Rudy Calls On Obama To Use “War” And “Terror” In Same Sentence Again
On an RNC conference call with reporters just now, Rudy Giuliani called on the Obama administration to start using the words “war” and “terror” in the same sentence again.
First, he repeatedly praised Attorney General Eric Holder for his repeated use of the word “war” in his opening statement before the Senate Judiciary Committee today, where he’s being grilled over his decision to try Khalid Sheik Mohammed in a New York court.
But then he charged that Holder’s description of our standoff with global terrorism as a “war” wasn’t good enough, and claimed that the administration’s abandonment of the specific phrase “war on terror” was directly linked to the decision on where to try KSM and his co-conspirators.
“It was great to see that the Attorney General said, `I know that we are at war,’” Rudy said. But he went on to lament that under current policy, we aren’t supposed to use the phrase “war on terror” anymore.
“I do think that terminology is important,” Rudy continued. “It leads to conclusions different than trying people in civilian courts.”
In his opening statement today, Holder said that “we are at war with a vicious enemy” who targets “our civilians on the streets here at home.” He referred to “our fight against terrorism.” He said 9/11 was “an act of war.” He used the word “war” and variants on the word “terror” half a dozen times each. Not good enough for Rudy.
There’s obviously a legit debate to be had over how to view terrorism. But Rudy’s actually claiming that Holder’s unwillingness to place the two words within three words of each other, in precisely the formulation Rudy prefers — rather than merely call it a “war” or a “fight against terrorism” — is directly responsible for the mindset that produced the decision to try KSM in New York.
It’s hard to see how that’s even an argument.
This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here..
Giuliani, poster child of how to turn oneself into a national joke over an issue where you used to be leader of.
roflmao! I don’t think so, Rudy. The administration made it pretty clear that that isn’t the policy any more.
But hey Rudy = maybe if you dressed up really nicely in that satin suit with the mink stole and the pearls and matching hat that you wore for the perfume ad and asked very sweetly.
I wish this blog would pay as much attention to Rudy as to Palin – that is to say, enough!
@Greg: “There’s obviously a legit debate to be had over whether to view terrorism as a problem best dealt with as an act of war or through global police actions.”
This is a sincere question. Prior to 9/11, the sovereign nation of Afghanistan was the home to many terrorist training camps. How could global police action have dealt with those camps?
“I do think that terminology is important,” Rudy continued.
“Without its use I have no hope of ever reaching the White House.”
A group of 32 retired military leaders released a letter to Congress today, calling for lawmakers to continue plans to close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, and to stop fear-mongering about bringing detainees to the U.S. for trial.
The military leaders, some of whom stood behind President Obama when he signed the initial Executive Orders to close Guantanamo Bay and stop the use of torture, said they have “watched with disappointment efforts to engender fear among the American people about the prospect of bringing suspected terrorists to the United States for trial. Our federal justice system has a proven track record of successfully prosecuting terrorists and incarcerating them safely in our prisons.”
http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/11/military-leaders-push-congress-to-close-gitmo-stop-fear-mongering.php?ref=fpa
Since SBJ felt the need to label it; “a sincere question”, he has admitted that all his previous questions were not; “sincere”.
Of course, most of you already had concluded that he was just an insincere interloper.
I hesitate to use this quote but it really does typify some of the fear mongering of Cheney/Bush and their quest for war. Please understand that I am not comparing them to the author of the quote, just the strategy which could apply to many forms of government. This is from the study posted on the previous thread.
“This study seems to confirm what Hermann Goering famously said:
But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship. …voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.”
“watched with disappointment efforts to engender fear among the American people about the prospect of bringing suspected terrorists to the United States for trial. Our federal justice system has a proven track record of successfully prosecuting terrorists and incarcerating them safely in our prisons.”
Ethan = all snark aside – that brought a tear to my eye. I have been waiting for this country to get back to some semblance of normal and maybe it finally has.
Rudy continues to make it pretty clear that Cluster-Fox’s pay check goes in his bank account pretty well. So here’s the PUBLIC’s message back to you for your cross-dressing pleasure – STFU !!!
Back in your hole little man – you smell bad.
