Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

Pbs: Nova - rise of drones


  • Please log in to reply
66 replies to this topic

#31 thrustbucket

thrustbucket

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 06 February 2013 - 01:51 AM

And that's why when someone calls Obama a socialist or the MOST LIBERAL PRESIDENT EVAR1!!11!1, you know they're full of shit.


Since when does socialism or liberalism get confused with pacifism?

#32 dohdough

dohdough

    Sum Dum Guy

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 06 February 2013 - 02:33 AM

Since when does socialism or liberalism get confused with pacifism?

Thanks for proving my point and I know what you're getting at. According to your "logic," the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is a democratic republic run by the people of Korea.

McCarthy is dead and the Red Scare is over. Deal with it.8-)

#33 joeboosauce

joeboosauce

    Snarf! Get in the...

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 06 February 2013 - 02:58 AM

You missed my points completely. Honestly, your macro is in very poor taste and you being one of the more educated people in vs. in regards to these types of issues(social and political), I really expect more from you. I shouldn't have to explain the white washing of MLK and that quote, which your characterization employs.

Dropping it all on Obama ignores the fact that if it wasn't Obama, it would've been someone else and the country has been under a constant state of war since it's inception. This is a systemic problem, not an individual one. Hell, I'd blame John Yoo long before I'd blame Obama, but you also have to know how a person like Yoo can come to such an influential position to begin with. And if it wasn't John Yoo, would there have been another person that would come up with the same legal manipulations?

This type of warfare has been in the works for over 30 years and the idea of killer robots is even older. Do I like the situation? No. Does Obama deserve some blame? Hell yes because he has some agency especially now that he's in his second term, but pointing your finger only at him and not at the system is missing the forest for the trees.


Hey Doh, I think you're inferring a lot which is not there. Or we see that that pic is saying something completely different. I am 110% with you on MLK whitewashing. I hate the MLK Day infinite loop of "I have a dream." Me, I like me some of that MSM censored Beyond Vietnam speech.

Of course, I understand this is a systemic problem. Why would you think that I put all the problems on him? I don't. You clearly know that I am not one of those conservative fools who thinks all these issues started with Obama. I think every post war US president is a war criminal because they are. Even Mr Peace, Jimmy Carter.

I like the juxtaposition of the pic because Obama (and his handlers, supporters, etc) have tried to connect Obama to MLK. He just took the oath of office on MLK's bible! Liberals eat that shit up! The serious problem of Obama is that as a supposed "liberal," or more accurately, the alternative to the lunatic right, he normalizes right-wing policies. All this while seeming like the "reasonable" alternative!!! You know this. Slick Willie did the same. Obama is moving the goalpost. This is a far greater threat to this country than the expected right-winger. I'm sorry, this meme is a great one. I don't see how this picture could be so problematic for you.
Posted Image

"The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them." - George Orwell

#34 dohdough

dohdough

    Sum Dum Guy

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 06 February 2013 - 03:21 AM

I find it problematic because it uses right wing framing...MLK being one of the "good ones" with Malcolm X/Obama being an agitator. I never bought into his cult of personality because he's just another neo-liberal politician, so I guess the message is lost on me, but things like this are always up for interpretation I suppose. It's like when libertarians talk about Ron Paul and Bernie Sanders, I just find it cynical.

#35 joeboosauce

joeboosauce

    Snarf! Get in the...

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 06 February 2013 - 03:24 AM

I find it problematic because it uses right wing framing. I never bought into his cult of personality because he's just another neo-liberal politician, so I guess the message is lost on me, but things like this are always up for interpretation I suppose. It's like when libertarians talk about Ron Paul and Bernie Sanders, I just find it cynical.


I don't see it as right-wing framing. It's far left to me. Since when does the right-wing care about drone bombing? I've heard maybe one say something critical about it.

And what do libertarians say about Bernie Sanders???
Posted Image

"The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them." - George Orwell

#36 dohdough

dohdough

    Sum Dum Guy

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 06 February 2013 - 03:33 AM

I don't see it as right-wing framing. It's far left to me. Since when does the right-wing care about drone bombing? I've heard maybe one say something critical about it.

I edited my post to be more descriptive...or maybe you should stop knee-jerking! Kidding of course.:D

Most libertarians tend to be right wing regressives, so I just group them together. Only a couple of them on vs. are exceptions...and that's being generous to their numbers.

And what do libertarians say about Bernie Sanders???

About how they'd love to see Paul and Sanders together on a Presidential ticket or how we should be supporting Paul because of superficially being on the same side as liberals on some issues.

