Author Topic: Where is the Outrage Over Obama's Stikes on Pakistan? (Read 2609 times)

asdf2231 · « **on:** January 24, 2009, 01:48:59 PM »

Quote

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8136518

tekisui (1000+ posts) Sat Jan-24-09 10:24 AM
Original message
Where is the Outrage Over Obama's Stikes on Pakistan?
Advertisements [?]When chimpy did this, it was roundly slammed. There is no authorization of war from Congress in Pakistan. Why are we suddenly defending missile strikes within the border of a sovereign nation that has not attacked us? When did this become something we cheerlead?

It was wrong when chimpy did it. It is wrong when Obama does it.

Here are some reactions to chimpy's actions. Compare how DUers felt then to the reactions Yesterday:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Quote

liberalmuse (1000+ posts) Sat Jan-24-09 10:28 AM
Response to Original message
1. I'm not happy about it.
I don't know. I was sad when I heard that. Then again, I do not know what President Obama was told, and I highly doubt he would allow them without good cause. I just don't know.

Quote

tekisui (1000+ posts) Sat Jan-24-09 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. It is ironic that no one defended the actions when chimpy did it.
But, now, many are defending Obama's approval of it, or at least accepting it.

Quote

Bonobo (1000+ posts) Sat Jan-24-09 10:33 AM
Response to Reply #3
7. No. it is entirely understandable.
Obama has our trust. Bush did not.

It is THAT simple.

I trust that Obama has sound judgment and knows more about what is happening on the ground than you or I.

Quote

Bonobo (1000+ posts) Sat Jan-24-09 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #9
14. Be more specific.
What if, just imagine for a second here, what if they were really "bad guys" and we knew it. What if we knew they were our true enemies?

Would it then have been justified?

For all we know, he just saved lives...

I don't ****ing know. I am generally against this kind of shit, but that is in large part because I have never trusted a leader as I do Obama.

At some point, we have to admit that we don't have a command of what is happening and must rely on the judgment of our leaders, whom we trust, and whom have a larger picture of what is going on.

Just my opinion.

Quote

alcibiades_mystery (1000+ posts) Sat Jan-24-09 10:34 AM
Response to Reply #3
10. That's your premise
I think it is incorrect.

I think probably many people here tacitly support these strikes when they are properly targeted at militants, especially given the way Pakistan has given the wink and nod to groups who are obviously involved in the further destabilization of Afghanistan. It's not a simple issue, and I think the positions here are likely complex, and certainly more complex than your premise accounts for.

Quote

Phx_Dem (1000+ posts) Sat Jan-24-09 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #3
37. Bush only started doing this in August, after Obama stated
he would do it. Obama was criticized by Dems for his statement, but guess what. It worked. Bush's strikes killed several Al Queada(?) terrorists, and now Obama's have killed several more. I didn't criticize Bush for doing it and I won't criticize Obama. I think it's the right thing to do if they have "actionable intelligence."

Quote

babylonsister (1000+ posts) Sat Jan-24-09 10:31 AM
Response to Original message
5. Do you think President Obama authorized these strikes?
He's been kind of busy, so I do wonder.

Quote

Skinner ADMIN (1000+ posts) Sat Jan-24-09 10:34 AM
Response to Reply #5
11. I sure hope he did.
If the US Military is making military strikes in a foreign country without getting authorization from the president, that would be a real problem.

Quote

underpants (1000+ posts) Sat Jan-24-09 10:37 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. The most likely scenarios here are
Of course they consulted him. He okays it and then they can show the world that the NEW GUY is listening to them and willing to throw a punch. Pentagon also gets to float the "Did he know?" meme and Obama goes along with it allowing them clout.

This apparently is normal SOP-about 30 such strikes last year alone.

Quote

TayTay (1000+ posts) Sat Jan-24-09 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #16
51. It is possible these were planned before 1/20/09
But it is difficult to believe that Pres. Obama did not authorize these strikes. He is the Commander in Chief now and should have oversight on this.