Rudy is a clown. I’m sick of these idiots. If we’re going to get into semantics, perhaps Rudy could explain why we were hit on 9/11 during his party’s occupation of the Whitehouse? It happend under them after being warned. That should make any idiot who votes Republican think twice. These chicken hawks couldn’t keep us safe. How’d they like the Dems running around saying that? Republicans suck. It truely is the neo confederate party!
Don’t hesitate, Imsinca. Look, they revered Hitler in the C Street House – yes they did – and Bush spent time there when he was younger.
They were all plugged in to that ideology that the C Street House was about.
Here’s another word for Rudy. Adulterer! Phony *** Catholic! There’s another one!
I’m tired of Godwin, I’m tired of the Right projecting this with all their might back at us. It’s a straight fact – they preached Hitler’s political methods and message methods at the C Street House.
They did, dammit. I’m not going to let them get away with projecting that so much that nobody can talk about the truth.
How to handle Rudy:
Just keep reminding people that Rudy was the one who urged President Bush to make Bernard Kerik, the head of Homeland Security.
Liam = excellent point.
That also reminds people that Rudy’s dad was connected.
LOL
“Homeland Security”
There is a department name that the Nazis would embrace,
And it came from our very own Fourth Reich Wing Leaders.
@Liam “Just keep reminding people that Rudy was the one who urged President Bush to make Bernard Kerik, the head of Homeland Security.”
YES!!! And in case you wanted to add a little fuel to the fire illuminates what a loser Rudy is…
http://www.realchange.org/giuliani.htm
“Homeland Security”
You know what really made me sick, Liam? When all those people from the administration would get on TV and talk about the “motherland”. That made me physically ill.
I will give Rudy credit for being very farsighted, and planning ahead for a national campaign.
He first marriage was to his cousin, and I am sure he planned it, because he was sure that would appeal to Southern States Family Values voters.
I am just sick to death of their “fear mongering”. Liz Cheney has gotten quite good at it as well. How we are “less safe” under Obama, what a crock. We’re finally putting these guys on trial for all the world to see and it will finalize, at least symbolically, the end to 9/11.
sbj
We cannot bring the fight to every terrorist, we would need to be at war with the World. It’s time to move on from 9/11 and fight terrorism on a case by case basis, individually, with the other tools in our box.
“YES!!! And in case you wanted to add a little fuel to the fire illuminates what a loser Rudy is…”
I love you! That picture is priceless – it’s Rudy, right down to the sly minx expression.
“He first marriage was to his cousin, and I am sure he planned it, because he was sure that would appeal to Southern States Family Values voters.”
OK Liam…now we’ve got your started..LMAO
Too bad that Bush/Cheney were not able to get their hand picked bank swindler, Ahmed Chalabi installed. He would have made things run far more smoothly than this, just like Bush/Cheney’s hand picked corrupt Karzai has Afghanistan running like a fine Swiss watch.
Iraq’s national elections in jeopardy as Sunni VP issues veto
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/v-print/story/79082.html
“November 18, 2009 11:15:12 AM
BAGHDAD — Iraq’s pivotal national elections were thrown back into turmoil and potential delay Wednesday after Vice President Tariq al Hashemi vetoed part of an election law and sent it back to parliament.
Hashemi, a Sunni Muslim, charged that the measure doesn’t provide adequate representation for millions of displaced Iraqis, most of whom are thought to be Sunnis.
Successful national elections, which are supposed to take place in January, are a crucial milestone for the departure of U.S. troops from Iraq. President Barack Obama wants to remove all American combat forces from Iraq by Aug. 31.
A senior official from Iraq’s independent elections commission said it was suspending preparations for the elections, which had just gotten under way last week.
“We halted all sorts of preparations for the next elections because we don’t have a date for elections and we don’t have a law,” said Qassim al Aboudi, the head of the commission’s electoral department.
It wasn’t immediately clear how quickly the latest snag in Iraqi politicians’ torturous effort to arrange the elections could be overcome. Parliament members are scheduled to meet Thursday to debate the changes Hashemi has demanded.”
Ah yes, Liam – the blessings of democracy. No wonder they greeted us with flowers and candy.
@lmsinca: “It’s time to move on from 9/11 and fight terrorism on a case by case basis, individually, with the other tools in our box.”
I disagree, respectfully.
By what legal authority can we bomb a terrorist training camp in a sovereign nation if we are not at war? Aren’t you proposing that we simply let those camps churn out terrorists and that we try our best to follow them all over the world and hope we can prevent their murderous actions? That is similar to the problem with a fellow like Hasan – we had suspicions but we really couldn’t DO anything until AFTER he had committed his atrocities. When we’re at war we can more effectively take the battle to them, IMO.
OT: “Iran’s foreign minister ruled out on Wednesday sending enriched uranium out of the country for further processing, effectively rejecting the latest U.N. plan aimed at preventing Tehran from building nuclear weapons.”
Imsinca – “Liz Cheney has gotten quite good at it ”
Babydick.
I wish I knew who came up with that because I stole it from someone somewhere. It’s too brilliant not to steal.
I’m with you Tena. I posted that quotation for QB. I’m fine with disagreement, but the GOP has really blatantly crossed the line with their fear-mongering. It IS nice to see military brass come out forcefully not only FOR the trials, but AGAINST the obvious attempts to scare people based on lies and only FOR political gain. Truly, using the worst calamity in our history for political gain is the lowest low I can think of. QB even admitted that he thinks Obama’s decision re: trials was a political decision. And that does tacitly expose an admission that the GOP defense is a political decision. Another telling admission was in his most recent response to me that essentially boiled down to “well you hate Bush.” Well, I DO hate Bush and I understand if they hate Obama…. but I hate Bush based on facts and they hate Obama based on politics. It is sad. I do think we are working our way through things with regard to Guantanimo and finally bringing the terrorists to justice… so that is great. But I think it will be quite some time before the hub-bub dies down. Definitely sad. The GOP complains that we are always blaming Bush and looking at Bush, but whether they like it or not, the end result of his own dealings is that we will be referring to his improper handling of terrorists — among many other issues that he screwed up — for years and years to come. If, for no other reason, than we HAVE to deal with the circumstances that he created. It’s truly weird stuff. I too just want a normal country again where we are free to disagree but we are at least on the same page as to what are the major problems we face and that we — in point of fact — want to solve our problems in the first place. When the GOP has returned to being a partner in fact-based problem-solving, that is the day that terrorism will be officially defeated. I hope we get there, but I’m not holding my breath. I any case: Full-steam Ahead.
“When we’re at war we can more effectively take the battle to them, IMO.”
THEY are all over the world in small cells who are isolated from other cells and we cannot take the fight to the terrorists. That’s why I asked you if you imagined that they were all clustered in Afghanistan, since you focus ALL your terrorist worry there.
You don’t understand what we are dealing with and you are stubbornly going to insist on not understanding cause that’s your MO.
And I call on Rudy to never again say “9/11″!
Iraq’s pivotal national elections were thrown back into turmoil and potential delay Wednesday after Vice President Tariq al Hashemi vetoed part of an election law and sent it back to parliament.
“but I hate Bush based on facts and they hate Obama based on politics. It is sad.”
Thank you for pointing out that distinction. The right insists the two things are equivalent and they’re not. I never hated another Republican president like I hate Commander Coocoo. Reagan did a lot of damage and I didn’t like him at all, but it wasn’t the same thing or even close.
George Bush and his cabal of an administration skittered along the ragged edge of criminality right from the jump.
When we’re at war we can more effectively take the battle to them, IMO.
And when they realize it’s easier to set up shop in some other country, what then? They’re mostly in Pakistan now. On paper Pakistan is an ally, but the present reality is that as a functioning country it’s almost a basket case and our going there will make all of that a lot worse. That’s no secret.
“THEY are all over the world in small cells who are isolated from other cells.”
Duh!
“We cannot take the fight to the terrorists.”
Sure we can. We can’t use our MILITARY everywhere – and I never said we should.
“That’s why I asked you if you imagined that they were all clustered in Afghanistan, since you focus ALL your terrorist worry there.”
And i pointed out that we are/have used our military to fight terrorism in Indonesia, Somalia, the Philippines, and so on.
“You don’t understand what we are dealing with and you are stubbornly going to insist on not understanding cause that’s your MO.”
We disagree about how to deal with the threat of terrorism, tena. I don’t think that measn you stubbornly refuse to understand what we are dealing with. I could make that charge but it would be rude. I think we should use our military as one component of an overall effort that includes many facets. That’s precisely what Bush II called for long ago.
“And when they realize it’s easier to set up shop in some other country, what then?”
You keep going after them however you can! You use all means at your disposal.
When we go after the terrorist in Pakistan we aren’t just bombing a sovereign nation. I’d bet this is in coordination with Pakistani intelligence. After all, they are also using our Predator drones.
George Bush and his cabal of an administration skittered along the ragged edge of criminality right from the jump.
And after 9/11 dived into it whole hog.
@sbj-”That is similar to the problem with a fellow like Hasan – we had suspicions but we really couldn’t DO anything until AFTER he had committed his atrocities. When we’re at war we can more effectively take the battle to them, IMO”
How in the world could being at war (which we are still) have helped us in the case of Hasan? The military is doing a review as we speak to see if they could have effectively dealt with him prior to his commission of murder. Our war has nothing to do with anticipating an American citizen’s actions. Perhaps good police work, or military intervention could have prevented it, we’ll find out.
Should we suddenly throw caution to the wind and say, well we suspect some guy may be a rapist because of an email or two so we’ll just throw him in jail before he commits the crime. HUH?
Just watched an interview on msnbc between
the president and chuck Todd, lots of good stuff there including Chuck acting like a real reporter instead of going for gotchas. I love the strong line by Holder and Obama against the fearmongering by Rudy and the like, rightly calling their reaction one of weakness and distrust of America. He also said that the upcoming Afghanistan decision would include how to “end the war”, note he didn’t say win which we already lost the opportunity to do… It sounds like I’m really going to like his decision when it comes.
That’s precisely what Bush II called for long ago.
What he called for and what he did are different. I have no problem with what he called for. I have enormous problems with what he did.
What Shrub called for and what he actually did, are two very different things. He did not wage a real war in Afghanistan. All he did was send in an expeditionary force level, and he let the bad guys escape. As soon as that happened, he left Afghanistan to rot under the guidance of his hand picked corrupt leader, Karzai, and took off for Iraq.
Just because he called it a war in Afghanistan, did not make it one. Shrub did not pursue a war there to a successful conclusion.
Isn’t it interesting that all those Right Wing War Mongers are only interested in waging a bigger war in Afghanistan now, and never pushed Shrub to do so.
It is just like Republicans handle every serious national issue, such as Health Care Reform. They only come up with demands for change, when they are out of power, but never when they are actually in charge.
# Tena | November 18th, 2009 at 01:06 pm
Imsinca – “Liz Cheney has gotten quite good at it ”
Babydick.
I wish I knew who came up with that because I stole it from someone somewhere. It’s too brilliant not to steal.
……………….
I had not heard that one.
I have been calling her Dickette Cheney.
When they were in charge they were too busy cheering for Shrub’s Iraq invasion, which was the only thing that administration ever truly wanted to do even though it was utterly beside any point involving 9/11.
@Tena,
“You don’t understand what we are dealing with and you are stubbornly going to insist on not understanding cause that’s your MO.”
Thanks for so accurately responding to SBJ with a simple declaritive sentence that also can end my wasted paragraphs of effort.
Yes it is his MO!!!!
I now finally get it.
Thanks
@lmsinca: I’m afraid you miss my point. I used the word ‘similar’ to make a point: you can do things in war that you can’t do in normal police work. For instance, during war we can bomb suspects without trial or Miranda rights – with police action we cannot throw a suspect in jail for no good reason. I did not claim that being at war would have helped to stop Hasan; I claimed that the (appropriate) limitations of police work may have prevented (otherwise illegal) action that could have thwarted his murderous spree.
Oddjob, Liam and I are right on the same page.
ACTION SPEAKS LOUDER THAN WORDS.
