I just had a very disturbing thought brought on by the Yemen bombing

[G_j]

IS THIS WHY OBAMA DID NOT WANT BUSH OFFICIALS PROSECUTED, OR EVEN INVESTIGATED FOR CRIMES AGAINST THE PEACE?

[jonnyblitz]

1. that's what i figure. how can they prosecute when they are

engaged in the same behavior? i have thought this for quite some time.

[timeforpeace]

31. I never understood why people demanding this didn't worry about it happening to Obama someday. Now

look, it's almost certain to happen with all his militarism.

[gateley]

2. I am so sad. nt

[malaise]

5. We should all be sad

I hope Obama knows that Rethugs won't think twice about locking him up for the same crime they committed - he will learn.

[G_j]

6. yes, I know Bush never thought twice about claiming criminality of another

while do the very crime himself.

[Posteritatis]

3. No. (nt)

[arcadian]

4. Obama: he's a War President too.

[FrenchieCat]

7. What disturbs you about the Yemen bombing?

That the Yemen government signed a military pact with the U.S. in November of this year,
to go after Al Qaeda...who bombed the USS Cole, as well as attacked the U.S. Embassy in Yemen
last year? Do you like AlQaeda? Do you think you could talk them into not wanting to chop your head off if they captured you?

Are we going crazy here in believing that this President was elected to allow attacks on the United States?

[G_j]

9. same thing that disturbs me about the civilians killed by drones

in Pakistan.

[chandler2]

10. I think al qaeda also set up Tiger's wood and that doctor guy

at Fort Head. Why don't they take OOH SOMA ben larden in and bring him up on charges for masterminding 9/11 and making the U.S.
look stupid for having spent trillions of dollars on a national security and defense system that was as easy to defeat as a
tin horn country in darkest Arfrica.

[ima_sinnic]

11. +1

as long as "al qaeda" exists, the MIC will always have an excuse to go stomping and chopping around the world, beating its chest and blowing things up.

We will NEVER "defeat" "al qaeda," because "we" will never kill the golden goose.

In a decade or two, "al qaeda" will have morphed into some other boogyman, but the principle will be the same.

[chandler2]

15. You are 100% correct, except why can't there be an al qaeda

second in command, Jr. or the #2 al qaeda leader III? That saves having to make up a whole new boogyman and then trying to blame
them for things that our own intelligence services did. Or an intelligence service proxy in Pakistan or _______.

[FrenchieCat]

12. You are being funny, but there is nothing to laugh about.

[NJmaverick]

16. It's beginning to look like Al Qaeda rates better than Obama to many DUers

[G_j]

17. so let me ask,

what would you think if your government invited a foreign military to strike suspected terrorists in America? (and never-mind that a bunch of civilians were killed)


and that is some low shit, trying to cast those who don't agree with the air-strikes as Al Qaeda sympathizers.

I know it happens all the time, but it's still intellectually dishonest.

[NJmaverick]

18. You know what's "low shit" 9/11 and all the Americans killed

if a government invites the US in for an air strike against Al Qaeda I am all for the attack. I know people that lost family members and friends on 9/11 and I was a first responder for 9/11. So it was more than just a TV show to me.

[G_j]

19. you didn't answer the question

no, 9/11 was not a legitimate answer. :eyes:

I'm originally a NYer, it's not a TV show for me either,
Thank you for what you do as a first responder, I greatly respect that.

I don't love Al Qaeda, I believe that civilized nations must respect certain principals of international behavior.
There are ways to do things, and ways not to.

[NJmaverick]

20. You got the answer I am going to give, because I am not playing your framing games

The US stuck to international law, and no amount of anti-Obama sentiment can change that fact

[G_j]

22. ok

whatever

[Arctic Dave]

21. We have to kill their innocent people because they killed ours?

Who would you like to see killed by Iraqis when they take revenge? Think about it a while and get back to me.

[NJmaverick]

23. The innocent people killed claims come from unreliable sources

and so your point is not a valid one (at least until it can be confirmed)

[G_j]

25. there have been scores of confirmed civilian deaths

from US drone attacks in Pakistan, it's called collateral damage and it's quite common you know.

[Arctic Dave]

26. This not the drone attack on al qeada, pick anyone were only the bad guy died

I would love to see the missile that was invented that only kills bad people.

[Agony]

30. They are suspects. Blow 'em up first, let god sort 'em out later.

18th Dec NY Times http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/19/world/middleeast/19yemen.html

"WASHINGTON — The United States provided firepower, intelligence and other support to the government of Yemen as it carried out raids this week to strike at SUSPECTED hide-outs of Al Qaeda within its borders, according to officials familiar with the operations."

-emphasis mine-

[moodforaday]

29. First, the onlyway you know

it was "Al Qaeda" in Yemen is because MSM told you so. You believed Bush too?

Second, the only thing that happened was that the Yemeni government (who are Sunnis, and pals with the Saudis) has used US forces to settle a bloody score with internal rebels in the country, who are Shia and so *by definiton* not Al Qaeda.

Third, it's horrifying to see DUers cheer when people are being killed without a shred of public evidence that they did anything wrong. The only "evidence" has been to call the attacked "Al Qaeda". Is this really good enough?

[G_j]

32. thank you

[EmeraldCityGrl]

27. There will always be "evil doers" in the world.

There will always be a reason to invest our blood and treasure into the MIC.

If the US weren't into nation building, positioning itself as the world's cops,
invading and bombing sovereign nations with little regard for collateral damage
we would not be the target of every madman in the world.

We've chopped off our share of heads only the history books don't teach that.

I guess Obama is bound and determined to prove his military skill after all
that deep thought he put himself through.

[Jamastiene]

28. What exactly were those 28 children planning to attack?

Obama's candy store?

[jillan]

8. I was thinking they did it now while everyone is focused on healthcare.

Maybe they really think that no one is paying attention :eyes:

[IndianaGreen]

13. Obama is pursuing a neocon policy in Latin America

by this time next year, we will up to our necks in new wars.

[G_j]

14. yep, just take Columbia for example,

our military has expanded access there.
Hillary struck an agreement.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

24. "Smoke 'em out" and "Bring it on" isn't just for Republicans any more.

Not that it ever was.