The decision may well be a sort of legacy from the Bush Admin. The personnel from planning at Defense and the Pentagon may have advanced this and come up with the plans under the Bush Admin, but Pres Obama has the power to veto these if he wants.

This is his strike, though, as with the Bay of Pigs under JFK, it may be a legacy plan. (Or not. I don't know the details.)

But Bush waa responsible for policies he inherated? Riiight...

Quote

Liberal_Stalwart71 (1000+ posts) Sat Jan-24-09 10:50 AM
Response to Original message
27. Don't understand why you are upset. Chimpy is allowing Pakistan get away with harboring
al-Qaeda. The government knows where Osama bin Laden and members of the resurgent Taliban are. Biden has been right all along. The problem is Pakistan, along the border of Afghanistan where Osama is believed to be. I don't have any problem with the strikes. I want Osama and those that harbor him brought to justice. And I'm saying this as a peace-loving liberal.

Quote

bvar22 (1000+ posts) Sat Jan-24-09 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #29
65. They "may" hit some bad people.
These strikes will certainly KILL and MAIM innocent civilians, you know "collateral damage".

Quote

Phx_Dem (1000+ posts) Sat Jan-24-09 11:38 AM
Response to Original message
35. Why would there be an outrage? He stated quite clearly during
the campaign (in the debates) he would do this. If I get actionable intelligence, I will strike at terrorist targets in the mountain of Pakistan. (paraphrased). This is not a surprise.

God forbid we kill terrorists. I strongly support these actions.

Quote

tekisui (1000+ posts) Sat Jan-24-09 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #35
36. These actions are against the wishes of the Pakistani government
and kill innocent people. I know Obama planned to do things like this, it does not make it right.

Quote

Demi_Babe (1000+ posts) Sat Jan-24-09 12:07 PM
Response to Original message
40. Obama = TRUST Bush = NO TRUST period!

USA4ME · « **Reply #1 on:** January 24, 2009, 01:58:18 PM »

It's now fashionable to kill brown people since the DUmmies can trust in their cult leader, B. Hussein.

.

ScubaGuy · « **Reply #2 on:** January 24, 2009, 02:20:37 PM »

Quote

LittleBlue (790 posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sat Jan-24-09 01:53 PM
Response to Original message
69. If civilians were killed, I say prosecute for war crimes

Edited on Sat Jan-24-09 01:54 PM by LittleBlue
If he knew about it, and if he authorized it, then treat him the same as Chimpy.

I'm tired of civilian casualties, and I'm tired of the "progressives" who would rationalize those casualties. Civilian casualties are not excusable under any circumstances. The life of a Pakistani is worth the same as an American life; if the military had killed an American, heads would roll.

Little Blue looking for granite.

Quote

MadBadger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sat Jan-24-09 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #69
70. Let me get this straight...you are all for prosecuting Obama for war crimes now?

OMFG.

Isn't this the same thing you want to prosecute Bush for?

Quote

Pavulon (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list     Sat Jan-24-09 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #73
76. Please..

this is a war, not even a big one. Civilians will die, that is part of war. The last time we played war for real we burned tokyo down and killed 300 - 500 people a SECOND for 8 hours. That is still debated on criminality.

The President will authorize strikes where innocent people die, or will delegate the power to make that call. That is not a crime, that is called war. It is what it is.

So now it's OK since B. Hussein is in charge.

Quote

LittleBlue (790 posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sat Jan-24-09 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #76
77. Wait a sec... but we were so ready to send Bush to the Hague

for killing civilians. We made whole threads about it!

What happened?

I can hear the chisel on the granite now.

Traveshamockery · « **Reply #3 on:** January 24, 2009, 02:26:23 PM »

The rationalizing that the dummies do just shows their level of intelligence = zero.

Flame · « **Reply #4 on:** January 24, 2009, 02:41:13 PM »

That thread is next is listed as the definition of HYPOCRACY in the dictionary. What a bunch of tools.