#37 joeboosauce

joeboosauce

    Snarf! Get in the...

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 06 February 2013 - 03:56 AM

I edited my post to be more descriptive...or maybe you should stop knee-jerking! Kidding of course.:D

Most libertarians tend to be right wing regressives, so I just group them together. Only a couple of them on vs. are exceptions...and that's being generous to their numbers.


About how they'd love to see Paul and Sanders together on a Presidential ticket or how we should be supporting Paul because of superficially being on the same side as liberals on some issues.


Yup, my knee was a jerkin! Well, it's too bad but makes sense that they don't bring up MLK's condemnations such as...
“The evils of capitalism and militarism are as great as the evils of racism.”
"The greatest purveyor of violence in the world... my own government."

Now, I take exception to speaking about "Malcolm X/Obama being an agitator" without mentioning that the latter is an agitator only because of his skin color. Malcolm was an agitator due to his skin but mainly because of his views.
Posted Image

"The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them." - George Orwell

#38 joeboosauce

joeboosauce

    Snarf! Get in the...

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 06 February 2013 - 04:12 AM

Doh, I took a glance at your earlier posts on the misunderstanding of the general public on the liberal/conservative dichotomy here. I agree. It begs the question of what liberalism really is. (Right-wing fucktards need not apply with their juvenile explanations.) After reading Immanuel Wallerstein's The Modern World-System IV: Centrist Liberalism Triumphant, 1789-1914, I got a better understanding of what liberalism was historically and it seems some things do not really change. It was more accurately liberal-imperialism and was a political affiliation which sought to marginalize the working class and advocate for liberties... theirs only. They basically helped to embed liberal values (market-based) in the conservative party. Sound familiar? Chapter 3 of the book has the thick of this. You might be able to find a pdf of it. I highly recommend it.
Posted Image

"The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them." - George Orwell

#39 ID2006

ID2006

    "Klaymen, up here!"

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 06 February 2013 - 07:07 AM

It's pretty sad that it currently takes more legal justification to hack a cellphone outside the U.S. than it does to kill someone.

#40 Finger_Shocker

Finger_Shocker

    CAG Veteran

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 06 February 2013 - 10:13 AM

Last thing I want is to defend or justify the Obama admin in regards to this. Really do the right wing have any right to denounce and attack Obama on this when Obama is basically following right-wing though process.

We all know right wing gun nuts have long argued that they want their guns in order to shoot any intruder that comes on to their property, that they have no hesitation on pulling a gun out when someone break into their house, or that they will shoot anyone who comes near their family

Well lucky YOU Obama is using that same type of argument to justify Drone Killing, terrorist are the intruders and the USA is your property.. So in Obama's argument and right wing gun nuts argument, if you choose to enter my property in a threatening manner I will KILL YOU, and then we will let the courts sort it out later.

You see any right wing gun nut, ever mention that people who break into their house deserves a trial by jury and that they will always try to capture them to allow them to face justice? NO, many times the gun nuts just say if you enter my property you are DEAD and I maintain my guns so that if someone breaks into my house, I will shoot them dead.

Obama is basically applying right wing thinking on a gov't justification scale.

So right wingers why complain about Obama, he is basically one of you.... except he is black...lol

#41 Clak

Clak

    Made of star stuff.

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 06 February 2013 - 12:47 PM

Doh, I took a glance at your earlier posts on the misunderstanding of the general public on the liberal/conservative dichotomy here. I agree. It begs the question of what liberalism really is. (Right-wing fucktards need not apply with their juvenile explanations.) After reading Immanuel Wallerstein's The Modern World-System IV: Centrist Liberalism Triumphant, 1789-1914, I got a better understanding of what liberalism was historically and it seems some things do not really change. It was more accurately liberal-imperialism and was a political affiliation which sought to marginalize the working class and advocate for liberties... theirs only. They basically helped to embed liberal values (market-based) in the conservative party. Sound familiar? Chapter 3 of the book has the thick of this. You might be able to find a pdf of it. I highly recommend it.

