Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » Rand Paul needs to go

Rand Paul needs to go

5 posters

Go to page : 1, 2, 3  Next

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 3]

1Rand Paul needs to go Empty Rand Paul needs to go 3/5/2013, 10:26 pm

2seaoat



http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/05/17197906-holder-no-drone-strikes-in-us-except-in-extraordinary-circumstance?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=1

Does this stellar intellectual not comprehend that someday we may actually fight a war in our own country..........brilliant. How does somebody like this person get elected to the United States Senate. He is right to raise concerns, but the idea to say never........he is like a child who believes in Santa Claus.

2Rand Paul needs to go Empty Re: Rand Paul needs to go 3/5/2013, 11:54 pm

knothead

knothead

Listening to Rand Paul speculating about the theoretical possibility of using drone strikes within U.S. borders is exaggerated hyperbole to play to his manic base . . . . . . as Holder said it is highly unlikely but if it were the necessary determination over using traditional law enforcement elements is something we should all support. Senator Paul is a politician whose election victory was a fluke, to say the least, is solidifying his identity as someone who lives in la la land and not a person I can see winning a second term on his present political course.

3Rand Paul needs to go Empty Re: Rand Paul needs to go 3/6/2013, 2:36 am

Guest


Guest

This came up tonight at work. I think you will be hard pressed to find someone running a drone and making that decision to cap a fellow citizen inside the borders of the CONUS.

That being said, if it is done, it won't be military handlders doing it...

4Rand Paul needs to go Empty Re: Rand Paul needs to go 3/6/2013, 10:28 am

Guest


Guest

PACEDOG#1 wrote:This came up tonight at work. I think you will be hard pressed to find someone running a drone and making that decision to cap a fellow citizen inside the borders of the CONUS.

That being said, if it is done, it won't be military handlders doing it...

What exactly is the definition of 'extra ordinary circumstances' and what will be the process of deciding whether or not to use a drone?...And who will be responsible/accountable for that decision?...Homeland Security?...State Department?....Let's go back in time just for fun....what would the reaction to this same situation had it been proposed by the Bush Admin?...The same people now in favor...would they have been then?...Now as far as Sen Paul...he has been consistant in questioning drone strikes on foreign soil in both the Bush/cowh administrations without notifying or including Congress so it really shouldn't be a surprise if he's questioning their usage within the US...Paul illustrated what he's made of when he ran around opposing the nomination of Hagel and then voted for that nomination...that's inconsistant and also is a telling tale of many in Washington DC...

5Rand Paul needs to go Empty Re: Rand Paul needs to go 3/6/2013, 12:21 pm

Sal

Sal

newswatcher wrote:

What exactly is the definition of 'extra ordinary circumstances' and what will be the process of deciding whether or not to use a drone?...And who will be responsible/accountable for that decision?...Homeland Security?...State Department?....Let's go back in time just for fun....what would the reaction to this same situation had it been proposed by the Bush Admin?...The same people now in favor...would they have been then?...Now as far as Sen Paul...he has been consistant in questioning drone strikes on foreign soil in both the Bush/cowh administrations without notifying or including Congress so it really shouldn't be a surprise if he's questioning their usage within the US...Paul illustrated what he's made of when he ran around opposing the nomination of Hagel and then voted for that nomination...that's inconsistant and also is a telling tale of many in Washington DC...

What difference does it make that a citizen is killed by missile fired from a drone as opposed to one fired from a jet, or a helicopter, or a tank, or a segway?

If Congress is so concerned with how the executive branch is waging war, it could always invoke the powers afforded it by the War Powers Clause and the War Powers Resolution instead of constantly abrogating its responsibility.

Rand Paul is a buffoon.



Last edited by Sal on 3/6/2013, 12:44 pm; edited 1 time in total

6Rand Paul needs to go Empty Re: Rand Paul needs to go 3/6/2013, 12:29 pm

Guest


Guest

Sal wrote:
newswatcher wrote:

What exactly is the definition of 'extra ordinary circumstances' and what will be the process of deciding whether or not to use a drone?...And who will be responsible/accountable for that decision?...Homeland Security?...State Department?....Let's go back in time just for fun....what would the reaction to this same situation had it been proposed by the Bush Admin?...The same people now in favor...would they have been then?...Now as far as Sen Paul...he has been consistant in questioning drone strikes on foreign soil in both the Bush/cowh administrations without notifying or including Congress so it really shouldn't be a surprise if he's questioning their usage within the US...Paul illustrated what he's made of when he ran around opposing the nomination of Hagel and then voted for that nomination...that's inconsistant and also is a telling tale of many in Washington DC...

What difference does it make that a citizen is killed by missile fired from a drone as opposed to one fired from a jet, or a helicopter, or a tank, or a segway?

If Congress is so concerned with how the executive branch is waging war, it could always invoke the powers afforded it by the War Powers Clause and the War Powers Resolution instead of constantly abrogating their responsibility.

Rand Paul is a buffoon.

So....under this administration it's OK....but will that be the case in the future?...Just wait until an innocent and or property damages occur...again accountability and responsibility...We have a society that second gueses law enforcement officers when deadly force is used...Again some of the same people suddenly for this to be used for national security purposes weren't speaking like this about Homeland Security measures....

7Rand Paul needs to go Empty Re: Rand Paul needs to go 3/6/2013, 12:34 pm

2seaoat



I think the discussion of the use of drones is a needed discussion. However, executive power must have discretionary powers which cannot be chained down by congressional interference. I agree that Bush would have been blasted if there was talk about domestic use of drones......however, the reality is that the concept of NEVER and putting teeth in the same, is overreaching. I think that we need congressional input on safeguards on targeting, but sadly decisions must be made quickly, and running this country in a war situation by committee is not a very good idea. My problem with Paul is he really is a dullard.

8Rand Paul needs to go Empty Re: Rand Paul needs to go 3/6/2013, 12:46 pm

Sal

Sal

newswatcher wrote:
Sal wrote:
newswatcher wrote:

What exactly is the definition of 'extra ordinary circumstances' and what will be the process of deciding whether or not to use a drone?...And who will be responsible/accountable for that decision?...Homeland Security?...State Department?....Let's go back in time just for fun....what would the reaction to this same situation had it been proposed by the Bush Admin?...The same people now in favor...would they have been then?...Now as far as Sen Paul...he has been consistant in questioning drone strikes on foreign soil in both the Bush/cowh administrations without notifying or including Congress so it really shouldn't be a surprise if he's questioning their usage within the US...Paul illustrated what he's made of when he ran around opposing the nomination of Hagel and then voted for that nomination...that's inconsistant and also is a telling tale of many in Washington DC...

What difference does it make that a citizen is killed by missile fired from a drone as opposed to one fired from a jet, or a helicopter, or a tank, or a segway?

If Congress is so concerned with how the executive branch is waging war, it could always invoke the powers afforded it by the War Powers Clause and the War Powers Resolution instead of constantly abrogating their responsibility.

Rand Paul is a buffoon.

So....under this administration it's OK....

That's what you got from my post?

Really??

lol

9Rand Paul needs to go Empty Re: Rand Paul needs to go 3/6/2013, 5:34 pm

Guest


Guest

I haven't had a chance to catch up yet today... but is this about his opposition to domestic drones and the new right of govt to detain or otherwise deprive a US of their life, liberty, or property without due process?

10Rand Paul needs to go Empty Re: Rand Paul needs to go 3/6/2013, 6:25 pm

Sal

Sal

PkrBum wrote:I haven't had a chance to catch up yet today... but is this about his opposition to domestic drones and the new right of govt to detain or otherwise deprive a US of their life, liberty, or property without due process?

I dunno.

He's been blathering on and on since noon, and I still can't make heads or tails of it.

Wake me up when we get to Benghazi.

11Rand Paul needs to go Empty Re: Rand Paul needs to go 3/6/2013, 6:53 pm

Guest


Guest

lol... the gnashing of teeth of overreach of bush is eclipsed by any attempt to measure overreach by the leftists.

You should make your case clear. You are ok with autocracy if it comes from your team?

I know Will gave you an endorsement... but I find you lacking in a fair sense of play. Miles away from democracy.

Your type preys on the uninformed. The root cause has little to do with the history or known outcomes.

12Rand Paul needs to go Empty Re: Rand Paul needs to go 3/6/2013, 7:15 pm

Guest


Guest

Well... Whoever gave me negatives is an oblivious communist. I find it grotesque that any American might give a person the ability to kill another American with marginal evidence. Due process is a natural right.

I know you idiots love obama... but are you able to apply the same standards that lead you to declare bush a war criminal?

13Rand Paul needs to go Empty Re: Rand Paul needs to go 3/6/2013, 7:59 pm

Guest


Guest

That's how the left rolls. You either agree or go to the gulag. It's OK when they do it, but not if anyone else does it.

"Do as I say and not as I do" kind of mentality and they wonder why this nation is so divided.

14Rand Paul needs to go Empty Re: Rand Paul needs to go 3/6/2013, 8:29 pm

Sal

Sal

Remedial reading classes are available.

15Rand Paul needs to go Empty Re: Rand Paul needs to go 3/6/2013, 8:40 pm

Guest


Guest

....and you should sign up.

16Rand Paul needs to go Empty Re: Rand Paul needs to go 3/6/2013, 9:07 pm

Guest


Guest

Sal wrote:Remedial reading classes are available.

By remedial do you mean natural? it amazes me that your standards are so porous.

17Rand Paul needs to go Empty Re: Rand Paul needs to go 3/6/2013, 9:29 pm

Sal

Sal

PkrBum wrote:
Sal wrote:Remedial reading classes are available.

By remedial do you mean natural? it amazes me that your standards are so porous.
.

The thing is, Holder's answer to Paul's question was wholly unremarkable.

He basically said no, the administration does not have the right to kill citizens on U.S. soil with drones because of the rule of law.

He then said he could hypothetically envision a highly unlikely scenario where the country was under attack, and it would be appropriate for a hypothetical administration to authorize a hypothetical attack on the hypothetical aggressors, hypothetically.

You seem to be under the impression that if Bush had the opportunity to down one of the hijacked airliners on 911 with a hellfire missile, I would've objected.

That would be incorrect and "porous" thinking.

The only thing outrageous about Holder's response is Paul's reaction to it.

18Rand Paul needs to go Empty Re: Rand Paul needs to go 3/6/2013, 9:37 pm

Guest


Guest

lol... you are apparently devoid of advanced thought. Well... I might qualify that as only when republicans are dictating it. If it comes from the left you gobble it up. If only there were some standard set of rules... But no. The end justifies the means.

19Rand Paul needs to go Empty Re: Rand Paul needs to go 3/6/2013, 10:11 pm

gulfbeachbandit

gulfbeachbandit

Has Paul sold guns to drug dealers?
Holder did. And congress just passed a law today making that illegal. Today.
Really?

20Rand Paul needs to go Empty Re: Rand Paul needs to go 3/6/2013, 11:59 pm

Sal

Sal

PkrBum wrote:lol... you are apparently devoid of advanced thought. Well... I might qualify that as only when republicans are dictating it. If it comes from the left you gobble it up. If only there were some standard set of rules... But no. The end justifies the means.

And you're a halfwit who derives his entire worldview from simplistic libertarian axioms in complete denial of reality.

21Rand Paul needs to go Empty Re: Rand Paul needs to go 3/7/2013, 4:32 am

Markle

Markle

President Barack Hussein Obama denounces Water Boarding captured known radical, Islamist terrorists for vital information.

Obama on Water Boarding

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=8TaDrHHNXzI#!

Instead President Obama believes the use of unmanned drones, firing missiles from out of sign and sound, with extremely powerful rockets, killing everything in range including women and children is perfectly fine.

Please explain, logically, how this is not hypocritical.

22Rand Paul needs to go Empty Re: Rand Paul needs to go 3/7/2013, 5:54 am

Guest


Guest

Killing is apparently ideologically enlightened... Whereas torturing is brutish, simplistic, and passe.

23Rand Paul needs to go Empty Re: Rand Paul needs to go 3/7/2013, 10:15 am

Sal

Sal

Rand Paul needs to go Gunsof10

Randy doesn't really give a shit about the rule of law or the Constitution.

He's just pumping nickels into the wingnutz wurlitzer, and you glibertarian douchebags expect me to get up and dance to the noise?

I'll pass.

24Rand Paul needs to go Empty Re: Rand Paul needs to go 3/7/2013, 10:47 am

Guest


Guest

You would not pass if this edict came from a republican president. Will you still support this unconstitutional power when a republican pres wields it? Pretending it isn't significant is just plain stupid. You deserve to be subjugated... I'll pass.

25Rand Paul needs to go Empty Re: Rand Paul needs to go 3/7/2013, 10:55 am

Guest


Guest

Even Soros finds fault with this power... you're behind the progressive curve comrade.

http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/14975-right-wing-crazies-aren%E2%80%99t-crazy-anymore

In a letter to Sen. Paul dated on Monday, Holder said that it was conceivable, “I suppose,” to foresee an “extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate” under U.S. law for the President of the United States to authorize the military to use “lethal force” within the United States.

Responding to Holder’s comments, Sen. Paul issued a statement, in part saying, “The U.S. Attorney General’s refusal to rule out the possibility of drone strikes on American citizens and on American soil is more than frightening, it is an affront on the constitutional due process rights of all Americans.”

For once, Sen. Paul is absolutely right.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 3]

Go to page : 1, 2, 3  Next

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » Rand Paul needs to go

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum