Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2015/12/05 16:16:28
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
whembly wrote: I just find it damn hysterical that when everyone dog piled on Trump for suggesting to have Muslims "on a watch list".... and, many of those same critics want to use these "terror watch list" to deprive Americans of their rights without due process.
If you cannot tell the difference between "They're Muslims, so they could all be terrorists" and "People who have been placed on a terror watch list for some reason or another", then truly?
You have no business commenting on anything in this thread.
2015/12/05 16:16:41
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
whembly wrote: I just find it damn hysterical that when everyone dog piled on Trump for suggesting to have Muslims "on a watch list".... and, many of those same critics want to use these "terror watch list" to deprive Americans of their rights without due process.
If you cannot tell the difference between "They're Muslims, so they could all be terrorists" and "People who have been placed on a terror watch list for some reason or another", then truly?
You have no business commenting on anything in this thread.
Yeah, that 'some reason or another' is pure gak. It could be (and has been) some anonymous source and info that has never been verified. ANY list should be considered appalling, when you want to use inclusion on a list with nebulous and inconstant rules for inclusion as a basis for stripping away constitutional rights, I have a problem with it. Should we also strip away their 4th amendment rights to make it easier to collect info on them? Perhaps strip away their 1st amendment rights so they can't complain about it. Even better, we could keep everyone on the list in a big camp to better track them and their behavior.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/12/05 16:21:46
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
2015/12/05 16:33:31
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
CptJake wrote: Honestly, isn't the 'No Fly List' nothing but an admission that TSA screening is a failure and a waste?
CptJake, I am frankly upset by your unfair characterization of the TSA. Just because they're absolute gak, doesn't mean it's a failure!
If they were confident in their screening ability, we would not need a 'no fly' list.
Wasn't there a study or something done recently that showed just how bad the TSA is? Like a 95% failure rate on detecting weapons?
Welfare program is right.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/12/05 16:34:34
Prestor Jon wrote: Because children don't have any legal rights until they're adults. A minor is the responsiblity of the parent and has no legal rights except through his/her legal guardian or parent.
2015/12/05 16:55:00
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Liberal logic: If we prohibit Syrian refugees from entering the country, we're letting DaIsh win. However, sacrificing key constitutional rights in response to an DaIsh inspired attack is perfectly okay, and is definitely not letting the terrorists win.
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
2015/12/05 19:30:10
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Yeah I am with the republicans on this one. The bill sounds like a kneejerk fear-response and should not have been put through.
Also this:
Democrat logic: If we prohibit Syrian refugees from entering the country, we're letting DaIsh win. However, sacrificing key constitutional rights in response to an DaIsh inspired attack is perfectly okay, and is definitely not letting the terrorists win.
Kind of highlights how ridiculous both parties are across the board. I fixed it for you by the way; don't confuse democrats with liberals, or republicans with conservatives. There is overlap in those venn diagrams but they are too far apart to be legitimately lumped together these days.
whembly wrote: I just find it damn hysterical that when everyone dog piled on Trump for suggesting to have Muslims "on a watch list".... and, many of those same critics want to use these "terror watch list" to deprive Americans of their rights without due process.
If you cannot tell the difference between "They're Muslims, so they could all be terrorists" and "People who have been placed on a terror watch list for some reason or another", then truly?
You have no business commenting on anything in this thread.
Yeah, that 'some reason or another' is pure gak. It could be (and has been) some anonymous source and info that has never been verified. ANY list should be considered appalling, when you want to use inclusion on a list with nebulous and inconstant rules for inclusion as a basis for stripping away constitutional rights, I have a problem with it. Should we also strip away their 4th amendment rights to make it easier to collect info on them? Perhaps strip away their 1st amendment rights so they can't complain about it. Even better, we could keep everyone on the list in a big camp to better track them and their behavior.
You're responding to an argument I'm not making.
It should be really friggin' easy for someone to be able to tell the difference between a "Let's not allow someone who is currently on a terror watch list purchase firearms" and "Let's put all Muslims under surveillance because they're Muslim" and why one makes SOME sense while the other is pants on head moronic. And let's not forget that the same individual who wants to put Muslims under surveillance and make them wear identifying marks in public also wants to close their house of worship because SOME of those places get used for radicalization.
And for the record, I'm not exactly fond of a "secret list that you never get informed of being on", but what the hell do you expect them to do? A letter in the mail saying, "Congratulations! You made the Terror Watch List. You can expect: Phone taps, email intercepts, and random surveillance by plain-clothed government agents. This is a lifetime guarantee!"?
Ideally, it would be something to the effect of:
X is on the terror watch list.
X goes to purchase a firearm.
X gets a visit from a local FBI branch and is informed of being on the terror watch list.
X then gets the chance to prove in a court of law that they do not belong on said list, and is removed.
2015/12/05 20:52:21
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
whembly wrote: I just find it damn hysterical that when everyone dog piled on Trump for suggesting to have Muslims "on a watch list".... and, many of those same critics want to use these "terror watch list" to deprive Americans of their rights without due process.
If you cannot tell the difference between "They're Muslims, so they could all be terrorists" and "People who have been placed on a terror watch list for some reason or another", then truly?
You have no business commenting on anything in this thread.
Yeah, that 'some reason or another' is pure gak. It could be (and has been) some anonymous source and info that has never been verified. ANY list should be considered appalling, when you want to use inclusion on a list with nebulous and inconstant rules for inclusion as a basis for stripping away constitutional rights, I have a problem with it. Should we also strip away their 4th amendment rights to make it easier to collect info on them? Perhaps strip away their 1st amendment rights so they can't complain about it. Even better, we could keep everyone on the list in a big camp to better track them and their behavior.
You're responding to an argument I'm not making.
It should be really friggin' easy for someone to be able to tell the difference between a "Let's not allow someone who is currently on a terror watch list purchase firearms" and "Let's put all Muslims under surveillance because they're Muslim" and why one makes SOME sense while the other is pants on head moronic. And let's not forget that the same individual who wants to put Muslims under surveillance and make them wear identifying marks in public also wants to close their house of worship because SOME of those places get used for radicalization.
And for the record, I'm not exactly fond of a "secret list that you never get informed of being on", but what the hell do you expect them to do? A letter in the mail saying, "Congratulations! You made the Terror Watch List. You can expect: Phone taps, email intercepts, and random surveillance by plain-clothed government agents. This is a lifetime guarantee!"?
Ideally, it would be something to the effect of:
X is on the terror watch list.
X goes to purchase a firearm.
X gets a visit from a local FBI branch and is informed of being on the terror watch list.
X then gets the chance to prove in a court of law that they do not belong on said list, and is removed.
I expect our federal government to behave in a manner consistent with the facts that US citizens are innocent until proven guilty and are entitled to due process regardless of what the government might suspect. The feds don't have the right to have a no fly list in the first place. If the feds suspect someone of engaging in unlawful behavior they can present a case in court before they take punitive measures not after. Turning our entire judicial system upside down because " terrorism" is utter bullgak.
Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur
2015/12/05 21:04:50
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
And for the record, I'm not exactly fond of a "secret list that you never get informed of being on", but what the hell do you expect them to do? A letter in the mail saying, "Congratulations! You made the Terror Watch List. You can expect: Phone taps, email intercepts, and random surveillance by plain-clothed government agents. This is a lifetime guarantee!"?
Ideally, it would be something to the effect of:
X is on the terror watch list.
X goes to purchase a firearm.
X gets a visit from a local FBI branch and is informed of being on the terror watch list.
X then gets the chance to prove in a court of law that they do not belong on said list, and is removed.
So X gets to incur massive legal costs?
feth that.
Yes, if X is a suspect I expect the gov't to use warrants and not violate X's rights.
Ideally, this whole list idea gets thrown out as the unconstitutional gak it is.
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
2015/12/06 03:25:30
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Ideally, it would be something to the effect of: X is on the terror watch list. X goes to purchase a firearm. X gets a visit from a local FBI branch and is informed of being on the terror watch list.
X then gets the chance to prove in a court of law that they do not belong on said list, and is removed.
This is lawfare. It's nothing more than abuse.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/12/06 03:25:48
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2015/12/07 13:27:55
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
I'm retracting my earlier statement, which was made under the influence of alcohol, on the subject of terror watch lists.
I agree with the others - it is unconstitutional, and drawing on my knowledge of US history, very similar to the red scare that swept America from 1918 onwards.
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
2015/12/07 16:33:05
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Grey Templar wrote: If I had to pick now its going to be Bush, but its still way to early to tell who its going to be. Its not too early to say who it almost certainly will not be.
d-usa wrote: I didn't have a problem with the idea of blocking people on the no-fly list from buying guns, the problem for me was that the no-fly list is a clusterfeth with all kinds of people being on the list for no real reason and with people who have similar names still being affected because they are "on the list".
Even a good idea is terrible when it is build on a cracking foundation.
The fact that US citizens can be denied due process and be put on the useless unconstitutional bullgak security theater No Fly List is abhorrent. The list itself never should have been created in the first place. Doubling down on it and imposing even more unconstitutional restrictions and revocations of protected rights is an even worse idea.
I hve no problem with such a list if it doesn't include US citizens.
whembly wrote: I just find it damn hysterical that when everyone dog piled on Trump for suggesting to have Muslims "on a watch list".... and, many of those same critics want to use these "terror watch list" to deprive Americans of their rights without due process.
If you cannot tell the difference between "They're Muslims, so they could all be terrorists" and "People who have been placed on a terror watch list for some reason or another", then truly?
You have no business commenting on anything in this thread.
If you can't tell a difference between guys in US army uniforms in WWII putting people into internment camps because of where their parents came from and others being denied their fundamental rights without trial then you're just....absolutely correct. There is no difference.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/12/07 16:41:44
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2015/12/07 16:53:05
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
No one is going to touch the "No-Fly List", because if you do and something bad happens... well.... you are toast. Not only will you lose your job (politician), you will be pilloried int eh media, and be labelled in the History books as an idiot.
Support Blood and Spectacles Publishing:
https://www.patreon.com/Bloodandspectaclespublishing
2015/12/07 17:01:53
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Easy E wrote: No one is going to touch the "No-Fly List", because if you do and something bad happens... well.... you are toast. Not only will you lose your job (politician), you will be pilloried int eh media, and be labelled in the History books as an idiot.
And yet, the odds the perp of the next mass shooting was on the No Fly List are about nil.
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
2015/12/07 17:12:58
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Good evening. On Wednesday, 14 Americans were killed as they came together to celebrate the holidays. They were taken from family and friends who loved them deeply. They were white and black, Latino and Asian, immigrants, and American born, moms and dads, daughters and sons. Each of them served their fellow citizens. All of them were part of our American family.
Tonight I want to talk with you about this tragedy, the broader threat of terrorism and how we can keep our country safe. The FBI is still gathering the facts about what happened in San Bernardino, but here's what we know. The victims were brutally murdered and injured by one of their co-workers and his wife. So far, we have no evidence that the killers were directed by a terrorist organization overseas or that they were part of a broader conspiracy here at home. But it is clear that the two of them had gone down the dark path of radicalization, embracing a perverted interpretation of Islam that calls for war against America and the West. They had stockpiled assault weapons, ammunition, and pipe bombs.