Political parties/factions change over time, we know this. Now I get the feeling you're saying not much has changed, and I wouldn't agree with that. All of this is based upon your perspective and whether or not you really want to lay things at certain feet. some of us have different perspectives and aren't willing to lay the countries problems at the feet of just a few people. To put it simply, the problem with America is Americans.
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that. -George Carlin

“Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.” -Mark Twain

“When a great genius appears in the world you may know him by this sign; that the dunces are all in confederacy against him." -Jonathon Swift

#42 berzirk

berzirk

    I'm not so serious

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 06 February 2013 - 05:48 PM

I find it problematic because it uses right wing framing...MLK being one of the "good ones" with Malcolm X/Obama being an agitator.


hey, hey, hey, even in using it as an example of lunacy, not cool to ever put a hero and martyr like Malcolm in the same rhetorical group as a president, even a black one. Post-NOI Malcolm is one of the greater men to have ever lived, IMO. Obama is a US President. :/

#43 thrustbucket

thrustbucket

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 06 February 2013 - 09:08 PM

https://sphotos-b.xx...017715076_n.jpg

#44 dohdough

dohdough

    Sum Dum Guy

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 07 February 2013 - 03:33 AM

hey, hey, hey, even in using it as an example of lunacy, not cool to ever put a hero and martyr like Malcolm in the same rhetorical group as a president, even a black one. Post-NOI Malcolm is one of the greater men to have ever lived, IMO. Obama is a US President. :/

I totally get what you're saying and that's kinda the same point I was making. I'm just saying that others do it cynically and make that false equivalence.

And thanks for the rec joeboosauce. Now I have another book in the backlog.:D

#45 speedracer

speedracer

    Get off my lawn

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 07 February 2013 - 06:17 PM

Democrats used to champion these issues back in the day, when their guy wasn't President and they were the minority party in Congress. Now it's confined to the realm of Ron Paul Liberterians and old school 60s liberals who still believe that ever increasing government power is antithetical to freedom. Sad state of affairs.

The willingness of the mainstream liberal movement to pretend its not happening will go down as one of the greatest failings of Obama's term. There will come a day when a Republican gets elected and the feedback loop of hypocritical bullshit will be complete as "we" suddenly remember we care about these kinds of things.

Oh wait no we don't. It's just a bludgeon we use because we're childish assholes.

This is our version of Republican's bullshit on the deficit. The caring will begin the nanosecond the election is called for the other party.
Posted Image

#46 ID2006

ID2006

    "Klaymen, up here!"

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 07 February 2013 - 06:33 PM

NYTimes holds back info on US Drone Base in Saudi Arabia because their citizens — Saudi Arabia's, not America's ;) — might get upset about the drone base:

http://www.salon.com...one_complicity/

Related article:

http://www.guardian....dia-concealment

#47 dohdough

dohdough

    Sum Dum Guy

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 07 February 2013 - 06:38 PM

The willingness of the mainstream liberal movement to pretend its not happening will go down as one of the greatest failings of Obama's term. There will come a day when a Republican gets elected and the feedback loop of hypocritical bullshit will be complete as "we" suddenly remember we care about these kinds of things.

Oh wait no we don't. It's just a bludgeon we use because we're childish assholes.

This is our version of Republican's bullshit on the deficit. The caring will begin the nanosecond the election is called for the other party.


What makes you think that mainstream liberals actually care about imperialism, which is slightly different than what you're saying, but the actual term for it? I'd bet that a vast majority have absolutely no problem with the US using soft power to manipulate another country into doing it's bidding or act in US interests. People care about the method in which we exercise power, not that we do.

#48 speedracer

speedracer

    Get off my lawn

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 07 February 2013 - 08:45 PM

What makes you think that mainstream liberals actually care about imperialism, which is slightly different than what you're saying, but the actual term for it? I'd bet that a vast majority have absolutely no problem with the US using soft power to manipulate another country into doing it's bidding or act in US interests. People care about the method in which we exercise power, not that we do.

The method kills noncombatants. It kills children indiscriminately. We both know this. It has killed a substantial number of these people. I don't think a reasonable person would disagree.

Is this method acceptable then because there are no complaints? Post hoc, ergo propter hoc?
Posted Image

#49 dohdough

dohdough

    Sum Dum Guy

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 07 February 2013 - 08:58 PM

The method kills noncombatants. It kills children indiscriminately. We both know this. It has killed a substantial number of these people. I don't think a reasonable person would disagree.

Is this method acceptable then because there are no complaints? Post hoc, ergo propter hoc?

I think you're missing what I'm saying. My point is that imperialism via soft power is even more indiscriminate in it's victims and affects more people than all the victims of drones strikes put together.

edit: Even if we eliminated drone strikes right now, we'll just use another method that might be even more deadly than drones and even less covert.

It's not "acceptable because there aren't any complaints," but there are less complaints because it's not a full scale invasion and virtually no complaints when it comes to soft power. People are more concerned with these overt methods rather than the goal, which is empire. Drones aren't the problem; imperialism is. I'm not saying that we can't be critical, but that we need to attack both.

