and repeated and repeated... (5/27/2008 9:33:42 AM)
Like your religion of straw arguments and derails?

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125