AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > General > General Chat

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2012-01-11, 15:54   Link #1841
Vexx
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Targus View Post
My point is that Obama has a history of going back on his word. He says one thing but does what he said he wouldn't do, and here he said he would never throw someone in jail without a trial. Not like anyone who follows him will be any different.
Well... I suspect he would have line item vetoed it if he'd had the option. This is just another reason why "omnibus" bills are utter bullshit. And yeah, I consider the "defense appropriation bill" to be an omnibus of hundreds of things that should be handled separately.

I also note with amusement that he said "this administration" ... kicking the constitutional football down the road where we'll spend a lot of money and court time wastefully having to put that military option down.
Vexx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-01-11, 16:05   Link #1842
Targus
The Happy Camper
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Avatar by GenjiChan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vexx View Post
Well... I suspect he would have line item vetoed it if he'd had the option. This is just another reason why "omnibus" bills are utter bullshit. And yeah, I consider the "defense appropriation bill" to be an omnibus of hundreds of things that should be handled separately.
Leave it to Obama to make the US another version of Stalin's USSR, I say.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vexx View Post
I also note with amusement that he said "this administration" ... kicking the constitutional football down the road where we'll spend a lot of money and court time wastefully having to put that military option down.
Hence I said it's not like anyone who follows him will be any different. But the whole thing goes against the constitution and I don't think the military should stand for this.
Targus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-01-11, 16:16   Link #1843
Ithekro
Warning
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 37
Well there is fighting the fight, and their is wasting money and time. If you know a veto is pointless, you usually don't do it unless it is critical for your department (such as Nixon's veto of the War Powers Resolution in 1973)

But there are still clear lines of the seperation of power as to what each group does.
It would be the courts the decide what is and what is not Constitutional. But it is the military's job to follow the Constitution if given illegal orders. However it is only considered illegal if it mean arresting an American Citizen. And if I read the provision correctly...US Citizens are exempt from it. Meaning they still cannot hold a US Citizen without charge. now if it says the President (and only the President) can order a US Citizen to be held without charge. Well that is up to the courts to decide.
__________________
Dessler Soto, Banzai! Signature by ganbaru
Rena's Saimoe Take Home List 2014: Dairenji Suzuka.Misawa Maho.

Last edited by Ithekro; 2012-01-11 at 16:48.
Ithekro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-01-11, 17:28   Link #1844
Ledgem
Love Yourself
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Northeast USA
Age: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Targus View Post
My point is that Obama has a history of going back on his word. He says one thing but does what he said he wouldn't do, and here he said he would never throw someone in jail without a trial. Not like anyone who follows him will be any different.
Not unlike any other politician. I trust Obama because the things he has pushed for are largely in line with his promises. The government hasn't done some of the things that he promised (and it has done some things that he promised it wouldn't), but he's not the king. In fact, it isn't even his job to create new legislation. That's the job of Congress, and they have all sorts of sneaky tactics to force issues into bills. Who added that national security garbage to the NDAA? That person (or people) deserve the blame.

You say that Obama should have vetoed it on principle, but that would have created a host of problems (not to mention that it would have been political suicide). I don't mean to be an Obama apologist, but I think he gets a lot of criticism and undeserved blame that should really go to some nefarious congresspeople who largely keep out of the public's eye.
__________________
Ledgem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-01-11, 17:41   Link #1845
Vexx
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Targus View Post
Leave it to Obama to make the US another version of Stalin's USSR, I say.
Why don't you just invoke Hitler while you're at it? :P Bad discussion move and insta-fail in debate/discussion ...

The area where this detention note is really problematic is that it violates *human rights* to due process ... all that humanitarian stuff the US pretends to like. The US is sailing merrily into a "one set of rules for us and another for everyone else" that corrodes the idea of rule-of-law on the international level. Bush, Jr. and Cheney really took this ball rolling with their short-sighted policies that, for example, ruined our high road in terms of treatment of captured soldiers (since they took the inane step of treating terrorist groups like soldiers instead of criminals).

Yes, I'm pissed at Obama for not closing the damned Guantanamo the first year he was in office...
Vexx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-01-11, 17:47   Link #1846
Targus
The Happy Camper
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Avatar by GenjiChan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vexx View Post
Why don't you just invoke Hitler while you're at it? :P Bad discussion move...
Why? It's the truth. The bill gives Obama and any president that follows to take anyone suspected of terrorism without trial and hold them until the end of the "war on terror" which could go on for who knows how long. Stalin did a similar thing when he had his agents abduct innocents and throw them in labor camps. When having that in mind, the two are comparable.
Targus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-01-11, 17:53   Link #1847
Vexx
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Targus View Post
Why? It's the truth. The bill gives Obama and any president that follows to take anyone suspected of terrorism without trial and hold them until the end of the "war on terror" which could go on for who knows how long. Stalin did a similar thing when he had his agents abduct innocents and throw them in labor camps. When having that in mind, the two are comparable.
So.... the theoretical potential of throwing a few people in detention versus the slaughter of millions of people and the enslavement of millions more is "comparable". Sorry if anyone fails to take you seriously after that one... welcome to the forums and check the rules
Vexx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-01-11, 17:53   Link #1848
Anh_Minh
I disagree with you all.
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Targus View Post
Why? It's the truth. The bill gives Obama and any president that follows to take anyone suspected of terrorism without trial and hold them until the end of the "war on terror" which could go on for who knows how long. Stalin did a similar thing when he had his agents abduct innocents and throw them in labor camps. When having that in mind, the two are comparable.
Except Obama's short a few million dead and a bid to stay in power indefinitely.
Anh_Minh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-01-11, 17:56   Link #1849
Ithekro
Warning
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 37
I would note that the military does not want that power.
__________________
Dessler Soto, Banzai! Signature by ganbaru
Rena's Saimoe Take Home List 2014: Dairenji Suzuka.Misawa Maho.
Ithekro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-01-11, 18:39   Link #1850
monir
cho~ kakkoii
*Moderator
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: 3rd Planet
Here is the bit about the Detention which may include an US Citizen:
AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF
THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS
PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY
FORCE.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Congress affirms that the authority of the
President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to
the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40;
50 U.S.C. 1541 note) includes the authority for the Armed Forces
of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection
(b)) pending disposition under the law of war.
The definition of Covered Persons as follows:
(b) COVERED PERSONS.—A covered person under this section
is any person as follows:
(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided
the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001,
or harbored those responsible for those attacks.
(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported
al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged
in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners,
including any person who has committed a belligerent act or
has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy
forces.
This is the most up to date NDAA bill that I can find in PDF format. The above is listed in Section 1021, under Counterterrorism.

P.S. Please avoid sweeping generalization when possible, especially in the gathering of people who can actually think for themselves. Thank you all for maintaining composure.
__________________
Eat and sleep! And Solace. Sig by RRW.
Space Brothers Executive member of the ASS. Ready to flee at the first sign of trouble.
monir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-01-11, 19:46   Link #1851
Ithekro
Warning
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 37
I counter with this section (red being the important part...to me. Also known as Sec.1022(b))

Quote:
SEC. 1022. MILITARY CUSTODY FOR FOREIGN AL-QAEDA TERRORISTS.

(a) CUSTODY PENDING DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in paragraph (4), the Armed Forces of the United States shall hold a person described in paragraph (2) who is captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40) in military custody pending disposition under the law of war.


(2) COVERED PERSONS.—The requirement in paragraph (1) shall apply to any person whose detention is authorized undersection 1021 who is determined—


(A) to be a member of, or part of, al-Qaeda or an associated force that acts in coordination with or pursuant to the direction of al-Qaeda; and
(B) to have participated in the course of planning or carrying out an attack or attempted attack against the United States or its coalition partners.


(3) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR.—For purposes of this subsection, the disposition of a person under the law of war has the meaning given in section 1021(c), except that no transfer otherwise described in paragraph (4) of that section shall be made unless consistent with the requirements of section 1028.


(4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY.—The President may waive the requirement of paragraph (1) if the President submits to Congress a certification in writing that such a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States.



(b) APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS AND LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—


(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend
to citizens of the United States.


(2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.
Note that this Act will take effect 60 days after it is enacted. So when was it enacted?
__________________
Dessler Soto, Banzai! Signature by ganbaru
Rena's Saimoe Take Home List 2014: Dairenji Suzuka.Misawa Maho.

Last edited by Ithekro; 2012-01-11 at 19:59. Reason: Lots of formating to make it look nice and not take up the entire screen
Ithekro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-01-11, 20:42   Link #1852
DonQuigleone
Knight Errant
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Age: 26
I think the main reason that Obama hasn't shut down Guantanamo is that he's been unable to find a reasonable way to deal with the people still interned there.

