Yay For Common Sense!

[Ernie S.]

That does not make the audience right either...

it depends on how you define right in this case.

Right and wrong can not be defined using ones ideology.

They were wrong because a "panel" is not law. Hell, now a President can make a "panel" and say "Tell me I can do this" and void the constitution?

Newt said a panel sayong something makes it law, he is wrong, not up for debate.

Go back and listen again. What he said was that OBL was an enemy combatant, not a "criminal" He waged was on the US. You don't try the enemy in criminal courts, you kill them DEAD.

 

[Ernie S.]

THERE IS NO WAR TIME... When you understand that you will understand how it is not law. You can't claim we are at war without a declaration of war. As far as I know it to be we only have congressional approval to be in Iraq, no where else.

So there is in fact no "battle fields." You have to skip over the simple and most important fact that there is no declaration of war.

So Newt is wrong, there is no debate.

Umm:

Enemy Combatant
An “enemy combatant” is an individual who, under the laws and customs of war, may be detained for the duration of an armed conflict. In the current conflict with al Qaida and the Taliban, the term includes a member, agent, or associate of al Qaida or the Taliban. In applying this definition, the United States government has acted consistently with the observation of the Supreme Court of the United States in Ex parte Quirin, 317 U.S. 1, 37-38 (1942): “Citizens who associate themselves with the military arm of the enemy government, and with its aid, guidance and direction enter this country bent on hostile acts are enemy belligerents within the meaning of the Hague Convention and the law of war.”

This was signed into LAW.

We are waging a War on organized Terror.

You can go to bat for someone who declared HIMSELF an enemy of the US, and then MOVED HIMSELF, to an enemy base, and got taken out..............






But saner heads prevail, thankfully.





(common fucking sense: he declared himself an enemy combatant. He moved to the playing field. End of story. You can goody two shoes and dance around that very blatantly basic thing, but the right thing was done and it's as cut and dry as it gets).

Sorry, where does it say we can kill them again?

What is the object of war, again?

It's as Patton said, not to die for your country, but to make sure the enemy dies for his.

 

[WillowTree]

That does not make the audience right either...

it depends on how you define right in this case.

Right and wrong can not be defined using ones ideology.

They were wrong because a "panel" is not law. Hell, now a President can make a "panel" and say "Tell me I can do this" and void the constitution?

Newt said a panel sayong something makes it law, he is wrong, not up for debate.

You know what jackass? As a pundit so rightly pointed out that jack ass who asked the question would never have asked it of the dude who actually did order the murder..

 

[Dot Com]

it depends on how you define right in this case.

Right and wrong can not be defined using ones ideology.

They were wrong because a "panel" is not law. Hell, now a President can make a "panel" and say "Tell me I can do this" and void the constitution?

Newt said a panel sayong something makes it law, he is wrong, not up for debate.

You know what jackass? As a pundit so rightly pointed out that jack ass who asked the question would never have asked it of the dude who actually did order the murder..

 

[skookerasbil]

Willow.......not gonna make sense to some............

 

[WillowTree]

Willow.......not gonna make sense to some............

dots for dotpigg.. great.. even then he's a dudpig

 

[Dot Com]

Willow.......not gonna make sense to some............

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e305/baldaltima/13960_189855479432_503149432_2664011_7029878_n-5.jpg[/IMG[/quote]

dots for dotpigg.. great.. even then he's a dudpig[/QUOTE]

[CENTER][IMG]http://img67.imageshack.us/img67/1240/overractionfm1.jpg[/CENTER]

 

[Cecilie1200]

Umm:

Enemy Combatant
An “enemy combatant” is an individual who, under the laws and customs of war, may be detained for the duration of an armed conflict. In the current conflict with al Qaida and the Taliban, the term includes a member, agent, or associate of al Qaida or the Taliban. In applying this definition, the United States government has acted consistently with the observation of the Supreme Court of the United States in Ex parte Quirin, 317 U.S. 1, 37-38 (1942): “Citizens who associate themselves with the military arm of the enemy government, and with its aid, guidance and direction enter this country bent on hostile acts are enemy belligerents within the meaning of the Hague Convention and the law of war.”

This was signed into LAW.

We are waging a War on organized Terror.

