• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF Thread of PRESIDENT OBAMA Checkin' Off His List

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

DrForester

Kills Photobucket
I've said it before but I can't understand why they need to close Guantanamo. Overhaul the way it's run, so we can make sure that the right people are being kept there, by all means yes. But why close down what is a perfectly good facility? It would certainly be a lot cheaper to the tax payer just to change the way it's run and operated, but why waste the money to close it down, move the people, etc. etc. etc. All the reasons given for closing the place can be accomplished without closing it down.

Seems to me, the only benefit to closing it is for political posturing rather than any productive reason.
 
D

Deus Ex Machina

Member
Israelis Say Bush Officials Agreed to Settlement Building

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/04/world/middleeast/04israel.html

JERUSALEM — Senior Israeli officials expressed irritation on Wednesday that President Obama had declined to acknowledge what they called clear understandings with the Bush administration that allowed Israel to build West Bank settlement housing within certain guidelines while still publicly claiming to honor a settlement “freeze.”

The complaint was the latest in a growing rift between the Obama administration and the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over how to move forward to achieve Middle East peace. Mr. Obama was in Saudi Arabia on Wednesday and due to address the Muslim world from Cairo on Thursday.

The Israeli officials said that repeated and ongoing discussions with Bush officials starting in late 2002 gave unambiguous permission to build within the boundaries of certain settlement blocs as long as no new land was expropriated, no special economic incentives were offered to move to settlements and no new settlements were built. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity about an issue of such controversy between the two governments.

When Israel signed onto the so-called roadmap for a two-state solution in 2003, which says its government “freezes all settlement activity (including natural growth of settlements),” the officials said, it was after a detailed discussion with Bush officials that laid out those explicit limits.

“Not everything is written down,” said one of the officials.
Click to expand...

All the settlements should be torn down, along with the land grabbing wall. And, if a new wall is to be built, it should be built on the Green Line.

I don't know what makes them think the same rules apply under a new admin, especially 'rules' that weren't written down.
 
Xisiqomelir

Xisiqomelir

Member
DrForester said:
I've said it before but I can't understand why they need to close Guantanamo. Overhaul the way it's run, so we can make sure that the right people are being kept there, by all means yes. But why close down what is a perfectly good facility?
Click to expand...

Because it's on enemy territory? I'd much rather have these "dangerous terrorists" in a supermax on domestic soil.
 
S

Slurpy

*drowns in jizz*
Deus Ex Machina said:
Israelis Say Bush Officials Agreed to Settlement Building

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/04/world/middleeast/04israel.html



All the settlements should be torn down, along with the land grabbing wall. And, if a new wall is to be built, it should be built on the Green Line.

I don't know what makes them think the same rules apply under a new admin, especially 'rules' that weren't written down.
Click to expand...

Hey, 'Senior Israeli Officials'- go Fuck yourselves. Bush isn't President anymore. Deal with it. Quit your self-righteous, cynical whining. Maybe one of these days you'll be held accountable for the warcrimes of your country and mass genocide. Obama owes you absolutely nothing, including giving you carte blanch for your illegal, land-grabbing settlements and your policies of ethnic cleansing which is the root cause of everything. Obama needs to not give in to the pressure and lobbying of these assholes. He needs to reverse the policy of asking 'how high' every time Israel asks the US to jump, and being Israel's bitch and accomplice to its crimes.
 
S

speculawyer

Member
Deus Ex Machina said:
Israelis Say Bush Officials Agreed to Settlement Building

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/04/world/middleeast/04israel.html

All the settlements should be torn down, along with the land grabbing wall. And, if a new wall is to be built, it should be built on the Green Line.

I don't know what makes them think the same rules apply under a new admin, especially 'rules' that weren't written down.
Click to expand...
Cut you damn whining. We don't have a brainwashed Jesus-freak running things anymore. Barack HUSSEIN Obama, bitch! :D

Edit: Remember when Bush was saying how he'd get a two-state solution before his term ended? He wasn't even in the ballpark. He wasn't even in the same state.
 
M

Mason

Member
The Chosen One said:
Rachel Maddow keeps calling the death of that Abortion doctor an assassination. Isn't it just a murder?
Click to expand...

