Unbef***ingleavable

terp said:
He's treating you with disdain because you are not falling in line with the accepted narrative. 

No, I am calling out this elitist white libertarian BS about Obama killing innocent white Americans with drone strikes while ignoring cops killing innocent black americans on our streets every day

nohero said:
So this thread isn't about Trump and Bibi anymore?

 Sorry for getting off track, but both sub-threads are about racism at least

Okay then.     

Here's how the NY Times presented Obama's kill list.  A kill list with no recourse to the law apparently tested his principles and will.  I wonder how the corporate press would react if Trump did this.  Would they cover it the same way?  What about some other foreign leader that we don't like? 

And yes, this process resulted in the death of American citizens.  And no, they weren't white. 

I'm not sure what this has to do with the police, but I've been on the record on this very site saying that the police are out of control in this country.  

terp said:
Okay then.     
Here's how the NY Times presented Obama's kill list.  A kill list with no recourse to the law apparently tested his principles and will.  I wonder how the corporate press would react if Trump did this.  Would they cover it the same way?  What about some other foreign leader that we don't like? 
And yes, this process resulted in the death of American citizens.  And no, they weren't white. 
I'm not sure what this has to do with the police, but I've been on the record on this very site saying that the police are out of control in this country.  

It's a good article. And no, I don't think that the reactions would be the same when Trump did the same thing, because I do not think many people believe that Trump has the mental capacity or the moral authority to do something like this.

With all due respect, the fact that Obama did some despicable things does not mean I have to therefore accept all despicable things from here on out.

max_weisenfeld said:
With all due respect, the fact that Obama did some despicable things does not mean I have to therefore accept all despicable things from here on out.

No, you shouldn't. I just think that this selective outrage is a bit hypocritical.

max_weisenfeld said:
With all due respect, the fact that Obama did some despicable things does not mean I have to therefore accept all despicable things from here on out.

 I agree with you on that.  Everyone is outraged about Trump.  But, there's a lot of stuff that has just been going on for years.  We have been moving towards a very powerful presidency for years.  And Obama established some very troubling precedents IMO.

I agree that it doesn't mean we should accept all despicable things going forward.  But, when we like a guy in the White House and we sit back and watch him expand power at the expense of the citizens, we have to understand that it is setting a precedent.  This expanded power can and will be used by future presidents. 

I think calling Trump a neo-fascist is silly, because it does not set him apart from his predecessors in any real way.  

We can't turn back the clock. It's not acceptable to excuse Trump's further degradation of the law just because it was past Presidents who started the ball rolling. 

tom said:
We can't turn back the clock. It's not acceptable to excuse Trump's further degradation of the law just because it was past Presidents who started the ball rolling. 

I agree with that as well, as long as it continues when we have a president we like a bit better.  I do think we should try to turn back the clock a bit in terms of presidential powers.  

terp said:

tom said:
We can't turn back the clock. It's not acceptable to excuse Trump's further degradation of the law just because it was past Presidents who started the ball rolling. 

I agree with that as well, as long as it continues when we have a president we like a bit better.  I do think we should try to turn back the clock a bit in terms of presidential powers.  

I don't think that is going to happen in the current partisan climate. Republicans are turning a blind eye to Trump overstepping his constitutional powers, so when there is a Democrat in the White House Democrats would be foolish to just roll over and restrict those powers against one of their own.

Just look at how the Republicans were yelling at King Obama, and now Trump is even going further and they are all OK with it. 

You can't bring a knife to a gun fight.

nohero said:
So this thread isn't about Trump and Bibi anymore?

 There is always thread drift but talking about Obama is irrelevant.When Netanyahu announces that he is going to name a Town after Obama we can discuss that.

Israel was created as a refuge for an oppressed minority which had suffered 1000 years of persecution culminating in genocide.  