So this was an act of terrorism designed to kill innocent people. Our nation has been at war with terrorists since Al Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 Americans on 9/11. In the process, we've hardened our defenses, from airports, to financial centers, to other critical infrastructure. Intelligence and law enforcement agencies have disrupted countless plots here and overseas and worked around the clock to keep us safe.
Our military and counterterrorism professionals have relentlessly pursued terrorist networks overseas, disrupting safe havens in several different countries, killing Osama Bin Laden, and decimating Al Qaeda's leadership.
Over the last few years, however, the terrorist threat has evolved into a new phase. As we've become better at preventing complex multifaceted attacks like 9/11, terrorists turn to less complicated acts of violence like the mass shootings that are all too common in our society. It is this type of attack that we saw at Fort Hood in 2009, in Chattanooga earlier this year, and now in San Bernardino.
And as groups like ISIL grew stronger amidst the chaos of war in Iraq and then Syria, and as the Internet erases the distance between countries, we see growing efforts by terrorists to poison the minds of people like the Boston Marathon bombers and the San Bernardino killers.
For seven years, I've confronted this evolving threat each and every morning in my intelligence briefing, and since the day I took this office, I have authorized U.S. forces to take out terrorists abroad precisely because I know how real the danger is.
As commander in chief, I have no greater responsibility than the security of the American people.
As a father to two young daughters who are the most precious part of my life, I know that we see ourselves with friends and co-workers at a holiday party like the one in San Bernardino. I know we see our kids in the faces of the young people killed in Paris.
And I know that after so much war, many Americans are asking whether we are confronted by a cancer that has no immediate cure.
OBAMA: Well, here's what I want you to know. The threat from terrorism is real, but we will overcome it. We will destroy ISIL and any other organization that tries to harm us. Our success won't depend on tough talk, or abandoning our values or giving into fear. That's what groups like ISIL are hoping for. Instead, we will prevail by being strong and smart, resilient and relentless. And by drawing upon every aspect of American power.
Here's how. First, our military will continue to hunt down terrorist plotters in any country where it is necessary. In Iraq and Syria, air strikes are taking out ISIL leaders, heavy weapons, oil tankers, infrastructure.
And since attacks in Paris, our closest allies, including France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, have ramped up their contributions to our military campaign which will help us accelerate our effort to destroy ISIL.
Second, we will continue to provide training and equipment to tens of thousands of Iraqi and Syrian forces fighting ISIL on the ground so that we take away their safe havens.
In both countries, we're deploying special operations forces who can accelerate that offensive. We've stepped up this effort since the attacks in Paris, and will continue to invest more in approaches that are working on the ground.
Third, we're working with friends and allies to stop ISIL's operations, to disrupt plots, cut off their financing, and prevent them from recruiting more fighters.
Since the attacks in Paris, we've surged merged intelligence sharing with our European allies. We're working with Turkey to seal its border with Syria, and we are cooperating with Muslim majority countries, and with our Muslim communities here at home, to counter the vicious ideology that ISIL promotes online.
Fourth, with American leadership, the international community has begun to establish a process and timeline to pursue cease-fires and a political resolution to the Syrian war.
Doing so will allow the Syrian people and every country, including our allies, but also countries like Russia, to focus on the common goal of destroying ISIL, a group that threatens us all.
This is our strategy to destroy ISIL. It is designed and supported by our military commanders and counterterrorism experts, together with 65 countries that have joined an American-led coalition. And we constantly examine our strategy to determine when additional steps are needed to get the job done.
That's why I've ordered the Departments of State and Homeland Security to review the visa waiver program under which the female terrorist in San Bernardino originally came to this country. And that's why I will urge high-tech and law enforcement leaders to make it harder for terrorists to use technology to escape from justice.
Now, here at home, we have to work together to address the challenge. There are several steps that Congress should take right away. To begin with, Congress should act to make sure no one on a no- fly list is able to buy a gun. What could possibly be the argument for allowing a terrorist suspect to buy a semiautomatic weapon? This is a matter of national security.
We also need to make it harder for people to buy powerful assault weapons, like the ones that were used in San Bernardino. I know there are some who reject any gun-safety measures, but the fact is that our intelligence and law-enforcement agencies, no matter how effective they are, cannot identify every would-be mass shooter, whether that individual was motivated by ISIL or some other hateful ideology.
What we can do, and must do, is make it harder for them to kill.
Next, we should put in place stronger screening for those who come to America without a visa so that we can take a hard look at whether they've traveled to war zones. And we're working with members of both parties in Congress to do exactly that.
Finally, if Congress believes, as I do, that we are at war with ISIL, it should go ahead and vote to authorize the continued use of military force against these terrorists.
For over a year, I have ordered our military to take thousands of air strikes against ISIL targets. I think it's time for Congress to vote to demonstrate that the American people are united and committed to this fight.
My fellow Americans, these are the steps that we can take together to defeat the terrorist threat.
Let me now say a word about what we should not do. We should not be drawn once more into a long and costly ground war in Iraq or Syria. That's what groups like ISIL want. They know they can't defeat us on the battlefield. ISIL fighters were part of the insurgency that we faced in Iraq. But they also know that if we occupy foreign lands, they can maintain insurgencies for years, killing thousands of our troops and draining our resources, and using our presence to draw new recruits.
The strategy that we are using now -- air strikes, special forces, and working with local forces who are fighting to regain control of their own country -- that is how we'll achieve a more sustainable victory, and it won't require us sending a new generation of Americans overseas to fight and die for another decade on foreign soil.