Depends. He's technically a public figure, so that would technically make it an assassination. Though I guess some would argue he's not a public figure, which would mean it's not.
 
S

speculawyer

Member
The Chosen One said:
Rachel Maddow keeps calling the death of that Abortion doctor an assassination. Isn't it just a murder?
Click to expand...
Well . . . I guess it depends on if you call him a public figure. Considering the amount of ink about him, I'd say he qualifies.

Assassination is the targeted killing of a public figure. Assassinations may be prompted by ideological, political, or military reasons. Additionally, assassins may be motivated by financial gain, revenge, personal public recognition, or mental illness.
Click to expand...
 
M

mAcOdIn

Member
The Chosen One said:
Rachel Maddow keeps calling the death of that Abortion doctor an assassination. Isn't it just a murder?
Click to expand...
I think the word's being thrown around because of the more negative aura around it.

Say a stupid right winger that's a member of a group murdered a person versus assassinated a person, which "sounds" worse?

Maddow doesn't like those movements and wants to slam it as hard as she can.

In reality I find these differences in words to be rather mundane. I think, for instance, the difference between assassination and murder are about as big as the differences between abortion and murder or execution and murder. Just different words we humans come up with to make things sound more or less threatening.

So it's all to push an agenda and we all do it.
 
G

gkryhewy

Member
mAcOdIn said:
In reality I find these differences in words to be rather mundane. I think, for instance, the difference between assassination and murder are about as big as the differences between abortion and murder or execution and murder. Just different words we humans come up with to make things sound more or less threatening.
Click to expand...

::rolleyes:: yeah, it's all the same thing. Must be neat to live in a binary world.
 
M

mAcOdIn

Member
gkrykewy said:
::rolleyes:: yeah, it's all the same thing. Must be neat to live in a binary world.
Click to expand...
But it IS all the same thing.

I just feel these words were invented to kinda take away or add weight to what was done depending on how you want to spin something.

You may think I live in a binary world, shit I'm not sure I even get that, but that doesn't mean I oppose or embrace all murder. I actually have wildly differing opinions depending on who and why someone is killed. I believe that while you may see it as binary or black and white, which I do as well, I think my way of accepting things as what they are and saying "yes I support this act in this case" is a much more honest take on what's being done.
 
P

Particle Physicist

between a quark and a baryon
mAcOdIn said:
But it IS all the same thing.

I just feel these words were invented to kinda take away or add weight to what was done depending on how you want to spin something.

You may think I live in a binary world, shit I'm not sure I even get that, but that doesn't mean I oppose or embrace all murder. I actually have wildly differing opinions depending on who and why someone is killed. I believe that while you may see it as binary or black and white, which I do as well, I think my way of accepting things as what they are and saying "yes I support this act in this case" is a much more honest take on what's being done.
Click to expand...


in that case, a miscarriage is also murder. same thing. body rejects fetus, human rejects fetus, human rejects human.. same thing.. different words!! ;)
 
M

mAcOdIn

Member
quadriplegicjon said:
in that case, a miscarriage is also murder. same thing. body rejects fetus, human rejects fetus, human rejects human.. same thing.. different words!! ;)
Click to expand...
Oh Jesus.

I didn't mean for this to turn into an abortion debate but I guess it should have been expected since I used it as an example in relation to an abortion doctor no less so I guess I'm guilty of this, however, this wasn't my intent at all. Now that I look at it the previous poster decided not to continue highlighting my statement and stopped at the abortion example as well.

First off, that's freaking stupid, I think everyone in existence can agree there's a difference between national causes and human intervention no matter what a persons view of the different stages of a child. OK? Really, I don't think there's any merit to your post at all.

Second, well I guess I should tell you where I stand. I am generally against abortion, I do feel it's murder, but I'm 100% ok with it being performed if the life of the mother is in danger. How can I be for something that I feel is murder would be a good question and that's because I feel that there's lots of things that can justify a murder. Take on life to save another, it kinda balances although I wish there was no such reason to ever make such a choice it does happen.

I begrudgingly support it if the mother was raped, I say begrudgingly because once again it's a situation I wish just never happened and even worse it's completely within our power and yet it happens.

