The true (in a sense) cost of military spending and what else it could have bought

Oh please... those who wage war against us are enemy combatants, dumbass. Just because that's been used in the past to describe members of armed forces of nations we're at war with and Al-Qaeda is not a nation, it doesn't negate the FACT that Al-Qaeda is at war with us and al-Awlaki was an active member (until he got what he deserved). So you can play your word games if it makes you happy but the terrorist scum in Al-Qaeda are enemy combatants and thus military targets.
Quote from DAS Trader:

Oh dear I see you are confused again...I never asked for proof Awlaki was an enemy combatant..that's a label applied by Obama. I asked for proof he was waging war against the United States and that his actions were worthy of a death sentence. No evidence has been presented to any court to that effect. Does it exist? Maybe, I don't know. We've simply gone on the word of the Executive. That, by the way, is a complete subversion of the rule of law and the document you say you swore to support and defend against all enemies foreign and domestic.

For the final time, I care nothing for Awlaki....but this precedent, if allowed to stand, will eventually be turned against protesters or those critical of the government. Is that really the kind of country you want to live in? Not me.
More...
 
Quote from Trader666:

Oh please... those who wage war against us are enemy combatants, dumbass. Just because that's been used in the past to describe members of armed forces of nations we're at war with and Al-Qaeda is not a nation, it doesn't negate the FACT that Al-Qaeda is at war with us and al-Awlaki was an active member (until he got what he deserved). So you can play your word games if it makes you happy but the terrorist scum in Al-Qaeda are enemy combatants and thus military targets.
More...

Oh please?

From Article 3 Section 3 of the Document you say you swore to support and defend:

Clause 1. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

Sounds like Awlaki right? But wait, there's more:

No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

Now, what part of this is unclear to you or the President? Did this occur? Was this requirement satisfied? There is no record of it occurring. If it occurred in secret a reference could be made to redacted documents so as to better ensure national security. Therefore, there is absolutely no reason to have gone this route save one...to establish the precedent for the future.

As I've stated time and time again, I do not care about Awlaki. My concern is this being used against protesters or others who criticize the government and seek to reform it. You are truly being intellectually dishonest by not acknowledging this very real and alarming possibility.
 
Quote from Crispy:

Off topic??? -

So am I correct in that DAS, RCG and Petsamo are all former Marines?


As am I...
:D

Funny.
More...

Sup Devil Dog! RCG is Army and Petsamo is having trouble remembering key details. I am not convinced he is Marine at this point but the jury is still out. As an example he referred to his boot camp platoon as "class of 82". Weird right?

I looked up the platoon he says he graduated with (3048 MCRD San Diego) and it graduated two years before he said he did. Weird right?

He also said "he believed" he graduated in August... maybe it's just me but Boot Camp made quite an indelible impression. I will never forget that I arrived in Parris Island in August of 1990 and graduated in November 1990. More weirdness.

Here is a pic of Platoon 3048 which graduated in August of 1980, not 1982.

http://www.yellowfootprints.com/yearbook/showphoto.php?photo=12282

It's almost like someone is feeding him details. He capitalized Marine. Good. He knew going to San Diego meant you were a "Hollywood Marine". Good. But the rest strains credibility. I'll still give him the benefit of the doubt but I am very skeptical right now.
 
And had he been arrested in the States, he should have been tried for treason accordingly. But since he was out in the field, actively helping Al-Qaeda wage war against us, he made himself a military target and got exactly what he deserved.
Quote from DAS Trader:

Oh please?

From Article 3 Section 3 of the Document you say you swore to support and defend:

Clause 1. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

Sounds like Awlaki right? But wait, there's more:

No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

Now, what part of this is unclear to you or the President? Did this occur? Was this requirement satisfied? There is no record of it occurring. If it occurred in secret a reference could be made to redacted documents so as to better ensure national security. Therefore, there is absolutely no reason to have gone this route save one...to establish the precedent for the future.

As I've stated time and time again, I do not care about Awlaki. My concern is this being used against protesters or others who criticize the government and seek to reform it. You are truly being intellectually dishonest by not acknowledging this very real and alarming possibility.
More...
 
Quote from Trader666:

And had he been arrested in the States, he should have been tried for treason accordingly. But since he was out in the field, actively helping Al-Qaeda wage war against us, he made himself a military target and got exactly what he deserved.
More...

Where's the evidence he was actively helping? What exactly did the helping consist of? And most importantly, why wasn't it presented to a judge? Let me ask that most important question again.....WHY WASN'T IT PRESENTED TO A JUDGE? He did not have to be there to present the evidence to a judge. Why was this step omitted? I think I've already answered this but if you have a better answer I'd love to hear it.

Maybe he did get what he deserved, but for the President of the United States to circumvent the courts in this matter is a gross violation of the Constitution. That should give you pause. If it doesn't, then you don't understand the Constitution.
 
Quote from Crispy:
So am I correct in that DAS, RCG and Petsamo are all former Marines?


As am I...
:D

Funny.
More...
DAS Trader reminds me of some screwed up Marines, people I want to have nothing to do with. If this country goes into civil war, DAS Trader and I will be in opposing sides.

Break

I'm not disclosing anymore details about me. I like my freedom of speech.
 
Evidence? Do you think Al-Qaeda framed him in a sinister conspiracy with Barack Hussein Obama? Thanks for again proving my point that you insist on evidence for an admitted terrorist and key member of Al-Qaeda, but not for your phony accusations against an American combat veteran.
Quote from DAS Trader:

Where's the evidence he was actively helping? What exactly did the helping consist of? And most importantly, why wasn't it presented to a judge? Let me ask that most important question again.....WHY WASN'T IT PRESENTED TO A JUDGE? He did not have to be there to present the evidence to a judge. Why was this step omitted? I think I've already answered this but if you have a better answer I'd love to hear it.

Maybe he did get what he deserved, but for the President of the United States to circumvent the courts in this matter is a gross violation of the Constitution. That should give you pause. If it doesn't, then you don't understand the Constitution.
More...
 
Quote from Petsamo:

DASTrader reminds me of some screwed up Marines, people I want to have nothing to do with.

Break

I'm not disclosing anymore details about me. I like my freedom of speech.
More...

Then you are full of shit kid. You were all too happy to provide details, even details I didn't ask for. Once I found the cracks in your story you pull back? I can now safely say you are not a Marine. Have a nice day.
 
Quote from Trader666:

Evidence? Do you think Al-Qaeda framed him in a sinister conspiracy with Barack Hussein Obama? Thanks for again proving my point that you insist on evidence for an admitted terrorist and key member of Al-Qaeda, but not for your phony accusations against an American combat veteran.
More...

It's called the rule of law you nimrod. Learn it. Know it. Understand it. The President does not have the Constitutional authority to simply murder a citizen, no matter what that citizen is accused of. Remember innocent until PROVEN guilty? His guilt was never proven. That's about as cut and dry as I can make it for you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top