Here's what else we cannot do. We cannot turn against one another by letting this fight be defined as a war between America and Islam. That, too, is what groups like ISIL want.
ISIL does not speak for Islam. They are thugs and killers, part of a cult of death. And they account for a tiny fraction of a more than a billion Muslims around the world, including millions of patriotic Muslim-Americans who reject their hateful ideology.
Moreover, the vast majority of terrorist victims around the world are Muslim.
If we're to succeed in defeating terrorism, we must enlist Muslim communities as some of our strongest allies, rather than push them away through suspicion and hate.
That does not mean denying the fact that an extremist ideology has spread within some Muslim communities. It's a real problem that Muslims must confront without excuse.
Muslim leaders here and around the globe have to continue working with us to decisively and unequivocally reject the hateful ideology that groups like ISIL and Al Qaeda promote, to speak out against not just acts of violence, but also those interpretations of Islam that are incompatible with the values of religious tolerance, mutual respect, and human dignity.
But just as it is the responsibility of Muslims around the world to root out misguided ideas that lead to radicalization, it is the responsibility of all Americans, of every faith, to reject discrimination. It is our responsibility to reject religious tests on who we admit into this country. It's our responsibility to reject proposals that Muslim-Americans should somehow be treated differently. Because when we travel down that road, we lose. That kind of divisiveness, that betrayal of our values plays into the hands of groups like ISIL.
Muslim-Americans are our friends and our neighbors, our co- workers, our sports heroes. And, yes, they are our men and women in uniform who are willing to die in defense of our country. We have to remember that.
My fellow Americans, I am confident we will succeed in this mission because we are on the right side of history. We were founded upon a belief in human dignity that no matter who you are, or where you come from, or what you look like or what religion you practice, you are equal in the eyes of God and equal in the eyes of the law. Even in this political season, even as we properly debate what steps I and future presidents must take to keep our country safe. Let's make sure we never forget what makes us exceptional. Let's not forget that freedom is more powerful than fear. That we have always met challenges, whether war or depression, natural disasters or terrorist attacks, by coming together around our common ideals as one nation and one people.
So long as we stay true to that tradition, I have no doubt that America will prevail.
Thank you. God bless you. And may God bless the United States of America.
Kinda weak sauce to be using the Oval Office for this speech. It's okay for the most part... except for the whole "What could possibly be the argument for allowing a terrorist suspect to buy a semiautomatic weapon? " trope...
*shrugs*
Isn't this the first time Obama implored Congress for a new AUMF against ISIL?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/12/07 17:17:25
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2015/12/07 17:15:44
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
I don't think so, I think he did a while ago, although that was near the beginning when the "Oh no, ISIS!" thing set in. I don't have the best memory, so I could be wrong.
Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
kronk wrote: Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
sebster wrote: Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
BaronIveagh wrote: Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
2015/12/07 17:24:57
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
"My fellow Americans... Mass Shootings... Terrorism... No fly-list... Gun control... God bless America"
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/12/07 17:25:14
H.B.M.C.- The end hath come! From now on armies will only consist of Astorath, Land Speeder Storms and Soul Grinders!
War Kitten- Vanden, you just taunted the Dank Lord Ezra. Prepare for seven years of fighting reality...
koooaei- Emperor: I envy your nipplehorns. <Magnus goes red. Permanently>
Neronoxx- If our Dreadnought doesn't have sick scuplted abs, we riot.
Frazzled- I don't generally call anyone by a term other than "sir" "maam" "youn g lady" "young man" or " HEY bag!"
Ruin- It's official, we've ran out of things to talk about on Dakka. Close the site. We're done.
mrhappyface- "They're more what you'd call guidlines than actual rules" - Captain Roboute Barbosa
Steve steveson- To be clear, I'd sell you all out for a bottle of scotch and a mid priced hooker.
2015/12/07 18:15:02
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Good evening. On Wednesday, 14 Americans were killed as they came together to celebrate the holidays. They were taken from family and friends who loved them deeply. They were white and black, Latino and Asian, immigrants, and American born, moms and dads, daughters and sons. Each of them served their fellow citizens. All of them were part of our American family.
Tonight I want to talk with you about this tragedy, the broader threat of terrorism and how we can keep our country safe. The FBI is still gathering the facts about what happened in San Bernardino, but here's what we know. The victims were brutally murdered and injured by one of their co-workers and his wife. So far, we have no evidence that the killers were directed by a terrorist organization overseas or that they were part of a broader conspiracy here at home. But it is clear that the two of them had gone down the dark path of radicalization, embracing a perverted interpretation of Islam that calls for war against America and the West. They had stockpiled assault weapons, ammunition, and pipe bombs.
So this was an act of terrorism designed to kill innocent people. Our nation has been at war with terrorists since Al Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 Americans on 9/11. In the process, we've hardened our defenses, from airports, to financial centers, to other critical infrastructure. Intelligence and law enforcement agencies have disrupted countless plots here and overseas and worked around the clock to keep us safe.
Our military and counterterrorism professionals have relentlessly pursued terrorist networks overseas, disrupting safe havens in several different countries, killing Osama Bin Laden, and decimating Al Qaeda's leadership.
Over the last few years, however, the terrorist threat has evolved into a new phase. As we've become better at preventing complex multifaceted attacks like 9/11, terrorists turn to less complicated acts of violence like the mass shootings that are all too common in our society. It is this type of attack that we saw at Fort Hood in 2009, in Chattanooga earlier this year, and now in San Bernardino.
And as groups like ISIL grew stronger amidst the chaos of war in Iraq and then Syria, and as the Internet erases the distance between countries, we see growing efforts by terrorists to poison the minds of people like the Boston Marathon bombers and the San Bernardino killers.
For seven years, I've confronted this evolving threat each and every morning in my intelligence briefing, and since the day I took this office, I have authorized U.S. forces to take out terrorists abroad precisely because I know how real the danger is.
As commander in chief, I have no greater responsibility than the security of the American people.
As a father to two young daughters who are the most precious part of my life, I know that we see ourselves with friends and co-workers at a holiday party like the one in San Bernardino. I know we see our kids in the faces of the young people killed in Paris.
And I know that after so much war, many Americans are asking whether we are confronted by a cancer that has no immediate cure.
OBAMA: Well, here's what I want you to know. The threat from terrorism is real, but we will overcome it. We will destroy ISIL and any other organization that tries to harm us. Our success won't depend on tough talk, or abandoning our values or giving into fear. That's what groups like ISIL are hoping for. Instead, we will prevail by being strong and smart, resilient and relentless. And by drawing upon every aspect of American power.
Here's how. First, our military will continue to hunt down terrorist plotters in any country where it is necessary. In Iraq and Syria, air strikes are taking out ISIL leaders, heavy weapons, oil tankers, infrastructure.
And since attacks in Paris, our closest allies, including France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, have ramped up their contributions to our military campaign which will help us accelerate our effort to destroy ISIL.
Second, we will continue to provide training and equipment to tens of thousands of Iraqi and Syrian forces fighting ISIL on the ground so that we take away their safe havens.
In both countries, we're deploying special operations forces who can accelerate that offensive. We've stepped up this effort since the attacks in Paris, and will continue to invest more in approaches that are working on the ground.
Third, we're working with friends and allies to stop ISIL's operations, to disrupt plots, cut off their financing, and prevent them from recruiting more fighters.
Since the attacks in Paris, we've surged merged intelligence sharing with our European allies. We're working with Turkey to seal its border with Syria, and we are cooperating with Muslim majority countries, and with our Muslim communities here at home, to counter the vicious ideology that ISIL promotes online.
Fourth, with American leadership, the international community has begun to establish a process and timeline to pursue cease-fires and a political resolution to the Syrian war.
Doing so will allow the Syrian people and every country, including our allies, but also countries like Russia, to focus on the common goal of destroying ISIL, a group that threatens us all.
This is our strategy to destroy ISIL. It is designed and supported by our military commanders and counterterrorism experts, together with 65 countries that have joined an American-led coalition. And we constantly examine our strategy to determine when additional steps are needed to get the job done.
That's why I've ordered the Departments of State and Homeland Security to review the visa waiver program under which the female terrorist in San Bernardino originally came to this country. And that's why I will urge high-tech and law enforcement leaders to make it harder for terrorists to use technology to escape from justice.
Now, here at home, we have to work together to address the challenge. There are several steps that Congress should take right away. To begin with, Congress should act to make sure no one on a no- fly list is able to buy a gun. What could possibly be the argument for allowing a terrorist suspect to buy a semiautomatic weapon? This is a matter of national security.
We also need to make it harder for people to buy powerful assault weapons, like the ones that were used in San Bernardino. I know there are some who reject any gun-safety measures, but the fact is that our intelligence and law-enforcement agencies, no matter how effective they are, cannot identify every would-be mass shooter, whether that individual was motivated by ISIL or some other hateful ideology.
What we can do, and must do, is make it harder for them to kill.
Next, we should put in place stronger screening for those who come to America without a visa so that we can take a hard look at whether they've traveled to war zones. And we're working with members of both parties in Congress to do exactly that.
Finally, if Congress believes, as I do, that we are at war with ISIL, it should go ahead and vote to authorize the continued use of military force against these terrorists.
For over a year, I have ordered our military to take thousands of air strikes against ISIL targets. I think it's time for Congress to vote to demonstrate that the American people are united and committed to this fight.
My fellow Americans, these are the steps that we can take together to defeat the terrorist threat.
Let me now say a word about what we should not do. We should not be drawn once more into a long and costly ground war in Iraq or Syria. That's what groups like ISIL want. They know they can't defeat us on the battlefield. ISIL fighters were part of the insurgency that we faced in Iraq. But they also know that if we occupy foreign lands, they can maintain insurgencies for years, killing thousands of our troops and draining our resources, and using our presence to draw new recruits.
The strategy that we are using now -- air strikes, special forces, and working with local forces who are fighting to regain control of their own country -- that is how we'll achieve a more sustainable victory, and it won't require us sending a new generation of Americans overseas to fight and die for another decade on foreign soil.
Here's what else we cannot do. We cannot turn against one another by letting this fight be defined as a war between America and Islam. That, too, is what groups like ISIL want.
ISIL does not speak for Islam. They are thugs and killers, part of a cult of death. And they account for a tiny fraction of a more than a billion Muslims around the world, including millions of patriotic Muslim-Americans who reject their hateful ideology.
Moreover, the vast majority of terrorist victims around the world are Muslim.
If we're to succeed in defeating terrorism, we must enlist Muslim communities as some of our strongest allies, rather than push them away through suspicion and hate.
That does not mean denying the fact that an extremist ideology has spread within some Muslim communities. It's a real problem that Muslims must confront without excuse.
Muslim leaders here and around the globe have to continue working with us to decisively and unequivocally reject the hateful ideology that groups like ISIL and Al Qaeda promote, to speak out against not just acts of violence, but also those interpretations of Islam that are incompatible with the values of religious tolerance, mutual respect, and human dignity.
But just as it is the responsibility of Muslims around the world to root out misguided ideas that lead to radicalization, it is the responsibility of all Americans, of every faith, to reject discrimination. It is our responsibility to reject religious tests on who we admit into this country. It's our responsibility to reject proposals that Muslim-Americans should somehow be treated differently. Because when we travel down that road, we lose. That kind of divisiveness, that betrayal of our values plays into the hands of groups like ISIL.
Muslim-Americans are our friends and our neighbors, our co- workers, our sports heroes. And, yes, they are our men and women in uniform who are willing to die in defense of our country. We have to remember that.
My fellow Americans, I am confident we will succeed in this mission because we are on the right side of history. We were founded upon a belief in human dignity that no matter who you are, or where you come from, or what you look like or what religion you practice, you are equal in the eyes of God and equal in the eyes of the law. Even in this political season, even as we properly debate what steps I and future presidents must take to keep our country safe. Let's make sure we never forget what makes us exceptional. Let's not forget that freedom is more powerful than fear. That we have always met challenges, whether war or depression, natural disasters or terrorist attacks, by coming together around our common ideals as one nation and one people.
So long as we stay true to that tradition, I have no doubt that America will prevail.
Thank you. God bless you. And may God bless the United States of America.
Kinda weak sauce to be using the Oval Office for this speech. It's okay for the most part... except for the whole "What could possibly be the argument for allowing a terrorist suspect to buy a semiautomatic weapon? " trope...
*shrugs*
Isn't this the first time Obama implored Congress for a new AUMF against ISIL?
What? He should have flown a fighter jet onto an aircraft carrier and given the speech beneath a big, "Mission Accomplished" banner?
::shrug:: Presidents use a variety of locations/means to add gravitas to their message, at least the Oval Office didn't cost the tax payers anything extra.
Six mistakes mankind keeps making century after century: Believing that personal gain is made by crushing others; Worrying about things that cannot be changed or corrected; Insisting that a thing is impossible because we cannot accomplish it; Refusing to set aside trivial preferences; Neglecting development and refinement of the mind; Attempting to compel others to believe and live as we do
2015/12/07 18:43:18
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Good evening. On Wednesday, 14 Americans were killed as they came together to celebrate the holidays. They were taken from family and friends who loved them deeply. They were white and black, Latino and Asian, immigrants, and American born, moms and dads, daughters and sons. Each of them served their fellow citizens. All of them were part of our American family.
Tonight I want to talk with you about this tragedy, the broader threat of terrorism and how we can keep our country safe. The FBI is still gathering the facts about what happened in San Bernardino, but here's what we know. The victims were brutally murdered and injured by one of their co-workers and his wife. So far, we have no evidence that the killers were directed by a terrorist organization overseas or that they were part of a broader conspiracy here at home. But it is clear that the two of them had gone down the dark path of radicalization, embracing a perverted interpretation of Islam that calls for war against America and the West. They had stockpiled assault weapons, ammunition, and pipe bombs.
So this was an act of terrorism designed to kill innocent people. Our nation has been at war with terrorists since Al Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 Americans on 9/11. In the process, we've hardened our defenses, from airports, to financial centers, to other critical infrastructure. Intelligence and law enforcement agencies have disrupted countless plots here and overseas and worked around the clock to keep us safe.
Our military and counterterrorism professionals have relentlessly pursued terrorist networks overseas, disrupting safe havens in several different countries, killing Osama Bin Laden, and decimating Al Qaeda's leadership.
Over the last few years, however, the terrorist threat has evolved into a new phase. As we've become better at preventing complex multifaceted attacks like 9/11, terrorists turn to less complicated acts of violence like the mass shootings that are all too common in our society. It is this type of attack that we saw at Fort Hood in 2009, in Chattanooga earlier this year, and now in San Bernardino.
And as groups like ISIL grew stronger amidst the chaos of war in Iraq and then Syria, and as the Internet erases the distance between countries, we see growing efforts by terrorists to poison the minds of people like the Boston Marathon bombers and the San Bernardino killers.
For seven years, I've confronted this evolving threat each and every morning in my intelligence briefing, and since the day I took this office, I have authorized U.S. forces to take out terrorists abroad precisely because I know how real the danger is.
As commander in chief, I have no greater responsibility than the security of the American people.
As a father to two young daughters who are the most precious part of my life, I know that we see ourselves with friends and co-workers at a holiday party like the one in San Bernardino. I know we see our kids in the faces of the young people killed in Paris.
And I know that after so much war, many Americans are asking whether we are confronted by a cancer that has no immediate cure.
OBAMA: Well, here's what I want you to know. The threat from terrorism is real, but we will overcome it. We will destroy ISIL and any other organization that tries to harm us. Our success won't depend on tough talk, or abandoning our values or giving into fear. That's what groups like ISIL are hoping for. Instead, we will prevail by being strong and smart, resilient and relentless. And by drawing upon every aspect of American power.
Here's how. First, our military will continue to hunt down terrorist plotters in any country where it is necessary. In Iraq and Syria, air strikes are taking out ISIL leaders, heavy weapons, oil tankers, infrastructure.
And since attacks in Paris, our closest allies, including France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, have ramped up their contributions to our military campaign which will help us accelerate our effort to destroy ISIL.
Second, we will continue to provide training and equipment to tens of thousands of Iraqi and Syrian forces fighting ISIL on the ground so that we take away their safe havens.
In both countries, we're deploying special operations forces who can accelerate that offensive. We've stepped up this effort since the attacks in Paris, and will continue to invest more in approaches that are working on the ground.
Third, we're working with friends and allies to stop ISIL's operations, to disrupt plots, cut off their financing, and prevent them from recruiting more fighters.