“with police action we cannot throw a suspect in jail for no good reason”
Which is what Bush did. Throw people in jail for no good reason. Ya see sbj, that is what we call “not good”. Mkay? I know it’s part of the neocon strategy and all, but in the real world locking people up for no reason whatsoever is what we call “bad”.
Rude-Eee JulieAnnie, please put your dress back on, get some help for that lisp, see if you can buy a new pair of lips because the old pair seemed to have vanished, adjust your ill-fitting dentures, and then STFU, you worthless, despicable assshat.
I LOVED watching you get your lopsided head handed to you in last year’s GOOPer primaries, you arrogant, crotchety old gasbag — truly warmed my heart!
Mr. Noun-Verb-9/11 has ZERO CREDIBILITY. Or less. He’s Dick(head) Cheney in drag. He’s Moosebrain the Quitter with hairier legs. He’s Herr Karl Rove with a couple fewer chins.
(Speaking of amoral scumbags without chins, how is it that humps like Herr Rove and Mitch McClueless can be both chinless AND multi-chinned at the same time? Truly a freakish mystery of nature.)
rudy – another repug drag queen with his panties in a bunch – meh…. who cares what he sez, Greg.
Once Hassan was detected corresponding with a known promoter of attacks on America, he should have been monitored.
If the FBI had just kept an eye on his transactions, they would have learned right away about the guns he bought in August. Since he was scheduled to be deployed abroad soon after, he had no real need for those guns, so the FBI was asleep at the wheel again, just like they were with the the guy in Minneapolis who did not want to learn how to land planes, before the 9/11 attacks.
We have turned the world upside down, wasted up to two trillion dollars on two invasions, create a quasi-police state “homeland security” domestic surveillance operation, and the FBI is still just as incompetent as ever.
Mon plaisir, mon ami.
That was for rukidding – I forgot to include his “thanks”
BooMan on conservative cowards
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/11/18/805659/-Conservative-Cowards
OT – Science (oh, the horror of it !!!)
“Researchers have demonstrated a tiny chip based on silicon that could be used to diagnose dozens of diseases.
A tiny drop of blood is drawn through the chip, where disease markers are caught and show up under light.
The device uses the tendency of a fluid to travel through small channels under its own force, instead of using pumps.
The design is simpler, requires less blood be taken, and works more quickly than existing “lab on a chip” designs, the team report in Lab on a Chip.
It has a flexible design so that it could be used for a wide range of diagnostics. ”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/science/nature/8366405.stm
“Which is what Bush did. Throw people in jail for no good reason. Ya see sbj, that is what we call “not good”. Mkay? I know it’s part of the neocon strategy and all, but in the real world locking people up for no reason whatsoever is what we call “bad”.”
Yes, ethan *sigh*
In war mistakes are mad and hopefully rectified. For instance, right now innocent civilians in Pakistan are being killed by unmanned drones operated by the CIA. That’s what I call “bad.”
What shrub & darth wrought in Afghanistan with their best bud, korrupt karzai
“The problem of corruption in Afghanistan was highlighted recently when an international survey placed the country as the second most corrupt in the world.
It was beaten only by Somalia.
The survey was carried out by Transparency International, an organisation that tracks corruption worldwide. Afghanistan did so badly that it fell from only fifth worst to second to bottom.
This is not a new problem in a society once based on clan patronage. What is new is that it has become a political obstacle both for the Afghan government and for the countries whose soldiers are dying in its defence, most notably from the US and Britain. It has gathered pace after the corruption uncovered in the presidential election.
President Karzai has now set up his third anti-corruption unit. The first was disbanded when it was revealed that its head had been imprisoned on drugs charges in the US.
Not everyone is impressed. “Words are cheap. Deeds are required,” remarked the US ambassador Karl Eikenberry, who has recommended to President Obama that no further US troops be sent until corruption is confronted. ”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/south_asia/8366371.stm
How do you know they are innocent people who are being killed in Pakistan?
They are in the terrorists homes and compounds. You appear very eager to take the word of those who attacked us on 9/11.
If those b@astards chose to live among their families, then they are the ones who are putting those people at risk.
And we know how much those terrorists worry about killing civilians. God SBJ, you are such a pathetic fraud.
Killing innocent civilians is bad.
Killing AQ is good. Drones have done that. That is the positive benefit of drones.
Maybe you can explain to me the positive benefit of throwing thousands of innocent people in jail as we did in Iraq.
Your experiment in moral equivalence has been a colossal failure thus far. I don’t expect that to change.
sbj, the dishonest troll, conveniently papering over over the hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians killed by the neocon war of errors.
amk – that story about the chip is very cool.
“How do you know they are innocent people who are being killed in Pakistan?”
We have admitted it.
“Maybe you can explain to me the positive benefit of throwing thousands of innocent people in jail as we did in Iraq.”
When we’re at war we round up the suspected bad guys. Many of them are later found to be not so bad guys and they are released. It’s an unfortunate but unavoidable aspect of waging war. In the meantime, the holding of suspected bad guys helps to keep our troops and the innocent citizenry more safe.
Recall that on the eve of the Iraq Invasion, Bush/Cheney launched twenty missile strikes on buildings, in an attempt to assassinate Saddam Hussain.
We did not get him, but we killed approximately one thousand civilians in those buildings.
For the record; when we killed those one thousand Iraqi civilians, Iraq had never launched a single terrorist attack on th United States.
Thanks Tena. I thought it was pretty cool too.
Now, who gives a shite about that moran rudy except of course Greg.
“# oddjob | November 18th, 2009 at 01:19 pm
George Bush and his cabal of an administration skittered along the ragged edge of criminality right from the jump.
And after 9/11 dived into it whole hog.
”
And that’s what had me scared silly by the end of the day on 9-11. I knew the response was going to be basically what it was. What I didn’t realize then, and still would like to get to the bottom of, was that somehow Dick Cheney and Karl Rove would shut down our free press altogether and feed it propaganda that they published or else, apparently. I would love to know how they did that. The media went from asking questions about 9-11 to publishing nothing but Heil Bush overnight.
# sbj | November 18th, 2009 at 02:10 pm
“How do you know they are innocent people who are being killed in Pakistan?”
We have admitted it.
………..
I need you to provide links to the source of your claim that we have admitted it.
# amk | November 18th, 2009 at 02:15 pm
Thanks Tena. I thought it was pretty cool too.
Now, who gives a shite about that moran rudy except of course Greg.
……………
I am sorry but if the great Intelligent Design Creator in the Sky, did not take out a patent on that chip, then it can not be real. Yup Yup, You Betcha!
http://news.antiwar.com/2009/06/19/us-admits-maybe-killed-86-afghan-civilians/
“Senator Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat who heads the Armed Services Committee, acknowledged last week that “the price is very heavy” when missile strikes mistakenly kill civilians, but he said the strikes were “an extremely effective tool.”
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/04/07-0
ethan had once provided a helpful analysis showing how many innocent civilians had been killed in unmanned drone attacks.
SBJ, you will have to come up with something more specific than that. Levin was just saying that if missiles were to hit the wrong targets, then that would be a bad thing. Of course it would be.
You still have not provided any real proof that we have verified that we killed innocent people in Pakistan, that were not housed with terrorist leaders, and probably providing safe houses for them.
You really are pathetic. Did you see where I pointed out the History of Bush/Cheney killing 1,000 Iraqi civilians with missile strikes, on the eve of their invasion, even though Iraq had never staged a single terrorist attack on the USA.
“In a belated admission last month the U.S. had admitted to 26 civilian deaths in a series of drone attacks that took place in May but was not released to the media until over a month later. In the May attacks Afghan officials put the death toll at 140, significantly higher than U.S. claims. In the same strikes the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission put the Civilian deaths at 86.”
http://www.countercurrents.org/mcafee010709.htm
Nice try SBJ, but that is a report about Afghanistan. We know that the Military has made many bombing mistakes in that country, but you are always complaining about who we kill in Pakistan, not in Afghanistan. In fact you want to ratchet up the killing in Afghanistan, which will lead to far more civilian deaths, but that does not bother a war monger like you. That is how I know that you are a lying sack of shite, who does not give a rat’s arse about who got killed in Pakistan.