I generally do not support it in cases where it's just not convenient to have a child and frankly I'd be completely ok with more tax money being thrown at adoption programs, day care programs, helping families who feel the only reason against having that child is financial, etc, etc. I wish we would put enough resources into the social net so that instead of people feeling an unwanted child is 18 years of hardship they can't bear that it be reduced to 9 months of general hardship, and when viewed from that angle I do not think it's morally right to kill something when you only have to stick with it for less than a year and never see it again if you wish it.

Third, I do believe legal executions are the same thing as murder and I support it. That means there are some people that I think the world is better off if they just died and could never do another thing.

All my positions are made with the full weight that what I condone is the killing of another human being. I don't take away weight from the unborn or a criminal and I don't assign extra weight to a public official.

Edit: To further clarify things I don't agree with the Doctor being killed and I will happily allow the killer to be killed.
 
S

speculawyer

Member
mAcOdIn said:
I think, for instance, the difference between assassination and murder are about as big as the differences between abortion and murder or execution and murder. Just different words we humans come up with to make things sound more or less threatening.
Click to expand...
Wat?

assassination and murder are both illegal . . . those are similar . . . assassination is just a word often used when it is a public figure.

abortion and murder are very different as one is a legal medical procedure and the other is a crime.
execution and murder are also very different in that execution is (in the main definition) a state sanction killing of a criminal after a criminal conviction whereas murder is a crime.

Your confusion of those latter ones is quite disturbing.
 
M

mAcOdIn

Member
speculawyer said:
Wat?

assassination and murder are both illegal . . . those are similar . . . assassination is just a word often used when it is a public figure.

abortion and murder are very different as one is a legal medical procedure and the other is a crime.
execution and murder are also very different in that execution is (in the main definition) a state sanction killing of a criminal after a criminal conviction whereas murder is a crime.

Your confusion of those latter ones is quite disturbing.
Click to expand...
Wow, I didn't know that, thanks for the clarification!
 
P

PantherLotus

Professional Schmuck
If you are actually listening to Maddow, you'll know exactly why she is calling this an assassination. She has made an excellent case for how this is both an assassination and the effort to stop abortions by scaring the doctors and the public away from it is domestic terrorism.

One can debate whether or not this is "just a murder," but seeing the evidence mounted, year after year, threat after threat, bomb after bomb, shooting after shooting...is shocking. The most interesting part to me is the meta conversation of whether certain rhetoric (ie; O'Reiley's "Tiller the Baby Killer") is inciting the violence against these people. Fascinating, troubling, with no clear answer in my opinion.
 
P

PantherLotus

Professional Schmuck
Gov. Signs Bill Legalizing Gay Marriage In New Hampshire

pride-flag-0603-large.jpg
 
M

mAcOdIn

Member
PantherLotus said:
If you are actually listening to Maddow, you'll know exactly why she is calling this an assassination. She has made an excellent case for how this is both an assassination and the effort to stop abortions by scaring the doctors and the public away from it is domestic terrorism.

One can debate whether or not this is "just a murder," but seeing the evidence mounted, year after year, threat after threat, bomb after bomb, shooting after shooting...is shocking. The most interesting part to me is the meta conversation of whether certain rhetoric (ie; O'Reiley's "Tiller the Baby Killer") is inciting the violence against these people. Fascinating, troubling, with no clear answer in my opinion.
Click to expand...
That I'll give you.

I was watching Hannity for a bit and he played a clip from Rush saying "if Osama wants to destroy the United States he better hurry because Obama may beat him to it" or something really really close. It was kind of amazing because you just sit there andd go woah, what if some "uber" patriot who buys into this shtick really thinks that Obama is beating Osama at destroying the US? Isn't the only option left to take action?

It's pretty amazing, but on the other hand I do think Maddow was doing the same thing as Rush and Hannity with the rhetoric. I dislike Obama, don't like where he(well a majority of the people I guess) wants to take the country, but I will concede this argument to her. Between the two sides the one on the right is "more" wrong and more dangerous.
 
D

Diablos

Member
empty vessel said:
It's the Democrats' fault for symbolically backing Cheney with that near-unanimous vote on funding to close the prison. With both parties appearing to the public to be firmly opposed to closing Guantanamo, what do you expect the public to think?

