Obama DOJ Asks Court to Grant Immunity to George W. Bush For Iraq War

Discussion in 'Blazers OT Forum' started by bluefrog, Aug 22, 2013.

Moderators: 6

Moderators

  1. BrianFromWA
  2. Chris Craig
  3. Darkwebs
  4. Ed O
  5. PtldPlatypus
  6. SlyPokerDog
Page 1 of 2
  1. bluefrog

    bluefrog Go Blazers, GO!

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008
    Messages:
    1,964
    Likes Received:
    81
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Occupation:
    Programmer
    Location:
    New Bern
    LINK

     
    bluefrog, Aug 22, 2013
    #1
  2. bluefrog

    bluefrog Go Blazers, GO!

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008
    Messages:
    1,964
    Likes Received:
    81
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Occupation:
    Programmer
    Location:
    New Bern
    See, Obama is above partisan politics
     
    bluefrog, Aug 22, 2013
    #2
  3. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    “The DOJ claims that in planning and waging the Iraq War, ex-President Bush and key members of his Administration were acting within the legitimate scope of their employment and are thus immune from suit,” chief counsel Inder Comar of Comar Law said.

    First of all, the case is simply full of shit.

    They somehow waged a war they planned 5 years earlier at a think tank Bush wasn't any part of? At a time Clinton was bombing the fuck out of Iraq to destroy is WMDs?

    It's laughable.

    And I think Obama's right that whether you agree with the war or not, it was within the scope of what presidents do. Being the decider and all.
     
    Denny Crane, Aug 22, 2013
    #3
  4. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    A more interesting case will be when some poor woman from a village in rural Pakistan sues Obama for wrongful death of her children after some drone bombed and killed them. We're not even at war with Pakistan.
     
    Denny Crane, Aug 22, 2013
    #4
  5. BlazerCaravan

    BlazerCaravan Hug a Bigot... to Death

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2008
    Messages:
    28,071
    Likes Received:
    10,384
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's why you bomb poor people who don't have the resources to fight back with actual weapons of law.
     
    BlazerCaravan, Aug 22, 2013
    #5
  6. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    Surely some right wing law firm would take her case pro bono.

    Sadly, I think Obama's doing his job, too. His intent isn't to go bomb poor people and kill them, but to go after actual bad guys.
     
    Denny Crane, Aug 22, 2013
    #6
  7. TradeNurkicNow

    TradeNurkicNow piss

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    5,196
    Likes Received:
    676
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    hell
    Location:
    shit
    I agree, except that Cheney and Rumsfeld were sitting on the board of that think-tank at the time.
     
    TradeNurkicNow, Aug 22, 2013
    #7
  8. 3RA1N1AC

    3RA1N1AC 00110110 00111001

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2008
    Messages:
    20,918
    Likes Received:
    5,168
    Trophy Points:
    113
    not bushs fault?
     
    3RA1N1AC, Aug 22, 2013
    #8
  9. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    Except that board of that think-tank wanted to take out Iran, too. So it doesn't seem that their policies were actually followed. More like Clinton's were - he made regime change in Iraq US policy.
     
    Denny Crane, Aug 22, 2013
    #9
  10. TradeNurkicNow

    TradeNurkicNow piss

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    5,196
    Likes Received:
    676
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    hell
    Location:
    shit
    Their policies were absolutely followed when it came to Iraq. Who says them and Clinton had different ideas?
     
    TradeNurkicNow, Aug 22, 2013
    #10
  11. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    So where are our troops on the ground in Iran? Not absolutely followed.

    I think Clinton was interested in changing the headlines from "Lewinsky to testify" to "shock and awe in Iraq."

    You already know I thought taking out Saddam was great. It was what happened after Mission Completed (it actually was) that was the debacle.

    That think tank wanted a strong US military presence in the Mid East and it was already there. Troops in at least Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. It was there in 1992, long before the 1995 date you think is important.
     
    Denny Crane, Aug 22, 2013
    #11
  12. TradeNurkicNow

    TradeNurkicNow piss

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    5,196
    Likes Received:
    676
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    hell
    Location:
    shit
    I'll say it again: Their policies were absolutely followed when it came to Iraq.

    Quite possible.

    Why did we take out Saddam anyway?

    I don't think a 1995 date is important and I don't know what you're talking about.

    Let's be clear because perhaps we're discussing different things. The think-tank I'm talking about is the Project For a New American Century, a group which pressured the Clinton Administration to take out Saddam in the late 90s, and issued reports with awesome titles such as "A Way to Oust Saddam" and "How to Attack Iraq" (all pre-9/11). Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz were all members during this time. Dozens of Bush staff have connections to PNAC. Isn't it at least worth an investigation?
     
    TradeNurkicNow, Aug 22, 2013
    #12
  13. maxiep

    maxiep RIP Dr. Jack

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    28,303
    Likes Received:
    5,884
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Merchant Banker
    Location:
    Denver, CO & Lake Oswego, OR
    Obama doesn't want to be investigated after he gets out of office. He's trying to set precedent.
     
    maxiep, Aug 22, 2013
    #13
  14. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    Sorry my friend, but "when it comes to Iraq" happened in W's third year in office. There were issues with Iraq since the 1980s. I think you see a conspiracy in the natural course of events. If PNAC's agenda were truly followed, Iran and its nuclear program (as a reason) would have been where we sent our troops, not Iraq.

    Rightfully or wrongfully, it looks to me like W wanted to make the world better and reduce risk of future attacks. Perhaps at too great a cost (I think so, but Obama and his NSA program disagree). Ridding the area of a tyrant in possession of WMDs that could be used against us was a reasonable fear.

    His State of the Union speech shortly before the engagement in Iraq talked about WMDs, but also gave a number of other reasons. Possession of WMDs, obstruction of the UN inspectors, violation of human rights (torture), gassed his own people, supports terrorists, free the Iraqi people from a dictator, etc. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/onpolitics/transcripts/bushtext_012803.html

    Why did we take out Saddam? Because something like Arab Spring failed there with Saddam gassing his own people. And Saddam is a guy we propped up, and the revolt against Saddam encouraged by W's father.

    And I'm fully aware you and I are talking about the Project for a New American Century. 1995 would be the timeframe those guys sat on their advisory committee or whatever.
     
    Denny Crane, Aug 23, 2013
    #14
  15. Nikolokolus

    Nikolokolus There's always next year

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2008
    Messages:
    30,704
    Likes Received:
    6,198
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Exactly what I was thinking. My guess is that there's some unaccounted for material floating around out there.
     
    Nikolokolus, Aug 23, 2013
    #15
  16. BLAZER PROPHET

    BLAZER PROPHET Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    18,725
    Likes Received:
    191
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Occupation:
    dental malpractice claims adjuster
    Location:
    Portland area
    I have to admit that the democrats are very shrewd and effective politicians. The republicans can learn a few lessons from them.

    This move is designed to give them a sense of magnimity that will cover a host of their own sins. Add to it holding off Obamacare until after the 2014 elections, sacking Hilary so that people can forget about the way she ran the State department...

    Their timing and planning is so good and slick that I have to applaud it. Meanwhile the GOP staggers along like a drunken sailor thinking that the facts will give them elections.
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2013
    BLAZER PROPHET, Aug 23, 2013
    #16
  17. BlazerCaravan

    BlazerCaravan Hug a Bigot... to Death

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2008
    Messages:
    28,071
    Likes Received:
    10,384
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Man I remember saying the exact same thing 8-10 years ago, only about the Republicans.

    Though with the young, inexperienced Tea Partiers out there in office, I think the second half of your statement is more true now than mine was back then.
     
    BlazerCaravan, Aug 23, 2013
    #17
  18. Nikolokolus

    Nikolokolus There's always next year

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2008
    Messages:
    30,704
    Likes Received:
    6,198
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This is so wrong headed. What the GOP needs to do is juxtapose themselves against the Dems and fight hard for civil liberties and the Constitution and change the current playbook from the semi-fascist, authoritarian, overly secretive one they've (the government) been operating under since the start of the Cold War and which only got worse since 9-11.

    Either that or the Libertarian party needs to explode in popularity, which is impossible under the current rules and procedures.

    EDIT to add clarification
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2013
    Nikolokolus, Aug 23, 2013
    #18
  19. BlazerCaravan

    BlazerCaravan Hug a Bigot... to Death

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2008
    Messages:
    28,071
    Likes Received:
    10,384
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Socially, I'd vote Libertarian, if it were vanilla Libertarianism without the Tea Party rom hacks put on top of it. Economically, I'm less certain that handing the keys to corporations that prefer more work from fewer workers will solve our problems of unemployment at all.
     
    BlazerCaravan, Aug 23, 2013
    #19
  20. Nikolokolus

    Nikolokolus There's always next year

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2008
    Messages:
    30,704
    Likes Received:
    6,198
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm a registered Libertarian, but really only because no other party seems to come close to standing for things I really care about. But, yeah I'm not wild about some of the under-tones that come up when you talk about the Libertarian party. I think they've got it right when it comes to personal liberty and privacy issues. As for the economic policy side I definitely don't agree with everything a lot of Libertarians espouse, but I think it's very unrealistic to think that any party is ever going match perfectly with all of the issues somebody might care about.
     
    Nikolokolus, Aug 23, 2013
    #20
Page 1 of 2

Share This Page