Last Year President Obama Reportedly Told His Aides That He's 'Really Good At Killing People'

[GandD 5,966]

Both sides should sign a treaty saying they will stop killing innocent people.

[Janelle2002 3,865]

Well,

Since he says he likes killing and he is killing Muslims, people can quit the ####### about he is a Muslim all the time. Then again, everyone will start the Muslims like killing Muslims thing.

[JohnR! 5,495]

Everyone on this site that I saw said no to Syria. Some of them even part of the antiwar crowd. Remember?

Shirley, you jest...

[james&olya 1,121]

Well,

Since he says he likes killing and he is killing Muslims, people can quit the ####### about he is a Muslim all the time. Then again, everyone will start the Muslims like killing Muslims thing.

When did he say he likes killing? You make a groundless assumption that you know how he stated that he was good at killing. War is hell. War involves the deaths of people, combatants and non-combatants alike in almost all wars in history. My guess is that, if he actually made that statement, that he said it in an ironic and regretful way. But I wasn't there so I don't really know.

A bigger issue for me is this whole concept of a "war on terror"! War IS terror. It is inherently an illogical construct and can be construed to give the war-mongers in Washington free reign to take action wherever they wish. This should be addressed by congress and a more specific definition of who, if anybody, we are at war with, be established. Then all other uses of drones to kill in foreign lands will be far less justifiable. Instead our idiot congress, led by that rabble-rousing tea party dimwit Cruz, tries instead to shut down our government to prevent fellow citizens from getting health insurance. There are real issues begging for congressional attention and honest, public debate, and this is one of them.

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

When did he say he likes killing? You make a groundless assumption that you know how he stated that he was good at killing. War is hell. War involves the deaths of people, combatants and non-combatants alike in almost all wars in history. My guess is that, if he actually made that statement, that he said it in an ironic and regretful way. But I wasn't there so I don't really know.

A bigger issue for me is this whole concept of a "war on terror"! War IS terror. It is inherently an illogical construct and can be construed to give the war-mongers in Washington free reign to take action wherever they wish. This should be addressed by congress and a more specific definition of who, if anybody, we are at war with, be established. Then all other uses of drones to kill in foreign lands will be far less justifiable. Instead our idiot congress, led by that rabble-rousing tea party dimwit Cruz, tries instead to shut down our government to prevent fellow citizens from getting health insurance. There are real issues begging for congressional attention and honest, public debate, and this is one of them.

I might be wrong, but knowing Janelle, she is being sarcastic.

[Janelle2002 3,865]

I might be wrong, but knowing Janelle, she is being sarcastic.

[james&olya 1,121]

I might be wrong, but knowing Janelle, she is being sarcastic.

Glad to know we are on the same side!

[Janelle2002 3,865]

Glad to know we are on the same side!

Hello James&Olya

Welcome to the controversial side of VJ. Hope you will be staying with us.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

Both sides should sign a treaty saying they will stop killing innocent people.

I was like #######?

Then I saw it was you...

Real liberals brains work like that

[Sarah Elle-Même 660]

Both sides should sign a treaty saying they will stop killing innocent people.

Humor doesn't change the fact that what I said is fundamentally true.

The war on terror is a self-fulfilling prophesy. Attacking the idea of drones alone while ignoring the greater issue of waging perpetual war is moronic and unhelpful. Drones, however, do make "war" in countries where we are not at war easier, so they are a dangerous means to NO end. But so are night raids and proxy wars.

American has been doing the same damn thing since the beginning of the Cold War - being world police - only the technology has improved.

Edited November 7, 2013 by Sarah and Adnan

[Karee 4,190]

Humor doesn't change the fact that what I said is fundamentally true.

The war on terror is a self-fulfilling prophesy. Attacking the idea of drones alone while ignoring the greater issue of waging perpetual war is moronic and unhelpful. Drones, however, do make "war" in countries where we are not at war easier, so they are a dangerous means to NO end. But so are night raids and proxy wars.

American has been doing the same damn thing since the beginning of the Cold War - being world police - only the technology has improved.

Ohh you were being serious? My bad. I thought it was an attempt at humour. Please understand that the drone strikes will more than likely stop when the terrorists stop sending underwear bombers, suicide bombers, etc. etc. to attack innocent people in the U.S. Also, when they stop sending people from the tribal areas of Pakistan to kill U.S. troop in Afghanistan. That or the governments where they operate can deal with them internally. Surely you're not suggesting that Yemen or Afghanistan have anything near a functioning govt. that can handle this internally, are you?

You act as if the U.S. govt. is singling out innocent Muslims and simply executing them. I doubt that's the case. I'm 100% sure that innocent people are being killed, but that's collateral damage. It happens. I'd argue the collateral damage is far smaller using drones then it would be if they used manned aircraft or simply just started carpet bombing a la Vietnam.