You can go to bat for someone who declared HIMSELF an enemy of the US, and then MOVED HIMSELF, to an enemy base, and got taken out..............






But saner heads prevail, thankfully.





(common fucking sense: he declared himself an enemy combatant. He moved to the playing field. End of story. You can goody two shoes and dance around that very blatantly basic thing, but the right thing was done and it's as cut and dry as it gets).

Sorry, where does it say we can kill them again?

What is the object of war, again?

It's as Patton said, not to die for your country, but to make sure the enemy dies for his.

Or in this case, for his "holy cause".

 

[skookerasbil]

Willow.......not gonna make sense to some............

dots for dotpigg.. great.. even then he's a dudpig

He's just a youngin' Willow. There was a time I marched across my college campus like a hero with my Marx/Engels Reader under one arm and my New York Times under the other........a good 30 years ago now. You see.........I had read the "German Ideology" and was smarter than everybody else. Most people wise up over time, althugh we will alwyas have that 21% or so that will never get the connect the dots stuff.........the same people who can never answer two simple questions no matter the issue:

1) At what cost?

2) As compared to what?

The most recent example is the lefty's response to the oil pipeline to go through Canada. ONLY thing that matters is the environmental impact................the ONLY thing. Another more local event was the death of a whole family on a highway that got slammed in the rear by an 18 wheeler. The 21%ers went right to the mat for an expansion of the road from 3 lanes to 4 at a cost of tens of millions to prevent further incident ( the van had been parked on the shoulder). Those are just a couple of connect the dots faiL issues you always see with lefties.........

 

[Dot Com]

Is this a thread about foreign entanglements WT?

 

[skookerasbil]

Is this a thread about foreign entanglements WT?

 

[WillowTree]

dot.dud..




has a nice ring to it.

 

[skookerasbil]

dot.dud..




has a nice ring to it.

Listen Willow.........our lives would be boring as hell without having the mental cases around to make fun of.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Gingrich Vs. Liberal Debate Moderator On Rules Of War - YouTube

Liberal gets butt handed to him, love it.

 

[rdean]

Common sense in Pubspeak means brainwashable ignorance.

No it doesn't. It means someone found a penny twice in one day.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Did he ever explain his answer in the debates that he only made $300,000 from Freddie Mac when it turns out he prolly made closer to $1.6-$1.8 million WillowTree?

Also, whats a "European American"? Why don't you go back to Europe if you're so proud of that. I'm an American.

Stick to the subject idiot. Freddie and fannie buys politicians, more dimwits than republicans.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Seems like most of the audience also agreed with Newt and not the moderator.

That does not make the audience right either...

But they and Newt are right.

 

[AmericanFirst]

THERE IS NO WAR TIME... When you understand that you will understand how it is not law. You can't claim we are at war without a declaration of war. As far as I know it to be we only have congressional approval to be in Iraq, no where else.

So there is in fact no "battle fields." You have to skip over the simple and most important fact that there is no declaration of war.

So Newt is wrong, there is no debate.

Umm:

Enemy Combatant
An “enemy combatant” is an individual who, under the laws and customs of war, may be detained for the duration of an armed conflict. In the current conflict with al Qaida and the Taliban, the term includes a member, agent, or associate of al Qaida or the Taliban. In applying this definition, the United States government has acted consistently with the observation of the Supreme Court of the United States in Ex parte Quirin, 317 U.S. 1, 37-38 (1942): “Citizens who associate themselves with the military arm of the enemy government, and with its aid, guidance and direction enter this country bent on hostile acts are enemy belligerents within the meaning of the Hague Convention and the law of war.”

This was signed into LAW.

We are waging a War on organized Terror.

You can go to bat for someone who declared HIMSELF an enemy of the US, and then MOVED HIMSELF, to an enemy base, and got taken out..............






But saner heads prevail, thankfully.





(common fucking sense: he declared himself an enemy combatant. He moved to the playing field. End of story. You can goody two shoes and dance around that very blatantly basic thing, but the right thing was done and it's as cut and dry as it gets).

Sorry, where does it say we can kill them again?

Stop being a terrorist butt kissing bleeding heart. A murdering terrorist is dead, GOOD!!!

 

[Dot Com]

dot.dud..




has a nice ring to it.

 

[Dot Com]

Don't forget this WillowTree!!!: