Would Democrats have supported extrajudicial killings under Ashcroft?

Jon Stewart skewerd the President on this issue in the " Are You Gonna Take That Sh**" skit. He gave mad props to the President facing pointed campaign questions in his Tuesday press conference, but then asked why the hell they Press weren't asking about this issue.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-march-7-2012/a-view-to-a-grill

I ought to be more outraged but I'm having a hard time worrying about a US Citizen that is clearly expatriated. I would have rather had Seal Team 6 snatch him to make a point but that was probably too high risk for our guys.

 

Rush/Hannity/Beck didn't tell them to be angry back then, so there.

 

The Iraqis refused to give immunity to US troops - that is why we left. You can claim that were 'loopholes' to allow US troops to remain in Iraq, but without the immunity we pretty much had to leave...

 

Hiring mercenaries near a 1:1 replacement ratio is a loophole the size of paris hilton's gaping vjayjay.

 

Those loopholes though were that the US could remain with US troops not subject to Iraqi justice. This was an issue that was brought up by many critics of the withdrawl. Further considering the unequal nature of the power relationship and that the Iraqi government was very dependent on the US for security and operation if the we wanted to stay we certainly could have. The Iraqi military and police didn't have the capability to arrest and try US troops.

The fact is that Obama campaigned on getting out of Iraq and we did. Immunity was certainly a very large issue but if Obama had been determined to keep the US in Iraq he likely could have.

 

Wait....are you saying we could have kept our troops there even though we weren't wanted by them? And to not worry about the fact we didn't have immunity because the Iraqis didn't have the strength or will to arrest US troops?

Obama tried to have the immunity extended and keep US troops there longer. To give Obama credit for ending the war in Iraq is ridiculous...

 

What? That's a stupid thing to say, with all due respect. Very stupid.

 

Bush signed a Status of Forces agreement with Iraq that said that all US troops would leave Iraq by Dec 2011. We left Iraq under that agreement. Obama tried to keep us there longer - the Iraqis said no to giving our troops immunity. So no, it isn't a stupid thing to say...

 

Sure, he signed the Status of Forces Agreement, but the agreement was non-binding. In fact, Obama and the Democrats faced stiff opposition in their decision to withdraw from Iraq following the agreement and his campaign promise. Senator McCain would have had us stay.

GOP slams, Dems praise Obama over Iraq withdrawal

I bet you were thrilled that Obama stood up to hawks in the Republican party, right? You must also be thrilled that Obama won the presidency over McCain, right? So, give credit where credit is due. Obama had us stick to the agreement, where a Republican President would likely not have.

 

The simple fact is that Obama does not want to capture terrorists. He's made anything less than killing them just too problematic. Capturing and then giving them a civilian trial is too much of a pain. Lot easier just to kill them from 10,000 feet - never mind that doing so nets no intelligence.

 

Sorry he presided over the killing of your hero.

 

i know you are just trollin' samuel, but ill play along.

nope. my travel habits are not relevant to the fact that obama's tsa is sexually molesting innocent americans.

its also worth pointing out that you ignored my entire post and are focused on one sentence i made regarding obama's TSA. i guess you have no defense regarding all the other points i made about your precious obama and his piss poor record on civil liberties, huh? face it samuel, your obama has been nothing more than a continuation of many of bush's most egregious programs and in many cases is actually worse.

it absolutely is a "paradigm shift" that impacts my "quality of life". what obama's TSA has done is unprecedented, a violation of everything this country stands for and most importantly, is totally useless - security theater.

yes it is.

so what?

no its not.

no TSA "officer" ever rubbed my ball sack when bush was president.

and im just basically trying to understand why so called liberals and progressives could support a president like obama, who has been far worse than bush when it comes to civil liberties violations and trampling on the constitution.

 

Yeah, the whole immunity thing gave him some type of cover to leave. You realized that he could turned and hammered out a new immunity agreement with Maliki, he choose not to. He even apparently brought the immunity agreement to the Iraqi parliament, further adding support to the idea that Obama did not want the immunity agreement to pass. He effectively choose to leave and the immunity agreement issue was just added talking points to be used against the ongoing argument against the hawks at home to extend the war.

And of course, libertarians criticize him on that and say oh he only left because he couldn't get immunity re-negotiated. While their fellow Republicans criticize for not trying to get the immunity agreement passed. Libertarians need to make up their mind, they are either for a continued occupation in Iraq, or they or not. If they aren't then give credit where credit is due and be thankful McCain wasn't and isn't in office.

 

Since you are just repeating yourself, I'll just repeat myself. Obama left as he had pledged during his campaign. He left Iraq where the Republican candidate would have had us stay. Obama left after he could not extend immunity. You think the story ends there - it doesn't. He deliberately set up immunity talks to fail because he started them very late and he sent the immunity talks to the Iraqi parliament. While the original immunity talks were negotiated only between the Bush Administration and Iraqi prime minister Nuri al-Maliki, Obama chose to forego the Prime-Minister's office and take them straight to the Iraqi parliament making their passage all but impossible. Starting the talks negotiation so late can also be seen as part and parcel of this strategy (or if you prefer it could be seen as incompetence). When they did fail, he didn't really try to re-negotiate because he didn't want to. He could have forced a renegotiation by going through only Maliki and extending some sweet offer that would have allowed for Maliki's enrichment - he didn't.

Republicans were furious...

The administration used the failure of immunity talks as a talking point supporting their on-going fight with Republican hawks at home. For example, your quote:

Obama's communications team is probably thrilled to see that you bought into the immunity talking point. It means it might give him plausible deniability with the American public when he uses it again if Iraq descends into a civil war. You might even start blaming Bush for the pull-out if Iraq goes to ****. But, I doubt it, you'll probably find a way to convince yourself that once again it is Obama's fault.

I personally think that Obama has put himself in a bad position because his decision to not re-negotiate and withdraw will be used against him when Iraq descends into civil war. His motivations in this case were paper then and I think he will find the plausible deniability will not go very far when the media starts to question it. Iraq was screwed from the get-go. We should have never gone.

 

the whole point of this bill is to eventually detain/kill people that still care about the Constitution and protest the govt. in the USA. in the meantime it's a bluff to get them to shut up and stop protesting.

 

Sounds like what is being debated is the central government's ability to use self-defense in the nation's best interest.

 

Not a lie, they tried, just not very hard. It's called spin. I still haven't heard you say thanks to Obama for getting us out of there, while the only other viable candidate, McCain, would have had us stay. You might disagree with him on everything else, but you seem to see eye to eye with his completed campaign promise, to get us out. You might attribute his motivations to something else, but you seem to agree with the result. Unless you never wanted us out of there before until Obama went and did it. So, let's hear it.