All you want to do is to try and discredit the drone strikes solution, in order to drum up the support for a larger military presence in Afghanistan. If the death of civilians was of a real concern to you, then you would be calling for a end to all of our military strikes in Afghanistan.
I have had enough of your crocodile tears. Tell your phony sob(pun intended) story, walking.
“The NATO-led force in Afghanistan admitted Sunday to killing more civilians, this time in Pakistan, a day after harsh criticism from President Hamid Karzai about military operations.”
http://www.turkishpress.com/news.asp?id=182451
Still not a strike by US Drones, and also a strike from NATO in Afghanistan. But you want them to keep doing that in Afghanistan.
Like I said. You are just adishonest sack of shite, who wants to expand the killing in Afghanistan, which will kill far more civilians.
Tell your SOB story walking.
“As the United States dismantles Bucca, viewed by many as an appalling miscarriage of justice where prisoners were not charged or permitted to see evidence against them, freed detainees may end up swelling the ranks of a subdued insurgency. ”
[...]
“Since leading the invasion of Iraq and overthrowing Saddam Hussein in April 2003, the United States has detained about 100,000 people in the country.”
[...]
U.S. officials were long worried about Bucca effectively becoming a school for insurgents and tried to take steps to combat it. But in Abbas’s section, he said, Sadr supporters were in charge. Saadi, the cleric, taught classes in jurisprudence, Arabic, Koranic recitation and even literacy.
Saadi believes he recruited 80 men during his year in Bucca.
“By God’s grace, we opened our institute in an American prison,” he said.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/21/AR2009032102255.html
SBJ, 100,000 people. That’s a helluva lot of “suspected bad guys.” And as the article shows, the lack of jurisprudence may have created more terrorists than went in to the prison in the first place.
I’d take AQ-killing drones with civie casualties over wrongfully imprisoning 100,000 angry Iraqis any day of the week, month, or year.
sbj
I got your point earlier, my point is that we cannot exist in a perpetual, never ending state of war just so we can have super duper powers to deal with extremists, murderers, terrorists or anyone else who doesn’t like us very much.
We have laws on the books and agencies more than capable of dealing with all of this, although I get Liam’s point about the FBI. And with a justice system that has served us well for over 200 years, why do we need to be at war to deal with our enemies, especially within our own country or military?
Ethan,
What I have just exposed about SBJ is that he had no real source, other than the Terrorists’ word for those claims about civilian deaths caused by drone attacks in Pakistan.
He has been scouring the internet, for more than an hour, trying to find something, since I challenged him to come up with some real evidence, to back up his claims. He keeps trying to pass of a lot of stuff, that had nothing to do with our drone strikes as proof. That reveals fully, what a fraud SBJ is. He wants to discredit the tool that least exposes our troops, in order to promote an expansion of war in Afghanistan, and of course SBJ does not care at all about how many Afghan civilians have been killed or would be killed in an expanded war there.
He is a War Monger, plain and simple.
@Liam: Just so we’re clear, you do not think that US drone strikes in Pakistan have killed any innocent civilians?
i wonder how he makes distinctions between the “war on terrorism” detainees/prisoners that are captured and those that are captured in the global “war on drugs”?
SBJ,
It was your phony SOB story, and I busted you on it, so you are wasting your time, trying to make it about what I believe.
FWIW, I think it highly unlikely that sbj is wrong on this assertion, despite his present failure to support the story to Liam’s satisfaction. Aerial attacks have a long history of hitting other than intended targets and I very much doubt that our unmanned drones have solved that problem.
(I don’t doubt for a moment that they make the problem smaller than it was when we used B-17’s or B-52’s, but still.)
“his present failure to support the story to Liam’s satisfaction”
Funny! (And welcomed.) I doubt that I could support any assertion of mine to Liam’s satisfaction.
What SBJ failed to support was how expanding a War in Afghanistan would kill less civilians. That is where he gets exposed as a complete hypocrite. He is sooooooo soooooo concerned about civilian deaths in Pakistan, when we strike the Compounds of the Terrorists who hit us on 9/11, at the same time that he wants us to expanding the war in Afghanistan.
He is just a War Mongering sack of shite, who wants to discredit the use of drones, which is killing Terrorists, because he wants to keep a useless war going, and wants to expand it. Bush was there for double the time it took to defeat Hitler, and things got steadily worse, and the Terrorists were not being hunted down and killed.
The drones are killing them where they are, in Pakistan.
If they chose to hide out among their own families or in safe houses, then they are the ones who are getting others killed, and those people know full well what sort of people they are residing with.
Notice when Pakistan went after the Taliban in the Swat valley, and now in South Waziristan, the civilian populations fled to safety.
Those who choose to stay in the same compounds as the terrorists are not innocents civilians. They are aiders and abettors, or else they would flee to safety, just like the people of the Swat Valley did.
Well Liam, I’m gonna have to side with sbj on this one. There is no way that every drone strike has killed only AQ or AQ sympathizers, war just doesn’t work that way. However, Andrew Sullivan linked (and I can’t find the exact one but Newsweek backs me up) a graph showing drone strikes going up under Obama but the number of civilian deaths going down.
Obviously we aren’t on the ground asking people’s motivations for why they are standing where they are when we want to strike terrorists, but I think that making prudent strikes that hit the intended targets 80-90% of the time (instead of the 50% threshold under Bush) is the right way to go.
Paul
You are missing the point. SBJ is not calling for us to stop all attacks that might kill some civilians. In fact he wants to escalate the war in Afghanistan, which already has killed far more civilians, than any of our drone attacks in Pakistan. The difference is that we are actually targeting those Terrorists who hit us on 9/11, when we strike them in Pakistan. They are being sheltered by families in the badlands of Pakistan, and have married into those families. That makes their claims of being innocent bystanders far more suspect.
Tell me one military tactic that we can use to kill the terrorists, that will be fool proof. There is none.
SBJ is just trying to discredit the drone attacks, because he does not want them to be favored over greatly expanding the troop level, and war, and the inevitable killling of lots of civilians, in Afghanistan.
Show me where I even once stated that no innocent civilians were killed in Pakistan by drone attacks.
I have no way of knowing how many may have been, and how innocent they were, if some were killed. Neither does SBJ, but he wants to take the terrorists word for it, because it suits his goal to expand the useless war in Afghanistan, and he is afraid, that the drone attacks have been too effective, and might undermine the reason for all out war in Afghanistan.
Again;
Reality Check.
The bad guys that attacked us are in Pakistan. That is where we have to kill them. We can not send in the Military to Pakistan, so the drones are all that we have.
On the other hand, no matter how big a war, we wage in Afghanistan, it will not kill one Terrorist in Pakistan.
So SBJ is at the point where he wants us to stop killing the Terrorists in Pakistan who attacked us on 9/11, the only way we can; with drones,
but he wants us to increase the amount of killing we do in Afghanistan, where the 9/11 terrorists are not.
You can side with SBJ all you want to, but it is an absurd position to take.
Terrorism: Using fear for political purposes.
Republicanism: Using fear for political purposes.
Republicans have been trying to terrorize Americans for generations but it’s become particularly nasty these last eight plus years.
Republican leaders understand their base. Studies show that right wingers are more fearful than left wingers. Republican leaders use that fear to control and manipulate their right wing base.
Republican’s try to terrorize Americans in order to increase the power of Republicans.
One of the reasons many right wingers hate left wingers is that left wingers aren’t as cowardly as they are. Right wingers often feel everyone should be as frightened as they are.
Republican’s Core Message: Be Afraid, Be VERY Afraid.
Fear drips from nearly every speech nearly every Republican has ever made.
Hay kids, Wanna Laugh ??
It’s the Howdy Roody Show …
It’s Howdy Roody Time…
It’s Howdy Roody Time…
I know this is really boring and you are skipping to the next comment, but I just wanted to throw you a big thanks – you cleared up some things for me!
We are a group of volunteers and starting a new initiative in a community. Your blog provided us valuable information to work on.You have done a marvellous job!
We just couldnt leave your website before saying that we really enjoyed the quality information you offer to your visitors… Will be back often to check up on new stuff you post!