When a powerful politician attacks a minority group as being rapists and murderers it can be a prelude to genocide. To me that is the essential historical lesson of the 20th Century. So naming a Town in Israel after a man whose campaign announcement included a racist attack, and who said that there were some "fine people" among a racist and antisemitic mob is disgusting. 

STANV said:

nohero said:
So this thread isn't about Trump and Bibi anymore?

 There is always thread drift but talking about Obama is irrelevant.When Netanyahu announces that he is going to name a Town after Obama we can discuss that.
Israel was created as a refuge for an oppressed minority which had suffered 1000 years of persecution culminating in genocide.  
When a powerful politician attacks a minority group as being rapists and murderers it can be a prelude to genocide. To me that is the essential historical lesson of the 20th Century. So naming a Town in Israel after a man whose campaign announcement included a racist attack, and who said that there were some "fine people" among a racist and antisemitic mob is disgusting. 

Do you believe that Israel's "Right of Return" law  (AKA "Law of Return") is moral?

See:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Return

PS I believe that DJT's rapist comment and "fine people" comment were reprehensible.

proeasdf said:
Do you believe that Israel's "Right of Return" law  (AKA "Law of Return") is moral?

Yes. It was established as a Homeland for the Jewish people who were in a Diaspora for almost 2000 years. In that sense it is moral and justified.

In a much broader sense I am not sure the very existence of nation-states is moral. That is a much longer discussion.

proeasdf said:
Do you believe that Israel's "Right of Return" law  (AKA "Law of Return") is moral?

See:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Return

Moral? No.

Necessary in an amoral world that declines to take in refugees, or separates them from their children and puts them in cages? Yes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS_St._Louis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wagner%E2%80%93Rogers_Bill

proeasdf said:
Do you believe that Israel's "Right of Return" law  (AKA "Law of Return") is moral?

See:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Return

What does morality have to do with it? Right of return just means that Jews or people of Jewish ancestry can come to Israel and become citizens.  Non-Jews can become naturalized citizens under certain circumstances. All countries establish immigration and citizenship laws.  Indeed, Spain and Portugal too are allowing Jews to obtain citizenship with proof of ancestry in those countries. 

proeasdf said:
Do you believe that Israel's "Right of Return" law  (AKA "Law of Return") is moral?

Just as moral as the right of Palestinians to live and vote there

That's the real question isn't it. Do the pro Israel folks support the right of Arabs to live and vote in Israel?  The current regime has been doing its best to deny that right to Arab Israelis and there are many on the right who would seek to eliminate it all together.

Its a demographic conundrum.  

Klinker said:
That's the real question isn't it. Do the pro Israel folks support the right of Arabs to live and vote in Israel?  The current regime has been doing its best to deny that right to Arab Israelis and there are many on the right who would seek to eliminate it all together.
Its a demographic conundrum.  

There are Arab Israelis (both Muslim and Christian) who are citizens and who vote.  Then there are the Arabs who are not citizens but live in the occupied territories.  The real issue is, pick one: (a) two-state solution, or (b) full citizenship in a single state, Israel.  This current situation can't last, as much as Bibi seems to think it can (at least, based on how he acts).  

nohero said:

Klinker said:
That's the real question isn't it. Do the pro Israel folks support the right of Arabs to live and vote in Israel?  The current regime has been doing its best to deny that right to Arab Israelis and there are many on the right who would seek to eliminate it all together.
Its a demographic conundrum.  

There are Arab Israelis (both Muslim and Christian) who are citizens and who vote.  Then there are the Arabs who are not citizens but live in the occupied territories.  The real issue is, pick one: (a) two-state solution, or (b) full citizenship in a single state, Israel.  This current situation can't last, as much as Bibi seems to think it can (at least, based on how he acts).  

Yes, those are the two options. And yes, the current situation cannot last. I think the default outcome would be the same as the outcome for the Apartheid-regime in South Africa, which is that it continued to lose international support and at the end just surrendered. I think that would basically be your option (b). This will certainly take a while though.