DixieBelle · « **Reply #5 on:** January 24, 2009, 02:44:35 PM »

Obama has been president (in the know) for a nanosecond. Bush was president for almost a decade and oversaw our defense after the largest terror attack on U.S. soil. Now, which man should be trusted??

FFS!!

Carl · « **Reply #6 on:** January 24, 2009, 03:13:18 PM »

Lets see...on Monday those in uniform gathering the intelligence and risking their lives to rid the world of terrorists could be pissed on and swore at.
Now they are trusted.

DUmmies.

I don`t care who is President or what letter is after their name I want them finding terrorists and killing them.

jukin · « **Reply #7 on:** January 24, 2009, 03:46:57 PM »

Scratch a DUmbass, find a hypocrite.

JohnnyReb · « **Reply #8 on:** January 24, 2009, 06:39:19 PM »

Liberal DUmmies.....changing the rules in the middle of the game again.

Wonder if they're going to stop keeping score now....(Military dead)?

Think I'll just ask the world to forgive us....use the phrases "He's not my president" and "Not in my name". ....or how about, "Im ashamed to be an American".....and least I forget, we can all gather down by the river and sing that old black spiritual, "Gawd Dam America".

Wretched Excess · « **Reply #9 on:** January 24, 2009, 06:48:48 PM »

interesting that trust isn't based on actions in the land of DU . . . . I wonder what it is based on?

BEG · « **Reply #10 on:** January 24, 2009, 09:54:44 PM »

Quote from: Wretched Excess on January 24, 2009, 06:48:48 PM

interesting that trust isn't based on actions in the land of DU . . . . I wonder what it is based on?

The letter D.

Airwolf · « **Reply #11 on:** January 25, 2009, 12:09:25 AM »

Wow .Just ****in wow.This must mean they are all for the GWOT right?

Wretched Excess · « **Reply #12 on:** January 25, 2009, 12:39:37 AM »

Quote from: Airwolf on January 25, 2009, 12:09:25 AM

Wow .Just ****in wow.This must mean they are all for the GWOT right?

you would thiink so, wouldn't you?

SSG Snuggle Bunny · « **Reply #13 on:** January 25, 2009, 07:43:17 AM »

Quote

Pavulon (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sat Jan-24-09 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #73
76. Please..

this is a war, not even a big one. Civilians will die, that is part of war. The last time we played war for real we burned tokyo down and killed 300 - 500 people a SECOND for 8 hours. That is still debated on criminality...

Yeah, but that was a ~~socialist~~ democrat president who ordered those so that too is OK.

FlaGator · « **Reply #14 on:** January 25, 2009, 07:50:46 AM »

I don't think the DUer's realize this, but every military action that Obama authorizes that happens to reflect a Bush policy only validates Bush's actions. The don't trust Bush meme will only go so far.

SSG Snuggle Bunny · « **Reply #15 on:** January 25, 2009, 08:14:07 AM »

Quote from: FlaGator on January 25, 2009, 07:50:46 AM

I don't think the DUer's realize this, but every military action that Obama authorizes that happens to reflect a Bush policy only validates Bush's actions. The don't trust Bush meme will only go so far.

Liberal opposition to the GWoT was based on a false, circular premise and this thread only verfies that fact.

Bush is a war criminal!

How do you know?

Because he is an evil man!

How do you know he's an evil man?

Because he's a war criminal!

But how do you know he's a war criminal?

Because he's an evil man!

And so on.

For any theory to be valid it has to be falsifiable so let's examine the inverse:

The strikes are legit!

How do you know?

Because Obama is a trustworthy man!

How do you know he's trustworthy?

Because the strikes were legit!

ad infinitum, ad absurdum, ad nauseam

NHSparky · « **Reply #16 on:** January 25, 2009, 08:22:16 AM »

Quote from: Mr Snuggle Bunny on January 25, 2009, 07:43:17 AM

Yeah, but that was a ~~socialist~~ democrat president who ordered those so that too is OK.

Also, do the math.

Quote

Pavulon (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sat Jan-24-09 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #73
76. Please..

this is a war, not even a big one. Civilians will die, that is part of war. The last time we played war for real we burned tokyo down and killed 300 - 500 people a SECOND for 8 hours. That is still debated on criminality.

The President will authorize strikes where innocent people die, or will delegate the power to make that call. That is not a crime, that is called war. It is what it is.

500/second X 3600 seconds/hour X 8 hours = 14,400,000.

The official death toll was 83,000. Hey, only off by a factor of 20.

DUmmies lie. All the time, DUmmies lie.

SSG Snuggle Bunny · « **Reply #17 on:** January 25, 2009, 08:28:47 AM »

Quote from: NHSparky on January 25, 2009, 08:22:16 AM

Also, do the math.

500/second X 3600 seconds/hour X 8 hours = 14,400,000.

The official death toll was 83,000. Hey, only off by a factor of 20.

DUmmies lie. All the time, DUmmies lie.

Liberals make public education, public education makes liberals.

JohnnyReb · « **Reply #18 on:** January 25, 2009, 08:56:16 AM »

Quote from: NHSparky on January 25, 2009, 08:22:16 AM

Also, do the math.

500/second X 3600 seconds/hour X 8 hours = 14,400,000.

The official death toll was 83,000. Hey, only off by a factor of 20.

DUmmies lie. All the time, DUmmies lie.

DUmmie Math 444 - it's the new math.

BlueStateSaint · « **Reply #19 on:** January 25, 2009, 09:48:12 AM »

Quote from: FlaGator on January 25, 2009, 07:50:46 AM

I don't think the DUer's realize this, but every military action that Obama authorizes that happens to reflect a Bush policy only validates Bush's actions. The don't trust Bush meme will only go so far.

Dead on the target. H5. Thing is, they're too stupid--willfully so--to realize this.

Rebel · « **Reply #20 on:** January 25, 2009, 12:32:55 PM »

Quote

Bonobo (1000+ posts) Sat Jan-24-09 10:33 AM
Response to Reply #3
7. No. it is entirely understandable.
Obama has our trust. Bush did not.

It is THAT simple.

I trust that Obama has sound judgment and knows more about what is happening on the ground than you or I.

Liberalism in a nut shell. A lot of despots came to power this way.

Chris_ · « **Reply #21 on:** January 25, 2009, 12:44:57 PM »

I'm sorry, when was it that Bush, evil as he is, bombed an ally?

JohnnyReb · « **Reply #22 on:** January 25, 2009, 01:11:42 PM »

Quote from: Big Don on January 25, 2009, 12:44:57 PM

I'm sorry, when was it that Bush, evil as he is, bombed an ally?

The horrors....the huge manatee's....how many drunks were killed?

crockspot · « **Reply #23 on:** January 25, 2009, 04:07:02 PM »

Quote from: FlaGator on January 25, 2009, 07:50:46 AM

I don't think the DUer's realize this, but every military action that Obama authorizes that happens to reflect a Bush policy only validates Bush's actions. The don't trust Bush meme will only go so far.

It's plainly in front of their noses, and some almost, but don't quite make the leap of logic, that perhaps The Chimperor actually did know more than they knew, and was saving lives by killing terrorists.

crockspot · « **Reply #24 on:** January 25, 2009, 04:10:43 PM »

Quote

Pavulon (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sat Jan-24-09 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #73
76. Please..

this is a war, not even a big one. Civilians will die, that is part of war. The last time we played war for real we burned tokyo down and killed 300 - 500 people a SECOND for 8 hours. That is still debated on criminality.

The President will authorize strikes where innocent people die, or will delegate the power to make that call. That is not a crime, that is called war. It is what it is.

So much for the Bush War Criminal meme.... or.. maybe..... Obama bin War Criminal!!!!!!!11111elevenone

News:

Author Topic: Where is the Outrage Over Obama's Stikes on Pakistan? (Read 2609 times)