King's Dream: Obama's Drones

[georgephillip]

Bibles once handled by Abraham Lincoln and MLK will appear as props in today's anointment of our current nanny of "the giant triplets of racism, militarism, and economic exploitation."

King would not have any trouble pointing out the "misguided men":

"In King’s 1967 book Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community? he wrote: 'When scientific power outruns moral power, we end up with guided missiles and misguided men.'

Obama: I Have a Drone vs MLK: I have a Dream | Common Dreams

 

[Aristotle]

Fail......

Drone strikes were here before Obama....And what is your point?

 

[Stephanie]

MLK would be ashamed of Obama with the way he and his little comrades in arms is dividing our country apart

 

[NLT]

I think drone strikes on terrorist's are the one thing obama is doing right.

 

[georgephillip]

Fail......

Drone strikes were here before Obama....And what is your point?

Guided missiles and misguided men.
Obama has increased the drone strikes since he's been commander in chief, and King would have likely found that hard to accept. It's hard to avoid thinking the word "hypocrite" when Obama sheds crocodile tears for the US children murdered recently in Connecticut.

 

[Oldguy]

I think drone strikes on terrorist's are the one thing obama is doing right.

I do too....except when they target US citizens without due process of the law. THAT I don't like.

 

[georgephillip]

MLK would be ashamed of Obama with the way he and his little comrades in arms is dividing our country apart

I think King would criticize the way Obama and most other Democrats and Republicans divide the world through eternal war and endless debt:

"A few years ago there was a shining moment in that struggle. It seemed as if there was a real promise of hope for the poor, both black and white, through the poverty program. There were experiments, hopes, new beginnings. Then came the buildup in Vietnam, and I watched this program broken and eviscerated as if it were some idle political plaything of a society gone mad on war.

"And I knew that America would never invest the necessary funds or energies in rehabilitation of its poor so long as adventures like Vietnam continued to draw men and skills and money like some demonic, destructive suction tube. So I was increasingly compelled to see the war as an enemy of the poor and to attack it as such."

Beyond Vietnam - Martin Luther King, Riverside Church, NYC, 4 Apr 1967

 

[gallantwarrior]

Fail......

Drone strikes were here before Obama....And what is your point?

Guided missiles and misguided men.
Obama has increased the drone strikes since he's been commander in chief, and King would have likely found that hard to accept. It's hard to avoid thinking the word "hypocrite" when Obama sheds crocodile tears for the US children murdered recently in Connecticut.

I wonder whether he'll ever be held accountable for the increased number in collateral casualties? You know, just like all the servicemen (and women) who have been persecuted for the same thing?

 

[georgephillip]

I think drone strikes on terrorist's are the one thing obama is doing right.

Possibly because the drones are not killing children on your block.
"Terrorist" generally applies to those willing to kill or intimidate civilians to advance political or ideological agendas.

 

[gallantwarrior]

I think drone strikes on terrorist's are the one thing obama is doing right.

Possibly because the drones are not killing children on your block.
"Terrorist" generally applies to those willing to kill or intimidate civilians to advance political or ideological agendas.

Wait a minute...that does define the obama administration's policies on many levels.

 

[NLT]

I think drone strikes on terrorist's are the one thing obama is doing right.

Possibly because the drones are not killing children on your block.
"Terrorist" generally applies to those willing to kill or intimidate civilians to advance political or ideological agendas.

When terrorist's hide behind women and children there will be collateral damage.

 

[georgephillip]

Fail......

Drone strikes were here before Obama....And what is your point?

Guided missiles and misguided men.
Obama has increased the drone strikes since he's been commander in chief, and King would have likely found that hard to accept. It's hard to avoid thinking the word "hypocrite" when Obama sheds crocodile tears for the US children murdered recently in Connecticut.

I wonder whether he'll ever be held accountable for the increased number in collateral casualties? You know, just like all the servicemen (and women) who have been persecuted for the same thing?

I don't think any elected Democrat OR Republican will ever prosecute a member of the opposition for war crimes; both major parties depend too much on the 1% to fund their campaigns, and the 1% make a lot of money from warfare that's paid for by "loans" arranged from private bankers.

I'm also wondering when either wing of the Wall Street/War Party will be held accountable for the number of military suicides. According to some accounts I've read, we're losing more active duty military to suicide than to hostile enemy action. (and those numbers don't count discharged vets who've taken their lives)

 

[gallantwarrior]

I think drone strikes on terrorist's are the one thing obama is doing right.

Possibly because the drones are not killing children on your block.
"Terrorist" generally applies to those willing to kill or intimidate civilians to advance political or ideological agendas.

When terrorist's hide behind women and children there will be collateral damage.

I don't disagree. I just see an absolutely inequitable handling of damage on the battlefield inflicted by individuals who are under fire and the damage ordered by faceless bureaucrats who have no risk to themselves and forgo the stress of being under fire, in a hostile environment, separated from their loved families repeatedly for extended times.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Guided missiles and misguided men.
Obama has increased the drone strikes since he's been commander in chief, and King would have likely found that hard to accept. It's hard to avoid thinking the word "hypocrite" when Obama sheds crocodile tears for the US children murdered recently in Connecticut.

I wonder whether he'll ever be held accountable for the increased number in collateral casualties? You know, just like all the servicemen (and women) who have been persecuted for the same thing?

I don't think any elected Democrat OR Republican will ever prosecute a member of the opposition for war crimes; both major parties depend too much on the 1% to fund their campaigns, and the 1% make a lot of money from warfare that's paid for by "loans" arranged from private bankers.

I'm also wondering when either wing of the Wall Street/War Party will be held accountable for the number of military suicides. According to some accounts I've read, we're losing more active duty military to suicide than to hostile enemy action. (and those numbers don't count discharged vets who've taken their lives)

If we're waiting for that, we'll all die blue in the face and breathless.

 

[georgephillip]

I think drone strikes on terrorist's are the one thing obama is doing right.

Possibly because the drones are not killing children on your block.
"Terrorist" generally applies to those willing to kill or intimidate civilians to advance political or ideological agendas.

When terrorist's hide behind women and children there will be collateral damage.

Which country is still the greatest purveyor of violence on this planet?

"The CIA has been found guilty by the European Court of torture, abuse, & secretly imprisoning. US Military & CIA drones have maimed & killed thousands of people in Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan, Iraq, Libya, & Afghanistan. This year alone there have been over 333 + strikes in Afghanistan. Almost 60 Guantanamo prisoners have been cleared for release but still remain captives of the US indefinitely."

By any objective standards, the US Government has been committing acts of terrorism against innocent civilians for decades, if not longer. Is it surprising when a few victims fire back?

Drone Warfare Awareness and Resistance Resources | Voices for Creative Nonviolence

 

[georgephillip]

I wonder whether he'll ever be held accountable for the increased number in collateral casualties? You know, just like all the servicemen (and women) who have been persecuted for the same thing?

I don't think any elected Democrat OR Republican will ever prosecute a member of the opposition for war crimes; both major parties depend too much on the 1% to fund their campaigns, and the 1% make a lot of money from warfare that's paid for by "loans" arranged from private bankers.

I'm also wondering when either wing of the Wall Street/War Party will be held accountable for the number of military suicides. According to some accounts I've read, we're losing more active duty military to suicide than to hostile enemy action. (and those numbers don't count discharged vets who've taken their lives)

If we're waiting for that, we'll all die blue in the face and breathless.

Unless millions of US voters stop "choosing" between Democrat OR Republican in the voting booth.
Established third party candidates, spanning the political spectrum, already appear on most US ballots.
FLUSH 100, 200, ? Dems and Reps from DC in a single news cycle?
What doesn't Change?

 

[NLT]

Possibly because the drones are not killing children on your block.
"Terrorist" generally applies to those willing to kill or intimidate civilians to advance political or ideological agendas.

When terrorist's hide behind women and children there will be collateral damage.

Which country is still the greatest purveyor of violence on this planet?

"The CIA has been found guilty by the European Court of torture, abuse, & secretly imprisoning. US Military & CIA drones have maimed & killed thousands of people in Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan, Iraq, Libya, & Afghanistan. This year alone there have been over 333 + strikes in Afghanistan. Almost 60 Guantanamo prisoners have been cleared for release but still remain captives of the US indefinitely."

By any objective standards, the US Government has been committing acts of terrorism against innocent civilians for decades, if not longer. Is it surprising when a few victims fire back?

Drone Warfare Awareness and Resistance Resources | Voices for Creative Nonviolence

Countries
Afghanistan
Albania
Algeria
Azerbaijan


Bahrain
Bangladesh
Benin
Brunei
Burkina Faso


Cameroon
Chad
Comoros


Djibouti


Egypt


Gambia
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Guyana


Indonesia
Iran
Iraq


Jordan


Kazakhstan
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan


Lebanon
Libya


Malaysia
Maldives
Mali
Mauritania
Morocco
Mozambique


Niger
Nigeria


Oman


Pakistan
Palestine


Qatar


Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Sierra Leone
Somalia
Sudan
Suriname
Syria


Tajikistan
Tunisia
Turkey
Turkmenistan


Uganda
United Arab Emirates
Uzbekistan


Western Sahara


Yemen

 

[gallantwarrior]

I don't think any elected Democrat OR Republican will ever prosecute a member of the opposition for war crimes; both major parties depend too much on the 1% to fund their campaigns, and the 1% make a lot of money from warfare that's paid for by "loans" arranged from private bankers.

I'm also wondering when either wing of the Wall Street/War Party will be held accountable for the number of military suicides. According to some accounts I've read, we're losing more active duty military to suicide than to hostile enemy action. (and those numbers don't count discharged vets who've taken their lives)

If we're waiting for that, we'll all die blue in the face and breathless.

Unless millions of US voters stop "choosing" between Democrat OR Republican in the voting booth.
Established third party candidates, spanning the political spectrum, already appear on most US ballots.
FLUSH 100, 200, ? Dems and Reps from DC in a single news cycle?
What doesn't Change?

I've explained elsewhere how I thought we might address the changes needed to the electoral process. The unfortunate fact is, the only ones who can change the laws are the ones who pass laws for everyone else and exempt themselves.

 

[georgephillip]

Both major parties prove with virtually every political act they commit how dependent they are on one percent of Americans. This tool we are communicating with right now could convince millions of voters (especially those who don't currently see anyone worth voting for) to get involved and vote AGAINST all incumbents, regardless of party label.

 

[Aristotle]

Fail......

Drone strikes were here before Obama....And what is your point?

Guided missiles and misguided men.
Obama has increased the drone strikes since he's been commander in chief, and King would have likely found that hard to accept. It's hard to avoid thinking the word "hypocrite" when Obama sheds crocodile tears for the US children murdered recently in Connecticut.

Obama is like any other president. You act like all presidents before Obama are some type of morally autonomous person. No. They have individuals that speak in their ear about the "good for the people." This is a lot of moral pressure. If Obama decreases military activity people will chastise him for being too soft. If Obama presses military issue upon terrorist, he'll be seen as a war criminal and war monger.

You guys have no sense of yourself. This is why the fiscally elite become presidents because these individuals control the government and policy. Speak all you want about Obama but no president can help it.