Supreme Court in 2004 will Expand or Shrink the Power of the President - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 01-28-2004, 05:13 PM   #16
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 04:46 PM
The article I assume you're referring to is the one drawing parallels between this time in American history and the rise of the Nazi regime in Germany. I think this article was let go because it did report facts and was not engaged in name-calling. You're right; it's a very heavy and sensitive term to toss around, which is why we discourage it in FYM. I know that at some point people have been admonished by mods when calling Bush "Hitler" or a "Nazi," but if you really have a problem with the article, I suggest bringing it to Elvis's attention. He will advise the mods about what to do.
__________________

__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
Old 01-28-2004, 05:31 PM   #17
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 03:46 PM
I said my peace in the thread and in here.
__________________

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 01-28-2004, 06:31 PM   #18
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 08:46 PM
When I was born, we were the sole Scotch-Irish family in a Jewish enclave apartment house, an unusual environment for the Bible Belt. Our neighbors were concentration camp survivors from Poland. I can't remember, but my mother says the man used to have blood-curdling nightmares that he was still in the concentration camp and would start screaming. His wife was very strong, the strength in the family. They would later move to New York City so their kids could study to be rabbis at the yeshiva. The lady gave me my first baby present, a blue dress. My parents learned alot from those people. They taught us kids that we are all God's children and we need to respect diversity. I think this is so strong in our culture, even a relatively rigid one like the Deep South, that bad politicians in the White House or whatever can't screw it up. The voters will take care of any shenanigans just like they did after Watergate if God forbid there are any major scandals brewing. In the end the voters won't take getting screwed.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 01-28-2004, 06:48 PM   #19
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 08:46 PM
Melon,

"But there's one problem with this statement: we're not in a time of war. No war has been officially declared by Congress since World War II. Call it whatever you want, but this is not a "time of war." Being in a constant state of siege, like the incorrectly named "Cold War," is not a "time of war." Since you're so good on technicalities like UN Resolution 1441, I'm sure you'll understand the problems in your logic."

The Declaration of War is no longer used(nor will it ever be again), so one cannot claim that a state of war does not exist based on the fact that Congress did not "Declare War".

The Presidents most important responsibility is to ensure the National Security of the country.

"And bringing up the specters of bin Laden and Al-Qaeda? How presidential of you, but undermining our democracy in favor of dictatorial decrees is precisely how I'd imagine they'd vote."

Yep, lets allow terrorist more flexibility to murder thousands of Americans. What a way to uphold American Democracy.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 01-28-2004, 10:58 PM   #20
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 03:46 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
Yep, lets allow terrorist more flexibility to murder thousands of Americans. What a way to uphold American Democracy.
All I know is that you don't uphold democracy by taking it away--precisely what Bush has been doing.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 01-28-2004, 11:07 PM   #21
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 03:46 PM
What a shame it was not voted upon this time. Maybe, just maybe the intelligence would have been looked at more closely. There clearly was not any immediate threat from Iraq. We had time to do what the constitution was designed to do. Now, we have two choices.....A Declaration of War might have made people take things a little more seriously. Maybe I am dreaming though.

A) the President lied....
B) the Intelligence community really failed.

Neither is really promising....both damage us internationally.

The congress is as responsible for this as is the executive branch.
The voters are too if they do not do their jobs.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 01-29-2004, 01:41 AM   #22
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 08:46 PM
Dreadsox,

It was never incumbent upon US intelligence to prove that Saddam had WMD a or c. After the failure of intelligence about what Saddam had or did not have which was discovered following the First Gulf War, the international community made sure that the Verifiable Disarmament by Saddam himself would be the only reliable way, short of his removal to insure the security and stability of the region and for that matter the rest of the world. Verifiable Disarmament required some degree of cooperation from Saddam which he never gave.

Past intelligence estimates said:

Saddam would not invade Iran. He did

Saddam would not invade Kuwait. He did.

Saddam in 1990 was a decade away from a Nuclear
Weapon. He was actually less than a year away.

