User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 44

  1. #11
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,255

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beorn View Post
    Drones aren't protecting us from massive amounts of PTSD. It's massive land wars and nation building that are so costly in terms of money, fatalities, injuries and PTSD. We could restrict Drones to REAL imminent threats and situations where the intel is much better and makes clear there aren't innocent civilians around. Anywhere there are children we should be sending in special ops that can use some discernment. This would also have the plus of bringing more people in who surrender and can offer intel (provided we don't torture them). This is something Obama is clearly not doing given his child death count.
    I can agree with a lot of this (it's ideal at least), other than whatever this criteria is for "REAL" that you have. You haven't made it clear what it is, or where the white house has less access to "real" information than yourself. Apparently, military and intel are all operating on Obama's "wisdom and ethics" to locate imminent threats, and the burden is on everyone else except yourself to explain themselves.

  2. #12
    LL P. Stewie Beorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    5,127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    his administration is one of the only in my living memory that has not embarked upon any fresh wars or interventions or maintained and escalated existing ones, including the Clinton administration.
    He provided key air support in overthrowing Libya. He's helping to cement the new leadership in Egypt with f16s tanks and guns and has been secretly running guns to Syrian rebels. His withdrawal from Afghanistan has been very slow and he's left a small military city in Iraq.

    No he hasn't started two land wars like W, but that's not much to brag about.
    "You know, with Hitler, the more I learn about that guy, the more I don't care for him."
    Norm MacDonald

  3. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    23,481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beorn View Post
    He provided key air support in overthrowing Libya. He's helping to cement the new leadership in Egypt with f16s tanks and guns and has been secretly running guns to Syrian rebels. His withdrawal from Afghanistan has been very slow and he's left a small military city in Iraq.

    No he hasn't started two land wars like W, but that's not much to brag about.
    That's still less than Clinton did would you believe?

    I think there's a lot of these sorts of on going campaigning events which are not exactly executive led, at least not administrations which change every couple of years, deep state is behind it but its good to see that who is in office may have some influence.
    All for ourselves, and nothing for other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind.
    Chapter IV, p. 448. - Adam Smith, Book 3, The Wealth of Nations

    whether or not you credit psychoanalysis itself, the fact remains that we all must, to the greatest extent possible, understand one another's minds as our own; the very survival of humanity has always depended on it. - Open Culture

  4. #14
    LL P. Stewie Beorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    5,127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KDude View Post
    I can agree with a lot of this (it's ideal at least), other than whatever this criteria is for "REAL" that you have. You haven't made it clear what it is, or where the white house has less access to "real" information than yourself. Apparently, military and intel are all operating on Obama's "wisdom and ethics" to locate imminent threats, and the burden is on everyone else except yourself to explain themselves.
    I don't understand what you're saying. You're putting together the legal justification with intelligence gathering in a way I don't understand.

    Imminent means they have the capacity, means, and intention to perform an attack on the US or US citizens within a short time. I would define a short time as a period of time where other options are not available. If they have a bomb, plane, and a plan to attack the next day then they definitely have the capacity, means, and intention of performing a terrorist attack. Imminent does not mean not imminent.

    I don't understand why you keep bringing up "wisdom and ethics." That's what Carney said yesterday when the white paper came out indicating that unethical and unwise attacks were legally justified. His explanation was basically don't worry about what we view as a legally justifiable attack because Obama always uses wisdom and ethics when making these decisions.

    Obama doesn't have to reveal intelligence to justify each every attack right away. But, if his view of the law is that he is justified in violating human rights in a significant way then we have a serious problem.
    "You know, with Hitler, the more I learn about that guy, the more I don't care for him."
    Norm MacDonald

  5. #15
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,255

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    That's still less than Clinton did would you believe?

    I think there's a lot of these sorts of on going campaigning events which are not exactly executive led, at least not administrations which change every couple of years, deep state is behind it but its good to see that who is in office may have some influence.
    The president is commander in chief, and does have the final say in giving the green light... but there is a lot of deliberation and analysis going on. And each advisor to the president has 10 advisors of their own. And those in turn deal with dozens of operatives and tons of intelligence (the "staffs" part of "chief of staffs"). Each of these leaders (Secretary of Defense, NSA, military branches, etc) are all confirmed by the Senate, which isn't necessarily beholden to the President. Beorn seems to think we live in cartoon fantasy land, where Obama is some dictator in a banana republic. And apparently, he has a bigger handle on "REAL" imminent threats.

  6. #16
    LL P. Stewie Beorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    5,127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    That's still less than Clinton did would you believe?
    Well, he hasn't had to take people's attention away from a stained dress by bombing a country.

    Another reason to be thankful for his fidelity to Michelle.
    "You know, with Hitler, the more I learn about that guy, the more I don't care for him."
    Norm MacDonald

  7. #17
    LL P. Stewie Beorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    5,127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KDude View Post
    The president is commander in chief, and does have the final say in giving the green light... but there is a lot of deliberation and analysis going on. And each advisor to the president has 10 advisors of their own. And those in turn deal with dozens of operatives and tons of intelligence (the "staffs" part of "chief of staffs"). Each of these leaders (Secretary of Defense, NSA, military branches, etc) are all confirmed by the Senate, which isn't necessarily beholden to the President. Beorn seems to think we live in cartoon fantasy land, where Obama is some dictator in a banana republic.
    He's responsible for his administration and their respect for human rights.
    "You know, with Hitler, the more I learn about that guy, the more I don't care for him."
    Norm MacDonald

  8. #18
    LL P. Stewie Beorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    5,127

    Default

    I'm going to ask a mod to split some of this off into my new white paper thread.
    "You know, with Hitler, the more I learn about that guy, the more I don't care for him."
    Norm MacDonald

  9. #19
    LL P. Stewie Beorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    5,127

    Default

    Actually, on second thought I'm not going to ask for a thread split. Just post in the new thread on the white paper if you want to continue that discussion.

    http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...ad.php?t=60920
    "You know, with Hitler, the more I learn about that guy, the more I don't care for him."
    Norm MacDonald

  10. #20
    Sweet Ocean Cloud SD45T-2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    1w2 so/sp
    Posts
    2,834

    Default

    He sounds similar to me, which I like.
    1w2-6w5-3w2 so/sp

    "I took one those personality tests. It came back negative." - Dan Mintz

Similar Threads

  1. Who Is The More EVIL: Rand, or Kant?
    By Mal12345 in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 08-08-2012, 10:14 PM
  2. [NT] What Strategy Would Win Ron Paul the Republican Nomination/Presidency
    By Vizconde in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 01-18-2012, 03:28 AM
  3. Ayn Rand: The Ultimate INTJ
    By Into It in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 05-20-2011, 09:44 PM
  4. Rand Paul: How much of my foot can I fit into my mouth at one time.
    By kendoiwan in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 06-09-2010, 09:21 PM
  5. [INTJ] The Fountainhead/Atlas Shrugged/Ayn Rand's Objectivism and INTJ's
    By Harlow_Jem in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 07-03-2008, 01:06 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO