Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Bipartisan Resolution to Compel White House to Release Legal Justification for Drone Strikes [View all]G_j
(40,367 posts)52. intellectual dishonesty
(you can look up the definition) ,the issue is Drones not Ron Paul and I haven't seen anyone loving him here.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
99 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Bipartisan Resolution to Compel White House to Release Legal Justification for Drone Strikes [View all]
G_j
Nov 2012
OP
I wish we had drones in the 1930s before Hitler killed his first person. Reason enough
graham4anything
Nov 2012
#1
I am a Jew myself. I resent you wanting the Hitlers of the world to attack us like on 9-11
graham4anything
Nov 2012
#3
As a Progressive Democrat I abhor the adaption of Bush policies which we fought so
sabrina 1
Nov 2012
#19
I'd have been just fine with Bush drone striking Osama Bin Laden at Tora Bora. You? nt
msanthrope
Nov 2012
#31
Cynthia McKinney spent her last weeks in Congress probing the CIA assassination of Tupac Shakur.
msanthrope
Nov 2012
#38
If the drone issue was so damn serious to Dennis, why did he wait for the Lame Duck session?
msanthrope
Nov 2012
#58
Unchecked power? He won an election acting like Ron or Rand Paul. By charisma
graham4anything
Nov 2012
#6
Thank god for people like Dennis Kucinich who stood up against Bush's illegal
sabrina 1
Nov 2012
#22
Kucinich voted for war in the AUMF of 9/18/2001. I hate to bring facts into this. nt
msanthrope
Nov 2012
#36
I prefer to move forward on social issues. Wars have been fought for a million years now
graham4anything
Nov 2012
#26
That is all fine and good btw, but it doesn't get things passed. It is all best in show
graham4anything
Nov 2012
#27
You seem to have a habit of attaching comments to other people's comments and then
sabrina 1
Nov 2012
#61
Kucinich voted for war in the AUMF of 9/18/2001, invoking the War Powers Act.
msanthrope
Nov 2012
#33
Yes. Ron Paul voted for it. The AUMF of 9/18/2001 invoking the War Powers Act.
msanthrope
Nov 2012
#32
Your ignorance of history (and of German history in particular) is breathtaking. Hitler
coalition_unwilling
Nov 2012
#40
What point is this? Technically, neither did Bill Clinton BECAUSE OF IDIOTIC THIRD PARTIES
graham4anything
Nov 2012
#43
My point was to point out how your historical analogy is an EPIC FAIL because
coalition_unwilling
Nov 2012
#44
He wasn't in charge then? All the killings were due to someone else? He was singular.
graham4anything
Nov 2012
#45
OK, so your answer for the record is that you are willing to sacrifice 50 German civilians
coalition_unwilling
Nov 2012
#69
How many of the 20 million killed actually would have? BTW-Einstein was Jewish.
graham4anything
Nov 2012
#74
I'll let the facts speak for themselves: You will gladly sacrifice 50 German children to
coalition_unwilling
Nov 2012
#78
Your whole argument is bogus. Who said anyone else but Mr. Hitler would die?
graham4anything
Nov 2012
#85
You clearly have not been paying attention to the gist of this thread which is that
coalition_unwilling
Nov 2012
#89
My read on his position is that he would sacrifice 19.9 million to save 20 million.
Bonobo
Nov 2012
#90
He would sacrifice 19.9 million on the mere off chance he might save 20 million. But yeah
coalition_unwilling
Nov 2012
#91
Anti-semitism and nationalism are what enabled Hitler who then used those
coalition_unwilling
Nov 2012
#42
more than 6 million have died in congo & the us is in the middle of the action.
HiPointDem
Nov 2012
#20
How many German civilians would you have been willing to sacrifice to
coalition_unwilling
Nov 2012
#39
BTW- I don't like the house (which is republican) attempting to upsurp Presidential powers
graham4anything
Nov 2012
#4
The President should not have the power to summarily execute anyone without
coalition_unwilling
Nov 2012
#48
I do not know the origin either, but it seems to have begun openly during the Bush
sabrina 1
Nov 2012
#67
Actually, it's the "pseudo left" that have become silent or outright support extra-judicial
coalition_unwilling
Nov 2012
#92
Is execution without trial a presidential power now? when did they write that into the
HiPointDem
Nov 2012
#21
Osama Bin Laden should have had a trial? When we declare war (as we did on 9/18/2001)
msanthrope
Nov 2012
#41
Gee, that's funny. The link you give me references a piece of legislation called
coalition_unwilling
Nov 2012
#59
Vietnam was not a war? Afghanistan and Iraq are not wars? The Constitution does not
msanthrope
Nov 2012
#73
Fact: you're the one who claimed we 'declared war on Sept 18, 2001'. If you meant we 'authorized
coalition_unwilling
Nov 2012
#76
Yes. We declared war, invoking the War Powers Act under the auspices of Article 1, Section 8. Read
msanthrope
Nov 2012
#81
Um, no, actually my profanity was directed at the asshole who accused me of
coalition_unwilling
Nov 2012
#83
Well, yes, I do think it is disrespectful to tell a war veteran that what they served in wasn't a
msanthrope
Nov 2012
#84
No, but then they were never so assinine as to claim that the U.S. declared war. In fact, I was
coalition_unwilling
Nov 2012
#86
A war vet told you he wasn't in a war and you decided to base your knowledge of civics
msanthrope
Nov 2012
#94
First I was 'dissing soldiers' and now I'm a 'birther.' It's off to Ignore
coalition_unwilling
Nov 2012
#96
Yes, I find that claiming that war veterans didn't actually serve in a war to be a disrespectful
msanthrope
Nov 2012
#99
That argument was tried in the 70's, as a means to avoid the draft. It didn't work
msanthrope
Nov 2012
#82
War by any means is NOT the answer. If our policies do not match out rhetoric.
kelliekat44
Nov 2012
#13
It's Ron Paul's bill. Ron Paul did not sign Kucinich's impeachment bill back then.
graham4anything
Nov 2012
#54
It might actually mean something if it included Congress members who will also be members in the
RomneyLies
Nov 2012
#57
I am against the NRA and guns and lobby groups & republibertarianstea party
graham4anything
Nov 2012
#93
Bravo! I wish I could rec this reply a million times to the heavens. You cut
coalition_unwilling
Nov 2012
#97