Once again, this is why the responsibility for verifiable
disarmament came down on Saddam. Past experience had
already shown that Saddam's actions were nearly impossible
predict, and he had been able to conceal his activities.

This is why Saddam's full cooperation with the inspections
process to achieve Verifiable Disarmament was necessary.
But Saddam never did fully cooperate. Considering what
Saddam had already done to the region and the world, this
was simply intolerable.


"What a shame it was not voted upon this time."

The President asked for and received from the US congress,
the authorization to use military force against Iraq. The
support to do so was overwhelming compared to vote in
Congress to remove Iraqi troops from Kuwait a decade earlier.
Every Congressman new this was a vote about sending the
country to war and Congressman from Dick Gepthart to
Edwards and others examined the situation and believed it
was the right thing to do.

The Declaration of War is a relic of the past and will not be
used again. Every Congressman new they were voting to
either go to war or not to go to war, just as they did with
the vote back in 1991.


"There clearly was not any immediate threat from Iraq."

Any time a dictator with Saddam's past behavior and WMD possession, has a military of nearly 400,000 men, much of which were in position less than 100 miles from most of the Planets oil supply, and has failed to verifiably disarm of all WMD, there is always an immediate threat.

Saddam was required to Verifiably Disarm precisely because his possession or potential possession of WMD was seen as an immediate threat to the region and there for the rest of the world.
If this were not the case, there would have been no reason to force Saddam to disarm upon the end of the 1991 Gulf War.


A: Saddam lied and failed to verifiably disarm. While Kay
has yet to find certain stocks of weapons, hundreds of
items have already been found that violate resolution
1441 and the Gulf War Ceacefire.

B: The intelligence community has consistently failed in
many area's in regards to Saddam since 1980. This is
not a surprise but often the nature of intelligence. It is
for this very reason that Saddam was required to
verifiably disarm through an intensive uninterupted
inspections process because of the inability to predict
Saddam's actions as well as the inability to tell what
Saddam had or did not have from the outside.


Nearly every intelligence community from other countries including most former weapons inspectors concluded that Saddam still had WMD. The fact that he had failed to Verifiably disarm and comply with UN resolutions was uncontested.

The administrations overall case is rock solid because at its heart is Saddam's failure to Verifiably Disarm. If there is anything to criticize, it is the failure of this administration and the previous one to move more rapidly on the issue. Saddam had 12 years to meet his responsibilities, far longer than it would take to actually meet them if he had been willing to do so.

The President made his case, and the Congress and people examined and approved it.

What would be damaging internationally would be to have Saddam still in power, not disarmed, coming upon a 13th year of non-compliance. The inability to enforce the UN's most serious resolutions would have damaging effects on the problems of proliferation and rogue states well into the future as well as the obvious implications for security and stability in the vital Persian Gulf Region.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 01-29-2004, 01:47 AM   #23
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 08:46 PM
.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 01-29-2004, 07:13 AM   #24
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 03:46 PM
Anyway...

I really look forward to seeing what this court does. I still have faith given the recent rulings....that they are going to take a few of these cases and rule that the executive branch has indeed exceeded its powers.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 01-29-2004, 10:41 AM   #25
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,675
Local Time: 02:46 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox
Anyway...

I really look forward to seeing what this court does. I still have faith given the recent rulings....that they are going to take a few of these cases and rule that the executive branch has indeed exceeded its powers.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 01-29-2004, 11:48 AM   #26
New Yorker
 
Scarletwine's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Outside it's Amerika
Posts: 2,746
Local Time: 03:46 PM


I hope so also. I think this has really damaged our standing in the international community.

Kay has even stated they found some records of disarmement. Too bad they didn't let the inspectors work longer.
http://hnn.us/articles/3193.html

...
The world simply doesn't trust us any longer – a reversal of goodwill in lightening time – yet Mr. Bush pretends it's only because of some silly difference of opinion over some petty difference about what was real and what was not.

Perhaps if the president engaged the world by at least reading newspapers he could grasp the unpleasant diplomatic consequences of crying wolf. According to a front-page report in the Washington Post last week, foreign policy analysts who had sat in the president's pro-invasion corner are now in anguish over sinking, or rather sunken, U.S. credibility abroad.

Defense Advisory Board member and war hawk Kenneth Adelman, for example, complained “the foreign policy blow-back” from the administration's rhetorical hyperbole “is pretty serious.” He noted the damage done to exercising future, legitimate actions against imminent threats to national security. In effect, the Bush doctrine had one shot at proving itself justifiable, but the postwar absence of damning evidence has only served to shoot down our credibility instead. (For those egg-on-the-face conservatives who now advance the curious defense that the always-wrong Clinton administration also believed in damning evidence, try to remember this much: It didn't slap on six-shooters and go blasting its way into Baghdad, only later to say, “Oops.”)

Richard Haass – Council on Foreign Relations president, former assistant to State Secretary Colin Powell and good Republican – joined Adelman's critical ranks. Not only have U.S. allegations about North Korea 's nuclear capability been thrown into question as a result of the Iraqi WMD fiasco, similar and quite valid allegations against other hostile nations, said Haass, could be dismissed by the international community as so much swashbuckling. The giant gap between Bush's imaginary rhetoric and proven reality has made it “more difficult on some future occasion if the United States argues the intelligence warrants something controversial, like a preventive attack,” Haass concluded.

One can try piercing that argument from many angles, but it would seem impenetrable. Only the most diehard apologist or hyper-hormonal cowboy would argue the administration's overblown warnings about Iraq have not altered and, in fact, further limited U.S. options against real foreign dangers. And therein lies, it seems to me, the irony behind the president's schoolyard taunt that political opponents would seek an international “permission slip” before acting again. Ironic, because that is the one course of action that Mr. Bush, more than anyone else, has helped to establish as the only course.

...
__________________
Scarletwine is offline  
Old 01-29-2004, 06:10 PM   #27
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 08:46 PM
The majority of the intelligence agencies from other countries around the world believed Saddam still had WMD. But the ultimate fact was the Saddam had failed to VERIFIABLY DISARM and that is the Bush administrations central case for war. Can you name a single country before the war that stated or believed that Saddam had reliably complied with any of the 17 UN resolutions passed against him inlcuding those that were dealing with disaramament?

There was only one person required to prove anything and his name was Saddam.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 01-29-2004, 07:14 PM   #28
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 03:46 PM
If you are going to LEAD the charge into another country......
It should be EXPECTED that your Intelligence is correct......

I could care less about what France and Germany had for intelligence. I did not support their governments' position on the war. I supported MY government's position on the war. I now want my government held ACCOUNTABLE for what apparently was not correct.

I for one, cannot support any future action like this until it is CLEARED up.

Now can you all please get back to the topic of this thread...please

I think it is reasonable that if we are spending about 32 Billion a year and they screw up on an issue like this, we should now why. We paid for it.

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 01-29-2004, 07:29 PM   #29
Refugee
 
Danospano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,415
Local Time: 03:46 PM
---I love how most threads get sidetracked into discussions about related, yet tangent subjects. (sigh)

---Concerning the upcoming cases before the Supreme Court I believe that old laws will be respected. Getting a president into office is one thing; giving him unilateral powers concerning illegal detainment is another.
__________________
Danospano is offline  
Old 01-29-2004, 10:11 PM   #30
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 08:46 PM
"I think it is reasonable that if we are spending about 32 Billion a year and they screw up on an issue like this, we should now why. We paid for it."

The fact that Saddam failed to verifiably disarm is not a screw up for American intelligence. The fact that there continues to be all kinds of things that are unaccounted for by Saddam is not a screw up for American Intelligence. Its a Fact!

I think it is important to investigate in order to improve intelligence. What such an investigation should not be used for is as a tool to improve someone's election chances.
__________________

__________________
STING2 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com