It's time America released Bradley Manning and admitted to their war crimes.

"We've" meant DPers, not you personally however

Gaddafi died, Romney was chosen candidate, Obama won the presidency... these are just a few 'prophecies' that come to mind.

 

You do know what the word "Analysis" means, right?

Bush, you are a nice enough guy, but I honestly don't waste too much time arguing with you because you make me feel bad when you surrender the argument, acknowledging the fact you are sometimes described as "a nutter".

Browntwn summed up the Manning exposed "warcrimes" issue for you well, and you should read it again. Even if the helicopter video did expose a war crime, and it doesnt, it would not make the US culpable of "warcrimes". Shit happens in a warzone. Other than the video, Manning mostly just aired a bunch of confidential correspondence.

 

It's called debate imho, something sadly lacking here atm while only right-wingers remain. You need opposing sides.

What is it you feel that the Geneva Convention is wrong about?

 

Article 12 deals with Prisoners of War. That hardly seems applicable to the situation you describe. Without even reading the section you probably mean I can assume that it would include something about intent. So, for instance a civilian killed by accident would not constitute a war crime. Anyway, figure out which provision of the Geneva convention you really think was violated and then I take you more seriously.

I am hardly right wing. I am a social liberal, a military conservative, and a fiscal moderate ... probably like the vast majority of Americans.

 

Nobody gets booted from DP for expressing leftwing views, they're booted for duplicate IDs, scamming, ignoring guidelines.

That *should* tell you something about the honesty of those no longer able to speak here.

 

The only lefty banned is gworld and I don't think dupes was the reason. I think it's more they got bored of the place. Not enough kerfuffle here as there used to be. There's an incredible shortage of radicals atm. God bless Bradley Manning.

 

Drama for the sake of drama? Go outside. Plant something. Ride a bike. Bother your neighbors.

 

Gworld's been banned for a host of reasons, at least once or twice for dup IDs that I recall. Many of our most verbal US haters have been banned for dups, spamming and scamming, and in one case, death threats via rep. Never have suspected you of any of the above, but they don't make very auspicious company. If everyone that agreed with me was banned for dishonest practices I'd be tempted to rethink my position. Your mileage may vary.

 

Surely you know by now my self-assigned task is bringing some action here when required.

At times I use DP for business. There's no way I would deliberately get myself banned. Last time I got banned (for writing a 3 word post) I was in the middle of transactions, one fell over because I couldn't get to PMs. Though I didn't think I deserved a ban for it, I learned a lesson about being a bit more careful on what I wrote. I haven't even had an infraction for years.

You picked my first reason for starting this thread, boredom, as well as just read a news snippet that made me angry at the dickheads in the US who wouldn't know a hero if he saved their own kids. I truly believe whoever leaked those documents should be hailed a hero for showing the truth. We are all being lied to. When it comes to spending OPM then they need to be upfront and honest about where its going. When it comes to war in my name then I want the truth about what they're doing, not some made up fantasy to garner my support.

I understand how many enemies we create by fighting and the risk warmongers are putting onto ourselves. That's why we should never lose sight that truth, honesty are integral components when fighting on the side of righteous. Get rid of honesty and we might as well be living under the Taliban.

 

I thought you liked Obama. You do realize Bush is no longer in charge, and this is Obama's administration running the show, right?

 

I've never claimed to like Obama. I have said only that he was a better choice than Romney for leader of the free world. I stand by that.

I agreed with gworld's assessment that it doesn't matter who wins as they'll be led by the system anyway. I believe the military is in charge, albeit surrepticiously.

With the military running things God help the world if another Republican was put in charge.

 

Under Obama we've spent more money by a longshot in 4 yrs of Afghanistan than during BOTH Bush terms, and lost about twice as many men as we lost under Bush. Maybe having a leader that listens to his general staff wasnt such a bad idea.

Like Hitler, Obama thinks he is so bright he shouldn't need to follow the recommendations of the puny soldier types. How he could both waste more money and more lives does suggest who is at the top makes a difference.

 

Obama set an end date for which he was pilloried. It seems nobody wanted the Taliban to know how long they need to stay low.