IMO the drone program has been one of the great successes of the Obama administration and I support it 100%.

ETA: There's a very big distinction between the two sides. One side INTENTIONALLY targets innocent civilians. The other does not. I'll let you figure which one is which.

Edited November 7, 2013 by Karee

[Sarah Elle-Même 660]

Ohh you were being serious? My bad. I thought it was an attempt at humour. Please understand that the drone strikes will more than likely stop when the terrorists stop sending underwear bombers, suicide bombers, etc. etc. to attack innocent people in the U.S. Also, when they stop sending people from the tribal areas of Pakistan to kill U.S. troop in Afghanistan. That or the governments where they operate can deal with them internally. Surely you're not suggesting that Yemen or Afghanistan have anything near a functioning govt. that can handle this internally, are you?

Anyone who thinks we'll be able to "Drone them all" until they stop sending underwear bombers are living in a fantasy land. Or smoking something mighty gnarly.

Yemen does put terrorists on trial and executes them. Much more swiftly than our justice system does. They have been less able to do so since the "Arab Spring" and government upheaval. What Yemenis know to be true is that the number of terrorists operating in the south and northern tribal areas has increased exponentially since cruise missiles and drone strikes became routine. Even the capital city is overrun with them, which was never the case before. They kill Yemeni military leaders and soldiers by motorcycle drive-by or IEDs every single day. Are they the expected "collateral damage" too?

[Karee 4,190]

What Yemenis know to be true is that the number of terrorists operating in the south and northern tribal areas has increased exponentially since cruise missiles and drone strikes became routine. Even the capital city is overrun with them, which was never the case before. They kill Yemeni military leaders and soldiers by motorcycle drive-by or IEDs every single day. Are they the expected "collateral damage" too?

So the claim you're making is that terrorism has increased exponentially due to the drone strikes?

What is the best way to "bring these folks to justice?" in your opinion? Should we just hope the local authorities can deal with it?

[Karee 4,190]

Perhaps we should try this:

Paper birds dropped on restive provinces : Gesture of peace to south Thailand By Nick Cumming-Bruce Published: Monday, December 6, 2004

• Twitter
• Linkedin
• Sign In to E-Mail
• Print
• Share

BANGKOK: — Military aircraft gently bombed southern Thailand with 100 million paper birds Sunday in a gesture intended to promote peace in mainly Muslim provinces where more than 500 people have died this year in attacks by separatist militants and countermeasures by security forces.

Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra mobilized a fleet of some 50 military aircraft, from giant C-130 Hercules to helicopters, to drop the origami birds over the provinces of Pattani, Narathiwat and Yala, which have been worst hit by violence. Thaksin had called on Thais to fold a bird for each of the country's 63 million citizens, but ended up with far more as people enthusiastically took up the idea.

The operation to unload them, starting at what was deemed to be the auspicious hour of 9:09 a.m. and continuing throughout the afternoon, was timed to coincide with the birthday of Thailand's revered monarch, King Bhumibol Adulyadej, who had advised Thaksin in November to adopt a softer approach to dealing with the south.

"I've seen four aircraft. Many hundreds of birds are dropping," a villager in Yala reported as aircraft crossed his district. "People are very pleased, many people are out to pick up the birds, children are very much enjoying it."

Large crowds turned out in towns and villages across the south, some people armed with baskets to collect the birds, which local authorities in some areas have offered to exchange for rice and other food. One paper crane, signed by Thaksin, reportedly carried the offer of a scholarship or a job to whoever found it.

Skepticism, however, was mixed with the excitement.

"Birds are not enough," said Abdul Rahman Abdul Samad, chairman of the Narathiwat Islamic Council. "These birds do not mean anything to Muslims." He said what was needed was a government apology for the deaths in October of 78 Muslims who died in military custody after they were arrested for taking part in a demonstration, and for measures to take care of the victims' families.

Most of the men died of suffocation. Thaksin expressed regret for the deaths, but he said no one was to blame and he refused to apologize. A total of 1,300 people were arrested during the demonstration.

Violence in the southern provinces bordering Malaysia escalated sharply at the start of the year, when gunmen raided a military camp, killing four soldiers and seizing some 400 automatic weapons.

Political analysts in the region said Thaksin's origami initiative at least showed he was not focused exclusively on force to deal with the problems in the south, but they are still waiting for the government to set out a package of substantive measures for calming the region.

The level of violence has dropped in the last two to three weeks, but the killing of a Buddhist schoolteacher on Thursday provided a brutal reminder of the deep-rooted tensions in the area.

Source:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/06/news/06iht-t3_30.html?_r=0