U
RobDownSouth
Oh Look....
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2002
- Posts
- 75,201
Saxby Chambliss dodged the draft. Not surprisingly, Vetty looks up to him.
IrezumiKiss
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2007
- Posts
- 73,868
May 23, 2013
Obama's speech
An excellent presentation, beginning with an excellent, opening volley against the neoconservative wet dream of perpetual war, since even the limited ones have historically "compromised our basic values."
Obama is trying to get out of a foreign-policy box built for him by the George W. Bush administration's ideological propagandists and perpetuated by Republicans' military muscularism. Wars, though strike-up-the-band glorious for some of the political class, simply cannot last forever. And this one--the so-called war on terror--is long overdue for retirement. That Obama chose to announce said retirement four months after his second inauguration shows the lingering political power of neocon ideology and the president's better-protected eagerness to forcefully confront it.
One phrase deployed by Obama really struck home. In America's continuing battle against terrorists, there is "no moral safe harbor." Not, anyway, for a president, this one or the next. Virtually every counterterrorism path that a president pursues is a trade-off--a little security here for a piece of your liberty there; 10 innocents killed in exchange for a thousand later saved--and it's just so damn refreshing to hear a president admit it rather than suppress it through a fog of uberheroic, hyperpatriotic neocon bullshit. Wars do compromise our values; we eventually become what we hate; and President Obama appeared to be running the clock back. He knows where this is headed, and it ain't good.
In the service of that knowledge he announced more "targeted" counterterrorism efforts and "heavily constrained" drone strikes overseas, while here at home he has asked his attorney general to "review" the Justice department's reckless expansion of its investigative practices into security leaks. That the latter issue has become a weirdly balanced and therefore exceptionally dangerous one, Obama seemed to appreciate. The leakers--not the press--are the problem here; so work the problem, not the irritant. That, anyway, appears to be Obama's new instructions to Justice.
On Gitmo, well, what can one say about Gitmo, other than that it's an impossible problem exacerbated by impossible congressmen. But, finally, although he didn't use the phrase, it sure was good to hear him refer once again to the benefits of "soft power" over hard; to note, in so many words, that one freshly built school in Afghanistan is worth two brigades of firepower.
A really excellent speech.
http://pmcarpenter.blogs.com/p_m_carpenters_commentary/2013/05/obamas-speech.html
Obama's speech
An excellent presentation, beginning with an excellent, opening volley against the neoconservative wet dream of perpetual war, since even the limited ones have historically "compromised our basic values."
Obama is trying to get out of a foreign-policy box built for him by the George W. Bush administration's ideological propagandists and perpetuated by Republicans' military muscularism. Wars, though strike-up-the-band glorious for some of the political class, simply cannot last forever. And this one--the so-called war on terror--is long overdue for retirement. That Obama chose to announce said retirement four months after his second inauguration shows the lingering political power of neocon ideology and the president's better-protected eagerness to forcefully confront it.
One phrase deployed by Obama really struck home. In America's continuing battle against terrorists, there is "no moral safe harbor." Not, anyway, for a president, this one or the next. Virtually every counterterrorism path that a president pursues is a trade-off--a little security here for a piece of your liberty there; 10 innocents killed in exchange for a thousand later saved--and it's just so damn refreshing to hear a president admit it rather than suppress it through a fog of uberheroic, hyperpatriotic neocon bullshit. Wars do compromise our values; we eventually become what we hate; and President Obama appeared to be running the clock back. He knows where this is headed, and it ain't good.
In the service of that knowledge he announced more "targeted" counterterrorism efforts and "heavily constrained" drone strikes overseas, while here at home he has asked his attorney general to "review" the Justice department's reckless expansion of its investigative practices into security leaks. That the latter issue has become a weirdly balanced and therefore exceptionally dangerous one, Obama seemed to appreciate. The leakers--not the press--are the problem here; so work the problem, not the irritant. That, anyway, appears to be Obama's new instructions to Justice.
On Gitmo, well, what can one say about Gitmo, other than that it's an impossible problem exacerbated by impossible congressmen. But, finally, although he didn't use the phrase, it sure was good to hear him refer once again to the benefits of "soft power" over hard; to note, in so many words, that one freshly built school in Afghanistan is worth two brigades of firepower.
A really excellent speech.
http://pmcarpenter.blogs.com/p_m_carpenters_commentary/2013/05/obamas-speech.html
Busybody
We are ALL BUSYBODY!
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2011
- Posts
- 55,323
Obama: Muslims In America Have “Consistently Rejected Terrorism”…
CAIR begs to differ.
Transcript of Obama’s Speech on Drone Policy:
“As I said earlier, this threat is not new. But technology and the Internet increase its frequency and lethality. Today, a person can consume hateful propaganda, commit themselves to a violent agenda, and learn how to kill without leaving their home. To address this threat, two years ago my Administration did a comprehensive review, and engaged with law enforcement. The best way to prevent violent extremism is to work with the Muslim American community – which has consistently rejected terrorism – to identify signs of radicalization, and partner with law enforcement when an individual is drifting towards violence. And these partnerships can only work when we recognize that Muslims are a fundamental part of the American family. Indeed, the success of American Muslims, and our determination to guard against any encroachments on their civil liberties, is the ultimate rebuke to those who say we are at war with Islam.”
CAIR begs to differ.
Transcript of Obama’s Speech on Drone Policy:
“As I said earlier, this threat is not new. But technology and the Internet increase its frequency and lethality. Today, a person can consume hateful propaganda, commit themselves to a violent agenda, and learn how to kill without leaving their home. To address this threat, two years ago my Administration did a comprehensive review, and engaged with law enforcement. The best way to prevent violent extremism is to work with the Muslim American community – which has consistently rejected terrorism – to identify signs of radicalization, and partner with law enforcement when an individual is drifting towards violence. And these partnerships can only work when we recognize that Muslims are a fundamental part of the American family. Indeed, the success of American Muslims, and our determination to guard against any encroachments on their civil liberties, is the ultimate rebuke to those who say we are at war with Islam.”
U
unregistered
Guest
landslider2000
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2005
- Posts
- 2,545
Is the country more secure? 12 million illegals wander the land, Ft Hood, Boston...
And equating waterboarding 3 terrorists with banning torture = semantic gymnastics.
And equating waterboarding 3 terrorists with banning torture = semantic gymnastics.
IrezumiKiss
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2007
- Posts
- 73,868
U
unregistered
Guest
J
JAMESBJOHNSON
Guest
It's amazing how I can assemble the Terror Defense League so quickly:
Plenty of them dream of being one of the virgins awaiting the martyrs in paradise. Especially Rob.
RobDownSouth
Oh Look....
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2002
- Posts
- 75,201
It's amazing how I can assemble the Terror Defense League so quickly:
Saying anyone who disagreed with you was "supporting terra" lost it's effectiveness back in the Sarah Palin era.
RobDownSouth
Oh Look....
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2002
- Posts
- 75,201
Once again, I'll ask you to leave me out of your homoerotic fantasies. I don't swing that way, Gaylord.
phrodeau
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2002
- Posts
- 78,588
Yeah, so is his sympathy for the Christian world and the Jewish world.Obama's nostalgia for, his sympathy for the Islamic world, is peeking out all over the place.
He should just force everyone to be atheists.
Yeah, but then we'd be at war with the otters over what to call ourselves . . .
doctor_insanus
Splendid Isolation
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2001
- Posts
- 10,904
He also smeared a triple amputee and war hero with some of the most disgusting political ads ever conceived. He's a piece of shit, and the world will be better off when he's rotting in a hole.
LiFeNdEaTh
The Usual.
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2010
- Posts
- 21,307
Yemen, it's a good map on Blackops2.
Busybody
We are ALL BUSYBODY!
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2011
- Posts
- 55,323
who was that?
Drunk CLUMSLY CLELAND?
not surprised you LOVE him
he is handless legless headless and cluless, LIKE YOU
Busybody
We are ALL BUSYBODY!
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2011
- Posts
- 55,323
NY Times Buries UK Islamic Terror Attack Story On Page A7, Omits “Swear by the Almighty Allah”…
How does the NYT’s justify putting what is front page news in just about every newspaper on page A7?
Via Newsbusters:
While the Washington Post and Wall Street Journal this morning gave front-page coverage to yesterday’s grisly beheading of a British serviceman on a London street in broad daylight, the New York Times placed their 20-paragraph story by London correspondent John F. Burns on page A7. Editors slapped on the headline, “‘Barbaric’ Attack in London Renews Fears of Terror Threat,” with “barbaric” in scare quotes.
While the Post, Journal, and Times all ran quotes from one of the attackers as transcribed from a cell phone video filmed by a bystander, the Times curiously left out a portion of the rant where the attacker boasted, “We swear by the almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you until you leave us alone.”
How does the NYT’s justify putting what is front page news in just about every newspaper on page A7?
Via Newsbusters:
While the Washington Post and Wall Street Journal this morning gave front-page coverage to yesterday’s grisly beheading of a British serviceman on a London street in broad daylight, the New York Times placed their 20-paragraph story by London correspondent John F. Burns on page A7. Editors slapped on the headline, “‘Barbaric’ Attack in London Renews Fears of Terror Threat,” with “barbaric” in scare quotes.
While the Post, Journal, and Times all ran quotes from one of the attackers as transcribed from a cell phone video filmed by a bystander, the Times curiously left out a portion of the rant where the attacker boasted, “We swear by the almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you until you leave us alone.”
M
miles
Guest
He doesn't want to make the people mad who have sworn to slaughter us.
RobDownSouth
Oh Look....
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2002
- Posts
- 75,201
Chambliss characterized the speech as as "surrender".
Vettebigot was all too happy to paraphrase Chambliss, because it gave him plausible deniability when then the shit hit the fan, and avoiding personal responsibility is Vetty's prime directive: "I never said that! I never commented on that! I was merely passing it along!"
Simper fi, Vetty!
4est_4est_Gump
Run Forrest! RUN!
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2011
- Posts
- 89,007
Matt Welch, Reason.com [Libertarian]
Similar threads