Loved the Hitler reference! With a Republican in the White house you'd have storm-troopers taking out Americans on American soil by now (probably sold as "the war on climate"). They're easier to stooge into creating new wars.

 

And as the date approaches our losses increase. Now even the ones being trained by our troops are killing our troops. Obama might want to listen to his generals occasionally.

I gather you arent familiar with the executive orders Obamas posted (usually on a Friday afternoon to catch a slow news cycle) setting us up for martial law in peacetime. Or the NDAA he signed that allows for indefinite detention of citizens without due process, or the fact that we now have drones in our own airspace and MRAPs being deployed on our soil, or that innocuous extensions of executive branch are arming with military grade weapons. These are all verifiable facts. Please dont tell me about Republicans when Dear Leader is in the process of going all Mussolini on the place.

 

To be fair there's plenty of reason for an increasing death count, war fatigue being just one of them.

I am familiar with some of those actions however I think that provides you with more proof that the military is really running things. I would agree Obama can bring more attention to this if he wanted. Maybe that's still to come, however, once we allow lying into the system then any scenario is possible.

It would be interesting to read who voted for what. Most anti-people, pro-corporate and especially pro-military spending things end up being a majority Republican vote when you get to the gritty of it. I'm not trying to be partisan on that statement.

 

Nobody votes on an executive order. Obama owns those lock stock and barrel.

The areas of the civilian government that are being militarized are under the executive branch; the IRS, the Ag Dept, the Dept of Energy, etc. The executive branch is, again, under OBAMA.

As for laws, we have a Democratic senate majority, so blaming laws that pass on Republicans is impossible. They HAVE to have democrats to pass anything. On the NDAA I hold BOTH parties responsible, and that's why I like the Tea Party cause they do the same. My politics are libertarian, I vote Republican generally cause they are closer to my positions than the democrats 9 of 10 times, but I never hold the GOP universally blameless (surprise).

 

The descriptions of current events and recent history from the "hate Obama" crowd simply defies common sense, reading the news, watching tv news, and experiencing life.
Its no wonder that despite the craziness of the political claims of the last 4 years, Obama won the election, the GOP totally shocked themselves, and the American public simply didn't buy this nuttiness.

One shouldn't forget.

1.The war in afghanistan was begun by Bush (for good reasons).
2 he trounced the taliban might quickly
3. He had bin laden trapped and surrounded in the mountains and let him get away.
4. Bush pretty much put this war on the back burner and added a totally bullshit war in Iraq.
5. As a result he understaffed the military in Afghanistan, and after routing the taliban, he basically allowed them to regain strength and recreate this long aghanistan war.
6. Bush totally showed the US that we don't have enough soldiers for 2 ground wars...even relatively small ones.
7. He so fucked up Iraq that he virtually lost the unlosable war, necessitating a high risk maneuver bringing in troops we essentially didn't have, changing our interactions with shiites to effect a change in Iraq that it didn't become the bloody daily disaster you have in Syria right now.
8. Of course in doing all that he deeply understaffed Afghanistan.

9. Now afghanistan is a big mess, no doubt. but the nuttiness of somehow criticizing Obama for this incredible huge mess left by Bush is simply the height of Tea Party hatred and fantasy.

I truly hope they ban tea partiers from writing history books. it would be criminal.......to truth.

 

Maybe we can just set up camps, round them all up and put them there.

 

I agree. I also think Manning was a very troubled guy that should have failed the qualification for his security clearance. I think that whomever approved Manning's clearance should also be charged, suitability be damned.

Well, IMO, from what I remember the 3rd Iraq War was run perfectly, it was the peace that got messed up. What went wrong was when the U.S. Governor of Iraq L. Paul Bremer disbanded the Iraqi army without any authorization whatsoever. That put 250,000 armed men out on the streets of Iraq looking for a living. Added to that 250,000 was the Iranian militants that streamed in from the border like rats running to cheese.

It was a war that needed to be fought. Did anyone else notice that when Iraq fell, the monthly worldwide civilian terror attacks stopped?

 

Seems its the done thing these days. Probably a great place to start (this is sarcasm too).