It's ironic, but mostly pathetic, that the Democrats make a horrible opposition party even when they are the party in power.
Click to expand...
Well, Obama should have probably had an idea as to where the prisoners would go prior to asking for millions of dollars.

Regardless, Gitmo needs to be closed. I don't understand why anyone would want it to remain open. Reformed or not, it's just makes us look awful.
 
M

mAcOdIn

Member
Diablos said:
I don't understand why anyone would want it to remain open. Reformed or not, it's just makes us look awful.
Click to expand...
Because America doesn't bow to international demands.

I generally agree with this sentiment but in Gitmo's case it was un-American and reformed or not we have nothing to lose by changing our image by closing it down.

There's a difference between moving prisoners and say allowing Sharia law or some shit when it comes to international concessions in my opinion. Much as I hate to admit it perception does matter. If we do have reasons to hold these people then it doesn't matter where they're held, so if Gitmo's a negative and causes people to hate us but putting them in some other facility would placate it why not? We're to keep it open out of pride and spite?

Everyone who says that America shouldn't bow to world opinion just because of appearances better go to work in torn jeans and a wife beater because the way I see it we all play to appearances in some form or fashion.
 
M

Mandark

Small balls, big fun!
DrForester said:
Seems to me, the only benefit to closing it is for political posturing rather than any productive reason.
Click to expand...

IIRC (I haven't followed the detainee issue too closely) the site was chosen specifically because it was not inside the United States and therefor would not be bound by American laws.

The Bush administration wasn't entirely successful in using that loophole, but getting the prisoners back into the US would be one step towards preventing further legal shenanigans.
 
T

thefro

Member
megaton obama speech to the Islamic world going on now

zomg obama speaking Arabic and quoting the Q'uran, secret Muslim confirmed!
 
Z

ZeoVGM

Banned
I figured I would call it right now:

Expect Fox News to replay his "to quote the holy Q'uran" remark over and over.
 
T

thefro

Member
damn he owned this shit, let's wait for the wingers to freak out about him quoting the Q'uran.

everyone needs to watch this on the youtubes who missed it, right up there with his speech on race back during the campaign.
 
3

3rdman

Member
Nice speech from the parts I could see while getting ready for work. He struck a familiar stance of playing moderator while praising/chastising both sides of the arguments we know so well.

All in all, I thought it was great and it really emphasized that he is the right man for this time...McCain could never have pulled that off.
 
D

~Devil Trigger~

In favor of setting Muslim women on fire
Sleeker said:
how many states is that now?
Click to expand...

i dunno. Most of the northeast and..Iowa

the bill is stuck in New York's hell hole aka Albany were some of the worst democrats in the country reside.
 
M

Macam

Banned
Sleeker said:
how many states is that now?
Click to expand...

Six

Wikipedia said:
1. Massachusetts (by court case and then corresponding legislation)
2. Connecticut (by court case and then corresponding legislation)
3. Iowa (by court case)
4. Maine (by legislation) -- as of 90 days after end of June 2009 legislative session
5. Vermont (by legislation, over veto of governor) -- as of September 1, 2009
6. New Hampshire (by legislation) -- as of January 1, 2010
Click to expand...
 
K

Kai Dracon

Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
speculawyer said:
Wat?

assassination and murder are both illegal . . . those are similar . . . assassination is just a word often used when it is a public figure.

abortion and murder are very different as one is a legal medical procedure and the other is a crime.
execution and murder are also very different in that execution is (in the main definition) a state sanction killing of a criminal after a criminal conviction whereas murder is a crime.

Your confusion of those latter ones is quite disturbing.
Click to expand...

Uh, not taking sides here, but I think he was making an observation on the morality of one human being taking another human life, no matter what words, terms, legal frameworks (or excuses if you're so inclined), etc, are used to make the act seem "totally different".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

No Job, Loads of Debt: Covid Upends Middle-Class Family Finances - WSJ
Social
17
3K
daveonezero replied
[Atlantic] America Has a Drinking Problem
2 3
149
21K
Hawking Radiation replied
Big Business and Government: Grand conspiracy or ramblings of a mad man?
3
2K
Soodanim replied
WSJ: Trump to roll back ACA requirements with EOs next week
2
50
10K
Bsigg12 replied
Trump to Sign Executive Order on Health Care
2
89
20K
N21 replied
Top Bottom