E46 BMW Social Directory E46 FAQ 3-Series Discussion Forums BMW Photo Gallery BMW 3-Series Technical Information E46 Fanatics - The Ultimate BMW Resource BMW Vendors General E46 Forum The Tire Rack's Tire Wheel Forum Forced Induction Forum The Off-Topic The E46 BMW Showroom For Sale, For Trade or Wanting to Buy

Welcome to the E46Fanatics forums. E46Fanatics is the premiere website for BMW 3 series owners around the world with interactive forums, a geographical enthusiast directory, photo galleries, and technical information for BMW enthusiasts.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Go Back   E46Fanatics > Everything Else > The Off-Topic > Political Talk

Political Talk
You may discuss anything regarding politics in this forum ONLY. If you cannot respect others opinions, your access to this forum will be removed.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 02-05-2013, 08:11 PM   #41
NFRs2000nyc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NYC/NJ
Posts: 904
My Ride: 2003 FormulaRedS2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDydinanM View Post
Anwar al-Alaki, while I don't mourn his death, I see his killing as a slippery slope. Same goes for this memo and what it is proposing. I think a better alternative is for an American citizen that is being targeted overseas that has a nexus to terrorism and is an imminent threat, is to be tried in absentia. That way there is some sort of due process, review, and evidence can be weighed. It could even be a closed court or classified hearing (like they are doing for Pfc Bradely Manning in regards to Wikileaks), but at least there is some kind of judicial process. Additionally, perhaps the sentencing can range from imposing sanctions on the individual, such as not permitting return to the US, freezing financial assets, or depending on the severity of his/her actions, maybe even the death penalty (for a capital crime - treason?).
I assume this would have no jury correct? If that's the case, it seems moot, as federal agents will basically always get what they want behind closed doors.
__________________
NFRs2000nyc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 08:13 PM   #42
badfast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Northern Korea
Posts: 526
My Ride: A Car
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOVAbimmer View Post
Some sovereignties are ok to violate?

http://articles.cnn.com/2002-11-04/j...yers?_s=PM:LAW
Yes.
badfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 08:14 PM   #43
NFRs2000nyc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NYC/NJ
Posts: 904
My Ride: 2003 FormulaRedS2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOVAbimmer View Post
Some sovereignties are ok to violate?

http://articles.cnn.com/2002-11-04/j...yers?_s=PM:LAW
The word assassination can be bent to hell and back (what qualifies as an assassination.)
__________________
NFRs2000nyc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 08:18 PM   #44
NOVAbimmer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 12,386
My Ride: 14 Impala FXST M796
Quote:
Originally Posted by badfast View Post
Yes.
Dangerous position.

I understand if we have a beef with the government to the extent that we're ready to go to war over it. At that point, sovereignty is a moot point. But what criteria to we have to meet to violate another country's sovereignty to get one person?

Flip it around. How would it come out if we had Chinese hellfire rockets coming out of the skies towards Chinese political dissidents living in the U.S.?

If they ask, and we say no, and they do it anyway, what then?
__________________
NOVAbimmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 08:35 PM   #45
badfast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Northern Korea
Posts: 526
My Ride: A Car
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOVAbimmer View Post
Dangerous position.

I understand if we have a beef with the government to the extent that we're ready to go to war over it. At that point, sovereignty is a moot point. But what criteria to we have to meet to violate another country's sovereignty to get one person?

Flip it around. How would it come out if we had Chinese hellfire rockets coming out of the skies towards Chinese political dissidents living in the U.S.?

If they ask, and we say no, and they do it anyway, what then?
There was a mosque in Hamburg, Germany that was connected to 9/11 and many terrorists were connected to this mosque. Chasing AQ anywhere would have suggested that we send a drone over and bomb this mosque in Germany, violating German sovereignty. However, we did not. But we have no problems sending drones into Pakistan, Yemen, etc. The differences between the countries are considerable, but the right to sovereignty is universal. Each situation has to be weighed individually. Germany is not Pakistan. Germany is not Yemen.
badfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 08:53 PM   #46
NOVAbimmer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 12,386
My Ride: 14 Impala FXST M796
What makes Pakistan's sovereignty ok to violate but not Germany's? Pakistan's relative friendliness is directly critical to the war effort right now. Germany's is not.
__________________
NOVAbimmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 08:54 PM   #47
NFRs2000nyc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NYC/NJ
Posts: 904
My Ride: 2003 FormulaRedS2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by badfast View Post
There was a mosque in Hamburg, Germany that was connected to 9/11 and many terrorists were connected to this mosque. Chasing AQ anywhere would have suggested that we send a drone over and bomb this mosque in Germany, violating German sovereignty. However, we did not. But we have no problems sending drones into Pakistan, Yemen, etc. The differences between the countries are considerable, but the right to sovereignty is universal. Each situation has to be weighed individually. Germany is not Pakistan. Germany is not Yemen.
The one with the biggest "d!ck" dictates sovereignty. Thats the way the world works. If the US decides they need to do something somewhere, they are going to do it. Comes with the territory of being a superpower. The only other countries that can claim a "big d!ck" are Russia and China.
__________________
NFRs2000nyc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 09:03 PM   #48
badfast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Northern Korea
Posts: 526
My Ride: A Car
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOVAbimmer View Post
What makes Pakistan's sovereignty ok to violate but not Germany's? Pakistan's relative friendliness is directly critical to the war effort right now. Germany's is not.
inconvenient realities

Pakistan is a weak state amongst other reasons.

There has been discussion about sending forces in to Pakistan and Syria in the event the state collapses to secure their weapon caches. Pakistan is a nuclear state and Syria does have biological/chemical weapons. Are you against securing these weapons based on their universal right to sovereignty? Israel wasn't a week ago. Sometimes national interests and sovereignty cross paths.
badfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 09:05 PM   #49
NOVAbimmer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 12,386
My Ride: 14 Impala FXST M796
Syria is collapsing quickly. "Securing chemical weapons" is a U.N. job. The U.S. invading another middle eastern country on the premise of weapons of mass destruction would be terrible, terrible juju.

And besides, I'd rather not go to Syria. You're more than welcome to, though.
__________________
NOVAbimmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 09:09 PM   #50
badfast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Northern Korea
Posts: 526
My Ride: A Car
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOVAbimmer View Post
Syria is collapsing quickly. "Securing chemical weapons" is a U.N. job. The U.S. invading another middle eastern country on the premise of weapons of mass destruction would be terrible, terrible juju.

And besides, I'd rather not go to Syria. You're more than welcome to, though.
Syria is collapsing quickly and what to do is a matter of debate. While you are fine pushing the responsibility to the UN, there are many others that are not. I am not advocating either. But just bringing up another issue where sovereignty violations would possibly be considered and accepted.
badfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2013, 05:55 AM   #51
MDydinanM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: East Coast
Posts: 754
My Ride: is a ///M
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFRs2000nyc View Post
I assume this would have no jury correct? If that's the case, it seems moot, as federal agents will basically always get what they want behind closed doors.
It could. Just the jury would have to have clearances in order to receive sensitive information as evidence and probably sign a non-disclosure agreement.
MDydinanM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2013, 06:57 AM   #52
5ynd1cat3
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cincinnati
Posts: 476
My Ride: swagger wagon
NFRs2000nyc, in your opinion was EO 9066 acceptable?

Sent from my HTC Glacier using Bimmer App
__________________
5ynd1cat3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2013, 08:07 AM   #53
kaput
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Carlisle, PA
Posts: 748
My Ride: 2002 M3 SMG
Send a message via AIM to kaput
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lair View Post
Only in America would someone bltch because the president kills the enemy.

Apparently republicans prefer lying sack of shlt pvssies from texas who let the real enemy walk while they invade the wrong country.
Funny coming from a guy who is the male equivalent of Monica Lewinsky... All up on Clintons jock, when he in fact let OBL walk numerous times, while he was on the most wanted list.

OBL was never officially charged with 9/11, and just because you were duped into thinking Iraq was about the War On Terror, doesn't mean we all were.
__________________

2002 M3
kaput is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2013, 09:16 AM   #54
NFRs2000nyc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NYC/NJ
Posts: 904
My Ride: 2003 FormulaRedS2000
Honestly, I don't know. On paper it was a wrong thing to do. Rounding up a race and placing them into holding camps isn't right anyway you slice it. However, war is war. A lot of rules go out the window when it comes to war. Was it the proper strategy to ensure security at the time? Was there a credible threat from the Japanese inside our borders? Remember, there are a lot of things the public doesn't know, in fact, often times I think the public knows too much. So, on the surface, I don't agree with 9066. It doesn't SEEM to be a rational solution. My opinion is solely based on the information available historically, not from a government perspective at the time.
__________________
NFRs2000nyc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2013, 09:28 AM   #55
Lair
Modded ///Member
 
Lair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sea level
Posts: 321
My Ride: e90, cheap Boxster
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaput View Post
Funny coming from a guy who is the male equivalent of Monica Lewinsky... All up on Clintons jock, when he in fact let OBL walk numerous times, while he was on the most wanted list.

OBL was never officially charged with 9/11, and just because you were duped into thinking Iraq was about the War On Terror, doesn't mean we all were.


What?

OBL didn't fly two planes into the WTC when Clinton was in office. Dubya invaded Iraq on the pretense that they had nukes, not because of 9/11. Just because you and the other Foxtards thought Iraq was behind 9/11 doesn't mean the rest of us did.

75% of republicans STILL think Iraq was behind 9/11.

Morons.

And please - stop the mansex fantasies. I'm not gay, not matter how much you want me to be.
__________________

Quote:
Are you following him?

Yes.
Congratulations.
Lair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2013, 09:52 AM   #56
badfast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Northern Korea
Posts: 526
My Ride: A Car
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaput View Post
Funny coming from a guy who is the male equivalent of Monica Lewinsky... All up on Clintons jock, when he in fact let OBL walk numerous times, while he was on the most wanted list.

OBL was never officially charged with 9/11, and just because you were duped into thinking Iraq was about the War On Terror, doesn't mean we all were.
You must have forgotten that Clinton ordered missile strikes to kill bin Laden after the African embassy attacks.
badfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2013, 10:14 AM   #57
5ynd1cat3
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cincinnati
Posts: 476
My Ride: swagger wagon
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFRs2000nyc View Post
Honestly, I don't know. On paper it was a wrong thing to do. Rounding up a race and placing them into holding camps isn't right anyway you slice it. However, war is war. A lot of rules go out the window when it comes to war. Was it the proper strategy to ensure security at the time? Was there a credible threat from the Japanese inside our borders? Remember, there are a lot of things the public doesn't know, in fact, often times I think the public knows too much. So, on the surface, I don't agree with 9066. It doesn't SEEM to be a rational solution. My opinion is solely based on the information available historically, not from a government perspective at the time.
Fair enough.

Sent from my HTC Glacier using Bimmer App
__________________
5ynd1cat3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Censor is ON





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
(c) 1999 - 2011 performanceIX Inc - privacy policy - terms of use