But also remember: Israel in its current form only exists because the US supports it. If that support starts to erode (for example because it increasingly is seen as a partisan issue) that will be the beginning of the end.

basil said:
But also remember: Israel in its current form only exists because the US supports it. If that support starts to erode (for example because it increasingly is seen as a partisan issue) that will be the beginning of the end.

You oversimplify. The anti-Iran sentiments in the Middle East have given Israel new backup friends. 

sprout said:

basil said:
But also remember: Israel in its current form only exists because the US supports it. If that support starts to erode (for example because it increasingly is seen as a partisan issue) that will be the beginning of the end.

You oversimplify. The anti-Iran sentiments in the Middle East have given Israel new backup friends. 

How sure are you these backup friends are still friendly in, say, 5 years from now? They are mostly authoritarian regimes that have to hide their newfound fondness of Israel from their own population.

terp said:
You realize his predecessor established that you or I could be killed without any recourse to the law.  Yes? 

 That existed long before Obama came to town.

yahooyahoo said:
 That existed long before Obama came to town.

 Really?   Do you have any links to back up that assertion? 

basil said:
I don't think that is going to happen in the current partisan climate. Republicans are turning a blind eye to Trump overstepping his constitutional powers, so when there is a Democrat in the White House Democrats would be foolish to just roll over and restrict those powers against one of their own.
Just look at how the Republicans were yelling at King Obama, and now Trump is even going further and they are all OK with it. 

 Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize and went on to drone bomb civilians, ramp up military action in Iraq and Afghanistan, support genocide in Yemen, and destroy Syria and Libya.  

Personally, I don't see this as a partisan issue.  These are dangerous precedents. 

terp said:

basil said:
I don't think that is going to happen in the current partisan climate. Republicans are turning a blind eye to Trump overstepping his constitutional powers, so when there is a Democrat in the White House Democrats would be foolish to just roll over and restrict those powers against one of their own.
Just look at how the Republicans were yelling at King Obama, and now Trump is even going further and they are all OK with it. 

 Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize and went on to drone bomb civilians, ramp up military action in Iraq and Afghanistan, support genocide in Yemen, and destroy Syria and Libya.  
Personally, I don't see this as a partisan issue.  These are dangerous precedents. 

Just let me get this straight: in the same post you are criticizing Obama for:

- ramping up military activity in Iraq and Afghanistan

- not ramping up military activity in Syria and Libya

Sounds like you criticize him no matter what he does militarily.

By the way, I do agree with the Yemen point. I do not understand why we all seem to think we have to ally with the Saudis no matter what they do. The Bushes did it, Obama did it, Trump is doing it. They are a bunch of religious maniacs.

basil said:
Just let me get this straight: in the same post you are criticizing Obama for:
- ramping up military activity in Iraq and Afghanistan

- not ramping up military activity in Syria and Libya
Sounds like you criticize him no matter what he does militarily.


By the way, I do agree with the Yemen point. I do not understand why we all seem to think we have to ally with the Saudis no matter what they do. The Bushes did it, Obama did it, Trump is doing it. They are a bunch of religious maniacs.

 Why do you think I am criticizing Obama for not ramping up military activity in Syria and Libya.   It is actually quite the opposite. 

terp said:

yahooyahoo said:
 That existed long before Obama came to town.

 Really?   Do you have any links to back up that assertion? 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Military_Force_Against_Terrorists

basil said:

sprout said:

basil said:
But also remember: Israel in its current form only exists because the US supports it. If that support starts to erode (for example because it increasingly is seen as a partisan issue) that will be the beginning of the end.

You oversimplify. The anti-Iran sentiments in the Middle East have given Israel new backup friends. 

How sure are you these backup friends are still friendly in, say, 5 years from now? They are mostly authoritarian regimes that have to hide their newfound fondness of Israel from their own population.

Is there anything you are certain about 5 years from now?

sprout said:
Is there anything you are certain about 5 years from now?

Francisco Franco will still be dead.