Since the attacks in Paris, we've surged merged intelligence sharing with our European allies. We're working with Turkey to seal its border with Syria, and we are cooperating with Muslim majority countries, and with our Muslim communities here at home, to counter the vicious ideology that ISIL promotes online.
Fourth, with American leadership, the international community has begun to establish a process and timeline to pursue cease-fires and a political resolution to the Syrian war.
Doing so will allow the Syrian people and every country, including our allies, but also countries like Russia, to focus on the common goal of destroying ISIL, a group that threatens us all.
This is our strategy to destroy ISIL. It is designed and supported by our military commanders and counterterrorism experts, together with 65 countries that have joined an American-led coalition. And we constantly examine our strategy to determine when additional steps are needed to get the job done.
That's why I've ordered the Departments of State and Homeland Security to review the visa waiver program under which the female terrorist in San Bernardino originally came to this country. And that's why I will urge high-tech and law enforcement leaders to make it harder for terrorists to use technology to escape from justice.
Now, here at home, we have to work together to address the challenge. There are several steps that Congress should take right away. To begin with, Congress should act to make sure no one on a no- fly list is able to buy a gun. What could possibly be the argument for allowing a terrorist suspect to buy a semiautomatic weapon? This is a matter of national security.
We also need to make it harder for people to buy powerful assault weapons, like the ones that were used in San Bernardino. I know there are some who reject any gun-safety measures, but the fact is that our intelligence and law-enforcement agencies, no matter how effective they are, cannot identify every would-be mass shooter, whether that individual was motivated by ISIL or some other hateful ideology.
What we can do, and must do, is make it harder for them to kill.
Next, we should put in place stronger screening for those who come to America without a visa so that we can take a hard look at whether they've traveled to war zones. And we're working with members of both parties in Congress to do exactly that.
Finally, if Congress believes, as I do, that we are at war with ISIL, it should go ahead and vote to authorize the continued use of military force against these terrorists.
For over a year, I have ordered our military to take thousands of air strikes against ISIL targets. I think it's time for Congress to vote to demonstrate that the American people are united and committed to this fight.
My fellow Americans, these are the steps that we can take together to defeat the terrorist threat.
Let me now say a word about what we should not do. We should not be drawn once more into a long and costly ground war in Iraq or Syria. That's what groups like ISIL want. They know they can't defeat us on the battlefield. ISIL fighters were part of the insurgency that we faced in Iraq. But they also know that if we occupy foreign lands, they can maintain insurgencies for years, killing thousands of our troops and draining our resources, and using our presence to draw new recruits.
The strategy that we are using now -- air strikes, special forces, and working with local forces who are fighting to regain control of their own country -- that is how we'll achieve a more sustainable victory, and it won't require us sending a new generation of Americans overseas to fight and die for another decade on foreign soil.
Here's what else we cannot do. We cannot turn against one another by letting this fight be defined as a war between America and Islam. That, too, is what groups like ISIL want.
ISIL does not speak for Islam. They are thugs and killers, part of a cult of death. And they account for a tiny fraction of a more than a billion Muslims around the world, including millions of patriotic Muslim-Americans who reject their hateful ideology.
Moreover, the vast majority of terrorist victims around the world are Muslim.
If we're to succeed in defeating terrorism, we must enlist Muslim communities as some of our strongest allies, rather than push them away through suspicion and hate.
That does not mean denying the fact that an extremist ideology has spread within some Muslim communities. It's a real problem that Muslims must confront without excuse.
Muslim leaders here and around the globe have to continue working with us to decisively and unequivocally reject the hateful ideology that groups like ISIL and Al Qaeda promote, to speak out against not just acts of violence, but also those interpretations of Islam that are incompatible with the values of religious tolerance, mutual respect, and human dignity.
But just as it is the responsibility of Muslims around the world to root out misguided ideas that lead to radicalization, it is the responsibility of all Americans, of every faith, to reject discrimination. It is our responsibility to reject religious tests on who we admit into this country. It's our responsibility to reject proposals that Muslim-Americans should somehow be treated differently. Because when we travel down that road, we lose. That kind of divisiveness, that betrayal of our values plays into the hands of groups like ISIL.
Muslim-Americans are our friends and our neighbors, our co- workers, our sports heroes. And, yes, they are our men and women in uniform who are willing to die in defense of our country. We have to remember that.
My fellow Americans, I am confident we will succeed in this mission because we are on the right side of history. We were founded upon a belief in human dignity that no matter who you are, or where you come from, or what you look like or what religion you practice, you are equal in the eyes of God and equal in the eyes of the law. Even in this political season, even as we properly debate what steps I and future presidents must take to keep our country safe. Let's make sure we never forget what makes us exceptional. Let's not forget that freedom is more powerful than fear. That we have always met challenges, whether war or depression, natural disasters or terrorist attacks, by coming together around our common ideals as one nation and one people.
So long as we stay true to that tradition, I have no doubt that America will prevail.
Thank you. God bless you. And may God bless the United States of America.
Kinda weak sauce to be using the Oval Office for this speech. It's okay for the most part... except for the whole "What could possibly be the argument for allowing a terrorist suspect to buy a semiautomatic weapon? " trope...
*shrugs*
Isn't this the first time Obama implored Congress for a new AUMF against ISIL?
What? He should have flown a fighter jet onto an aircraft carrier and given the speech beneath a big, "Mission Accomplished" banner?
::shrug:: Presidents use a variety of locations/means to add gravitas to their message, at least the Oval Office didn't cost the tax payers anything extra.
Conducting a speech at the Oval Office has the "prestige factor"... he spoke there when he announced that we got Bin Laden.
Anyhoo... polling news that's interesting now because it'll be sorta "locked in" due to the holidays.
Regardless of where it was filmed, "To begin with, Congress should act to make sure no one on a no- fly list is able to buy a gun." does not sound like a reasonable approach when no one has full defined the criteria for how you get on the no-fly lists, who gets to determine who is on the no-fly list, and what the legal recourse is for people to get off the no-fly list.
Furthermore, to use this "arbitrary" list of people the government doesn't like as a means to prevent/remove a constitutionally protected right is absurdly illegal and abusive of a government supposedly of, for and by the people.
Anyway, I'm just in a gakky mood right now. I'm probably wrong.
DA:70S+G+M+B++I++Pw40k08+D++A++/fWD-R+T(M)DM+
2015/12/07 19:11:21
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
kronk wrote: Regardless of where it was filmed, "To begin with, Congress should act to make sure no one on a no- fly list is able to buy a gun." does not sound like a reasonable approach when no one has full defined the criteria for how you get on the no-fly lists, who gets to determine who is on the no-fly list, and what the legal recourse is for people to get off the no-fly list.
Furthermore, to use this "arbitrary" list of people the government doesn't like as a means to prevent/remove a constitutionally protected right is absurdly illegal and abusive of a government supposedly of, for and by the people.
Anyway, I'm just in a gakky mood right now. I'm probably wrong.
No. You're insanely right.
Kronk, doing his part to keep the population of Europe steady state since Berlin '87.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2015/12/07 19:11:46
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
kronk wrote: Regardless of where it was filmed, "To begin with, Congress should act to make sure no one on a no- fly list is able to buy a gun." does not sound like a reasonable approach when no one has full defined the criteria for how you get on the no-fly lists, who gets to determine who is on the no-fly list, and what the legal recourse is for people to get off the no-fly list.
Furthermore, to use this "arbitrary" list of people the government doesn't like as a means to prevent/remove a constitutionally protected right is absurdly illegal and abusive of a government supposedly of, for and by the people.
Anyway, I'm just in a gakky mood right now. I'm probably wrong.
No. You're insanely right.
Kronk, doing his part to keep the population of Europe steady state since Berlin '87.
100% on track man.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/12/07 19:13:28
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2015/12/07 19:58:28
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
True enough, but I don't think the threat of terrorism is out of place in a list of topics that include The War on Terror (GWB), immigration reform (GWB), a balanced budget (Clinton), the Dayton Agreement (Clinton), the nomination of a CIA director (GHW Bush), the decision to seek reelection (Reagan), and your own likely reelection (Reagan).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/12/07 20:01:02
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
2015/12/07 20:15:11
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
True enough, but I don't think the threat of terrorism is out of place in a list of topics that include The War on Terror (GWB), immigration reform (GWB), a balanced budget (Clinton), the Dayton Agreement (Clinton), the nomination of a CIA director (GHW Bush), the decision to seek reelection (Reagan), and your own likely reelection (Reagan).
Wow, I had forgotten Regan used it to announce his reelection. Talk about putting the bully pulpit to use. Imagine if a president were to do that today how many people would be up in arms...
Help me, Rhonda. HA!
2015/12/07 20:18:23
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
True enough, but I don't think the threat of terrorism is out of place in a list of topics that include The War on Terror (GWB), immigration reform (GWB), a balanced budget (Clinton), the Dayton Agreement (Clinton), the nomination of a CIA director (GHW Bush), the decision to seek reelection (Reagan), and your own likely reelection (Reagan).
Wow, I had forgotten Regan used it to announce his reelection. Talk about putting the bully pulpit to use. Imagine if a president were to do that today how many people would be up in arms...
Meh, you'd get a few radicals screaming on facebook, some memes would get posted, we'd all forget about it in a week.
Full Frontal Nerdity
2015/12/07 20:30:06
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
It was a fairly good address I think. He hit some points and used some language I've seen conservatives complain he never uses. Though I doubt anything he could have said would have made Fox watchers happy. He didn't hit very many touchy feely liberal points either. It was a fairly center of the road speech which would be my demographic (lol).
He did the right thing as POTUS. He pointed out some issues and put it on Congress to resolve. It is their job to resolve these issues and its his job to execute their decisions. I still don't know why we let Congress get away with sitting on their thumbs so we can blame the president for everything.
2015/12/07 20:39:11
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
kronk wrote: Regardless of where it was filmed, "To begin with, Congress should act to make sure no one on a no- fly list is able to buy a gun." does not sound like a reasonable approach when no one has full defined the criteria for how you get on the no-fly lists, who gets to determine who is on the no-fly list, and what the legal recourse is for people to get off the no-fly list.
Furthermore, to use this "arbitrary" list of people the government doesn't like as a means to prevent/remove a constitutionally protected right is absurdly illegal and abusive of a government supposedly of, for and by the people.
Anyway, I'm just in a gakky mood right now. I'm probably wrong.
Kronk, I brought up this exact issue in the San Bernardino Shooting thread. Denying civil rights (regardless if you agree with them or not) based on a secret list developed with unknown criteria and no means of redress is unconstitutional. But our President and people of like mind just don't seem to be able to wrap their heads around that concept.
Still, everyone is blathering on about gun control. What about the pipe bombs? Why isn't anyone talking about bomb control? Why isn't there a message that terrorists shouldn't be allowed access to bombs? Why are there no calls for Congress to make new laws restricting the availability of pipe bombs? Yes, there is a lot of sarcasm in this paragraph but I do it to make a point. Stop demanding meaningless laws and start looking at the causal factors that make someone go the path of the radical Islamist.