Congress has barred him from releasing those labelled by the military as "low risk", and as for those who are likely terrorists, congress has barred him from trying them in US civilian courts.

Frankly, I don't see what would be so wrong with that.

Blame Congress, not Obama. If you can blame Obama for anything, blame him for being unable to bring Congress over to his line of thinking.

If you want to see Obama try to achieve what he promised, give the democrats(and also Obama's faction within it) control over Senate and Congress. If, after that, we see nothing, we'll know he's a liar. Until then...
DonQuigleone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-01-11, 20:48   Link #1853
monir
cho~ kakkoii
*Moderator
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: 3rd Planet
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonQuigleone View Post
If you want to see Obama try to achieve what he promised, give the democrats(and also Obama's faction within it) control over Senate and Congress. If, after that, we see nothing, we'll know he's a liar. Until then...
To be fair, he DID have both the Senate and the Congress to work with for almost two years when they were under Democrats control.
__________________
Eat and sleep! And Solace. Sig by RRW.
Space Brothers Executive member of the ASS. Ready to flee at the first sign of trouble.
monir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-01-11, 20:57   Link #1854
SaintessHeart
Ehh? EEEEHHHHHH?
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Age: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by monir View Post
To be fair, he DID have both the Senate and the Congress to work with for almost two years when they were under Democrats control.
Not quite enough when GOP elements do their best to filibuster every plan he tries to pass.
__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.
SaintessHeart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-01-11, 21:00   Link #1855
Vexx
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 57
However, the completely extra-constitutional (tradition and etiquette) rules of the Senate have blocked the President in dozens of ways from fixing things. Single senators putting holds on appointments or blocking bills, etc.

So, like Don says .... follow the mess to Congress and then by extension follow the money
Vexx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-01-11, 21:34   Link #1856
DonQuigleone
Knight Errant
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Age: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintessHeart View Post
Not quite enough when GOP elements do their best to filibuster every plan he tries to pass.
The Democratic Party also deserves a little blame here, they didn't exactly do a very good job of using and holding onto their majority. If they had played their cards right they could have had a good 4-6 years of democratic domination of politics, reversing the Conservative gains made over the prior 10 years. Instead, they squandered it by not holding onto their base.

Though, perhaps it was simply a bad move to take power just after a the financial crisis, maybe they should have let the republicans win, and let them take all the blame. That probably would have destroyed the Republican party for good.
DonQuigleone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-01-11, 21:39   Link #1857
Ithekro
Warning
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 37
There would not be just a Single Party in the aftermath though, since I doubt people would just let the Democrats run the place alone.
__________________
Dessler Soto, Banzai! Signature by ganbaru
Rena's Saimoe Take Home List 2014: Dairenji Suzuka.Misawa Maho.
Ithekro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-01-11, 21:55   Link #1858
Vexx
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ithekro View Post
There would not be just a Single Party in the aftermath though, since I doubt people would just let the Democrats run the place alone.
I suspect given the rightward corporate trend of the DNC over the last 20 years that the progressives would more likely spin off as a second party. The whole political spectrum of the two parties have spun so far right since the 70s that I consider the Dems pretty close to where the GOP was in the 70s. Not in the "social conservative" context though... soc-cons are just off in the their own vector.
Vexx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-01-11, 22:37   Link #1859
Ithekro
Warning
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 37
I wonder what the nationalist bent will be. Pently of Conservatives think the country is failing fast due to internationalism, that there is no sense on what an American is anymore. That unconstitutional act they tried to get through in Oklahoma might be just one reaction to that trend. (the one about banning court use of international laws and religious laws that got 70% approval, but shot down due to the First Amendment)
__________________
Dessler Soto, Banzai! Signature by ganbaru
Rena's Saimoe Take Home List 2014: Dairenji Suzuka.Misawa Maho.
Ithekro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-01-11, 22:43   Link #1860
solomon
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Suburban DC
What's American is relative to the time period and who's in power.

That's a bit of a nutshell and we do have certain commonalities across groups and time periods.

But I'll smack down anyone who tries to get all BNP or Front National while bathed in Stars and Stripes window dressing. No fucking way.

anyways, the NDAA is a non stater cause none of the media has really bothered to talk about it with caucus fever running high (wake me when they nominate someone).
solomon is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
2012 elections, us elections

Thread Tools

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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 22:55.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.