Muenkel 0 #101 November 8, 2002 QuoteI happen to have known a couple people who were killed in NY. And I know for a fact that at least one of them would rather die a thousand deaths and take their family with them rather than have the US gov't start killing its own citizens without a trial. Oh really, did you speak to them after the explosions and fire started? Sorry to be so crass, but I too knew 2 people who lost their lives that day. I have seen and heard about the fallout in their families since then. Pics of 9/11 were posted on this thread. I still get chills looking at them. You are twisting the facts here. Last I heard, there were no amendments being passed to our constitution. Every American is still entitled to a fair trial. Where this differs is, we are at war! We were attacked...unprovoked!!! 3000 innocent people died for no reason, but selfishness. Any idiot with half a brain should know that at a time of war, hanging with the enemy may result in serious injury or possible death. _________________________________________ Chris Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #102 November 8, 2002 QuoteWe (you and I) do not know what the CIA knows, and therefore can not say they made the wrong decision I could not agree with you more. I don't know what the CIA knows, I don't have the slightest clue. All I am saying is: I don't think it is good to just blindly believe what the CIA is telling us. I actually think it is pretty scary to that..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #103 November 8, 2002 QuoteBut our government has readily admitted that it's been a huge mistake in the past to let the CIA lead military operations without the formal chain of command and authority present in the armed forces, so why are we repeating that mistake? This isn't a war against a fielded army. It's a war against terrorists. Somewhat like Vietnam but worse. Just like Vietnam if set a bunch rules on ourselves we WILL lose. Period. You have to fight on the enemies level. No matter what your military advantages are. Remember the Revolutionary war? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kmcguffee 0 #104 November 8, 2002 QuoteSure people are allowed to make mistakes, that is why when it comes to peoples lives, we like some form of stringent control. More control than what it seems the CIA was using in this particular case. More control usually leads to less results. There needs to be a balance. Everyone shouldn't start screaming that the system is broke everytime something doen't go 100% like they want it to. It is that type of control that ruins military operations. You have to be willing to accept some mistakes in order to give your commanders the freedom to succeed. Of course, we could sit around and do nothing. That way no one could say the US made a mistake. It worked for Clinton. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,452 #105 November 8, 2002 If the CIA didn't know the US citizen was there, I don't really think that his being there makes the execution attack worse. Really. And if the Yemeni government knew about it, then we're taking part in an assassination. Some will think that's evil, some will think the ends justify the means (where have I heard THAT phrase before?) If they didn't know, his death is collateral damage, just as taking out a village wedding (dang! slipped again!) is collateral damage, especially if a US citizen happens to be one of the guests. Our collateral damage is not more humanly painful than theirs. It's just more painful to us. If they knew he was there (or likely to be there), then it does raise some questions about their willingness, as a US agency, to abrogate someone's rights as a citizen. That's kind of an ugly question, and I wish it were the only one. It'd be easy to debate. Who here would, in retrospect, condemn the British for sending a force in to assassinate some of Hitler's generals? Even if the Duke of Windsor were with them? Dunno. But I just wanted to put some stuff out on the table. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cgross 1 #106 November 8, 2002 QuoteAll I am saying is: I don't think it is good to just blindly believe what the CIA is telling us Agreed. THe only thing that makes me think though is: Usually the CIA will just lie about it or cover it up. They came out and told us. It seems odd. Makes me want to believe they knew something was up. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #107 November 8, 2002 Where's Billvon? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #108 November 8, 2002 QuoteEvery American is still entitled to a fair trial. Where this differs is, we are at war! We were attacked...unprovoked!!! 3000 innocent people died for no reason, but selfishness. Any idiot with half a brain should know that at a time of war, hanging with the enemy may result in serious injury or possible death. Right, just this particular american did not have a right to a fair trial? Unprovoked? I think that depends on who you are talking to. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cgross 1 #109 November 8, 2002 Hey guys and gals.... It was a good discussion, but I have to go home now. Talk to later Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wingnut 0 #110 November 8, 2002 mental note.... nevr discuss polotics at the dz...or religion either....well same goes for in a bar.......... ______________________________________ "i have no reader's digest version" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #111 November 8, 2002 QuoteOh really, did you speak to them after the explosions and fire started? No, I spoke to one of them very much in depth about issues very similar to this and she was a card carrying member and devout supporter of the ACLU. That's what I base my statement on. What facts did I twist? I posted a link to an article and voiced my opinion. I also posted some what if scenarios. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #112 November 8, 2002 QuoteQuoteI'll be right back...I'm going to go smoke some crack so that your defense of this idiots life will make sense. War sucks, especially if you are the losers. Maybe these boneheads will re-think their terrorism policy if they realize that we're gone get them at home. The scary thing is that that is the exact reasoning and justification used by al qaida once they admitted they had flown aircraft into WTC and the pentagon. Happythoughts, please explain to me, where is the line? When is due process needed and when can we just kill? Who gets to decide that and when? What? What was the exact "reasoning" that they used? Do they confide in you? Well, here's a couple of new facts to throw in to their thinking. Bush said "We are coming to get you." I guess they are figuring out that he was correct. Due process? If they had wanted to discuss it in court, they should have done that. So, since they started it this way, no court. They started a war instead. We happen to be better at it. Sucks to be them. Who gets to decide? They gave up their right to some "fair" stuff on 9-11. They set the tone of the "rights" or "rules" then. They started killing people. In this game, they have lost the opening toss and are going to receive for a while. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kmcguffee 0 #113 November 8, 2002 QuoteWe get to just kill when we feel there is am emminent threat to our well being. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Well, I think your differing opinion is a threat to my well being. Is it ok for me to kill you? It is actually probable cause to believe that the person poses an imminent threat to their life or of significant physical harm that allows a police officer to eliminate the threat. I think that is what he means by "well being". "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #114 November 8, 2002 Quote Everyone shouldn't start screaming that the system is broke everytime something doen't go 100% like they want it to. I agree with you. I am not even saying that the system is broken. When a skydiver bounces, we examine and analyze what happened so the same mistake may be avoided. When a US agency kills a US citizen maybe they should look into that action as well so maybe in the future it can be avoided as well. Saying good riddence (not implying that you specifically said that) is not really a constructive way of doing that. I completely agree with the war against terrorism. Giving the US government carte blanche is just a little too much for me. And with that I am off. Time to go home, drink and maybe even get laid..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Muenkel 0 #115 November 8, 2002 QuoteRight, just this particular american did not have a right to a fair trial? We're at war. What part of this do you not understand? He was hanging with the enemy. QuoteUnprovoked? I think that depends on who you are talking to. I wonder if you would have the balls to walk into a fire or police station in New York and say that line? _________________________________________ Chris Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JDBoston 0 #116 November 8, 2002 The whole point of having an army or other security apparatus is so you can take action with it against a perceived threat. We do have to depend heavily on our government to determine what constitutes a perceived threat, but it's just not logical to expect due process to be applied everywhere, all the time. Due process is a luxury, and it is ridiculous to expect that it can really occur where witnesses, evidence, and so on are spread across multiple countries of varying friendliness to us. Thus the application of deadly force when the crime merits it and when the evidence, whatever it is, is deemed "good enough" by our government. I'm not a right-winger by any means, and I employ the "slippery slope" argument with respect to civil rights and John Ashcroft on many occasions, but only when the circumstances actually warrant it. IMHO, these circumstances do NOT. I won't ramble on restating others' posts in this thread, but the free world is clearly better off without the guy we smoked, and smoking him was a better option than risking more lives trying to capture and try him. I know - IF we trust our government. But sometimes you just gotta take things on faith. If we blew up a city, that's one thing, and outrage would be the appropriate response. But it wasn't a city. It was a few guys in a car. And I haven't heard ANYONE stand up yet and say that the guy we targeted wasn't who our government says he was. As for the US citizen, too f'ing bad. Maybe he was a good, legit guy, and maybe not. It's a complicated world, and unpleasant decisions, and unpleasant actions, are unfortunately very necessary in order for us to continue to have the leisure of sitting around typing messages on computers. There are quite a number of people out there who have stated and demonstrated their intention not to give us due process. Why do we owe it to them? I can tell you who deserves due process and who does not. People who take hostages and cause deaths in order to win the release of imprisoned friends and comrades do NOT deserve due process. People who intentionally and openly target noncombatant civilians with violence, with the intent of causing fear, chaos, and more fighting (not as a DEFENSIVE measure aimed at ending an ongoing and costly armed conflict), do NOT deserve due process. And everyone else does. I have a very active imagination, but I just can't see a clear line from this sort of thing to the rights of regular American citizens being endangered. Joe Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #117 November 8, 2002 Sorry, we already used the "logic" concept on these guys. There aren't playing on that field. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hagar 0 #118 November 8, 2002 So until the "War on Terror" is won, any US citizen that fits some description of suspicious may not expect a trial at all?--- PCSS #10 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #119 November 8, 2002 QuoteSo until the "War on Terror" is won, any US citizen that fits some description of suspicious may not expect a trial at all? If everyone else in the car are known, documented terrorist leaders, and you are in a foreign country...that isn't exactly just "suspicion", is it? Like..."That was a tank I was in? I wondered why it got bad gas mileage." Puleeeze. This guy was a bad guy. No one blew up Father Flanigan on the way to mass. Not kinda "suspicious". Very dirty. Buh-bye... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #120 November 8, 2002 "So how's that new club you joined? Is being an Al-Queda member any fun? " Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
txojumps 0 #121 November 9, 2002 Quote How do you know the guy didn't think he was dealing with a rich Arab land owner Are you really that naive? *************************************** Awright, guys, you don't have one, so don't act like one Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fasterfaller 0 #122 November 9, 2002 A U.S. citizen who was also a citizen of some arab country . The tragedy of this story is that it wasn't a bus full of al queda members . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dove 0 #123 November 9, 2002 If you ever find me in a car with even ONE other terrorist you are welcome to take both our asses out. I'd give my life to save hundreds to thousands others in a heartbeat. Fall in dove. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #124 November 9, 2002 Quote If you ever find me in a car with even ONE other terrorist you are welcome to take both our asses out. I'd give my life to save hundreds to thousands others in a heartbeat. If I ever find you in a car with another cute brunette, can I take both your asses out? (I know, I know...that was evil wasn't it?...I am not that good with temptation...) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dove 0 #125 November 9, 2002 Bill - you're such a charmer. How is it that you're still single? Fall in dove. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