Edited by dohdough, 07 February 2013 - 09:25 PM.


#50 joeboosauce

joeboosauce

    Snarf! Get in the...

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 07 February 2013 - 08:58 PM

Political parties/factions change over time, we know this. Now I get the feeling you're saying not much has changed, and I wouldn't agree with that. All of this is based upon your perspective and whether or not you really want to lay things at certain feet. some of us have different perspectives and aren't willing to lay the countries problems at the feet of just a few people. To put it simply, the problem with America is Americans.


Things do change. But, the amount of progress is tightly controlled by the elites. And I'd say that the problem is not as unique as you make it to be. You read this extremely well documented account and you will find the same strategies by those in power back then in other nations (which our political traditions are rooted in) they are clearly at play here. The whole lib-con dichotomy is the same framing as well over a century ago and the it is clearly a well-conceived plan by those in power to maintain their own position. They knew exactly what they were doing 150 years ago and today the population falls into their political construct yet again. I was quite shocked when I read this. Never thought this shit that passes off as politics would be going on for so long.
Posted Image

"The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them." - George Orwell

#51 joeboosauce

joeboosauce

    Snarf! Get in the...

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 07 February 2013 - 08:59 PM

What makes you think that mainstream liberals actually care about imperialism, which is slightly different than what you're saying, but the actual term for it? I'd bet that a vast majority have absolutely no problem with the US using soft power to manipulate another country into doing it's bidding or act in US interests. People care about the method in which we exercise power, not that we do.


Very well said!
Posted Image

"The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them." - George Orwell

#52 Clak

Clak

    Made of star stuff.

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 08 February 2013 - 04:29 PM

Things do change. But, the amount of progress is tightly controlled by the elites. And I'd say that the problem is not as unique as you make it to be. You read this extremely well documented account and you will find the same strategies by those in power back then in other nations (which our political traditions are rooted in) they are clearly at play here. The whole lib-con dichotomy is the same framing as well over a century ago and the it is clearly a well-conceived plan by those in power to maintain their own position. They knew exactly what they were doing 150 years ago and today the population falls into their political construct yet again. I was quite shocked when I read this. Never thought this shit that passes off as politics would be going on for so long.

So, what's the alternative? More parties? Dissolution of the government?

I'm not saying we don't need to change things, but what exactly is the optimal here? If we're controlled by the elites and the party system, what is the alternative?

In regards to imperialism, that's a human problem more than an American problem. I'd wager that any country with sufficient power will eventually try to expand and exerts it's influence in the world.
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that. -George Carlin

“Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.” -Mark Twain

“When a great genius appears in the world you may know him by this sign; that the dunces are all in confederacy against him." -Jonathon Swift

#53 UncleBob

UncleBob

Posted 09 February 2013 - 02:46 AM

I'm not saying we don't need to change things, but what exactly is the optimal here? If we're controlled by the elites and the party system, what is the alternative?


You either vote for one of the elites and ignorantly claim that he's not one of them and he's different or you vote for one of the elites and try to justify your decision by claiming that he's not as bad as the others.
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy, instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it."

#54 joeboosauce

joeboosauce

    Snarf! Get in the...

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 09 February 2013 - 04:13 AM

This is so fucking pathetically sad. 83% of Americans polled SUPPORT drone strikes. (Same idiots who supported the Iraq invasion?) Did not think it would be this high. Lem-ocrats support this. Just goes to show that so-called liberals fall in line behind their leader. This is the supreme danger of Obama. He normalizes what was once considered to be right-wing war-mongering.

The American public loves drones
http://www.washingto...c-loves-drones/

A February 2012 Washington Post-ABC poll showed that eight in ten Americans (83 percent) approved of the Obama Administrations use of unmanned drones against suspected terrorists overseas — with a whopping 59 percent strongly approving of the practice. Support for the drone attacks was also remarkably bipartisan. Seventy six percent of Republicans and 58 percent of Democrats approved of the policy.
In that same poll, respondents were asked whether they supported using drones to target American citizens who are suspected terrorists, the question that stands at the heart of the recent flare-up in Congress over the practice. Two thirds of people in the survey said they approved of doing so.


Great parallel from Revenge of the Sith at the end. Quite apt.

Posted Image

"The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them." - George Orwell

#55 dafoomie

dafoomie

Posted 09 February 2013 - 05:00 AM

And now the Obama administration has reiterated their claim that the 4th amendment does not apply within 100 miles of any border - including coasts AND international airports. They are essentially contending that the 4th amendment does not exist for 2/3rds of the US population.

#56 Finger_Shocker

Finger_Shocker

    CAG Veteran

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 09 February 2013 - 05:28 AM

This is so fucking pathetically sad. 83% of Americans polled SUPPORT drone strikes. (Same idiots who supported the Iraq invasion?) Did not think it would be this high. Lem-ocrats support this. Just goes to show that so-called liberals fall in line behind their leader. This is the supreme danger of Obama. He normalizes what was once considered to be right-wing war-mongering.

The American public loves drones
http://www.washingto...c-loves-drones/



Great parallel from Revenge of the Sith at the end. Quite apt.


Funny cause those repukeicans and Tea Baggers, don't seem to mind either.

#57 dohdough

dohdough

    Sum Dum Guy

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 09 February 2013 - 06:13 AM

Like I said, nobody really gives a shit and people don't really have a problem with this type of "warfare."

#58 Finger_Shocker

Finger_Shocker

    CAG Veteran

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 09 February 2013 - 07:29 AM

it will be when the gov't bring this war to the homefront...

Fark the gun debate, I think every americans need a RPG, seeing at where we are headed

#59 Sarang01

Sarang01

    My Use Name Is Saber

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 09 February 2013 - 04:52 PM

You see any right wing gun nut, ever mention that people who break into their house deserves a trial by jury and that they will always try to capture them to allow them to face justice? NO, many times the gun nuts just say if you enter my property you are DEAD and I maintain my guns so that if someone breaks into my house, I will shoot them dead.

Obama is basically applying right wing thinking on a gov't justification scale.

So right wingers why complain about Obama, he is basically one of you.... except he is black...lol


You can thank lawyers for having people with guns shoot to kill burglars in their house. If someone tried to rob my house I'd shoot to kill as well(if I had a gun) just because I can somehow be sued for money due to them injuring themselves when in my house. Explain that bullshit. If this was not the case then I would shoot to wound, period.
As for drones and people making the China comment for drones here you're missing the obvious. What about banning drones from operating in urban areas in the United States? If you don't ban them you're just asking for a gang to purchase drones one day and start killing in the city. As much as I have issues with the government and Obama killing American citizens without trial I have just as big a concern with this.
The biggest issue with Obama and that attitude and Bush as would seem to present evidence that they wish to be placed in "King" status. George Washington rejected being a king when they offered the position instead and asked for the position of President.
Meanwhile, you look at the yahoo's today in the Executive Branch and they seem to think they possess this tyrannical position. Look at their actions which speak volumes. The argument of hard choices has not been rejected however the behavior exposes that of one who has made mistakes. Instead of truly trying to fix and make up for mistakes they behave like one who will lose great face if they acknowledge this. Part of America's strength, recognizing these faults and alleviating them, or even trying to, makes us greater then some of our contemporaries. Look at how long it took the Japanese to recognize the wrongs they did to the Ainu, what about the Australians and the Aborigines?
Instead, what happened with Bush, his cronies and the war crimes? "Let's move past this.". By evading those charges, wounds have festered and turned to boils. Lest one lob accusations of the sort I am putting it all on Bush, look back to the Nixon Administration and the actions of one war criminal: Henry Kissinger. Henry Kissinger, a man I was taught in my history books and the media at the time of my schooling, to worship and bow to. The impression still received shows itself that Kissinger, a God on Earth, the man who should have nothing touch his feet but rose petals. When this man receives a pass and even sees Conservatives herald his name from the mountain tops. Now, when others feel their actions acceptable and commit, the point made concrete.
Arrest these people and charge them at the Hague. After this, when our reviled war criminals pop up they will be prosecuted and sentenced. Lest one thinks me fatally optimistic I do not count entirely on good intentions from those of such lower rank that bribe appears the common currency. Instead of this, those in Europe and other places appearing to our eyes in addition.
Regarding drones directly, I remember reading "Second Variety" by Philip K. Dick for one of my classes last semester and immediately thought of the CLAW's. After all, aerial un-controlled drones exist coupled with remote piloted ones.
Posted Image

"Friends let friends eat each other out.".

#60 Finger_Shocker

Finger_Shocker

    CAG Veteran

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 09 February 2013 - 07:59 PM

Pretty sure gangs ain't going to be flying drones killing each other.. Most gangs aren't cowards, they face their opponents.

Drones are going to be use by LEO and gov't as a way to control it citizens, allowing your life to not be judge by peers but by gov'ts.

when does the line blur btw a physical threat to a political threat?