Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: butterdezillion

There are more valid reasons to seek impeachment than because of military actions. I can understand your concerns but I feel strongly it would set and equally dangerous precedent to force our military to conduct operations as a police force rather than as an Army. If an American wants to fight against American forces than I don’t want politics to determine whether he can be treated as any other enemy soldier.

If we can get control of the Senate than we can get rid of Barry for illegally by-passing congress.


50 posted on 06/25/2014 10:07:44 AM PDT by thejokker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]


To: thejokker

If a US citizen is on a battlefield fighting US troops there is no question that they can be shot just like anybody else in the enemy camp. That isn’t the question.

The question here is whether secret operations can kill any US citizen that Obama calls “belligerent” - with or without any proof and with him writing all the definitions secretly with no recourse by anybody.

My friend was not on a battlefield of any kind, but according to Obama’s line of reasoning he could have been detained or killed simply because the regime doesn’t want him helping me to expose the lawlessness of the regime. All I know is that he’s missing. What assurances can you give me that he has not been detained or killed simply because Obama wants him dead? That’s precisely the kind of permission Obama is giving himself here, with NO MEANS OF ACCOUNTABILITY. Given all that, why should I believe that Obama has not killed or detained my friend?

Obama has it totally backwards. When real combat is involved, our guys have to wait for the enemy to actually shoot before they can do anything but be sitting ducks. But when it’s Obama picking and choosing who to zot with masochistic zeal, the “enemy” doesn’t have to be doing anything, and doesn’t even have to be an enemy, from the sounds of it.

Somebody said that the claims of our allies being hit with drones is a propaganda lie of the terrorists, out to hurt the US. If that is so, then why are we losing our allies in places like Pakistan? If we’re taking out terrorists left and right and standing by our allies, and the people involved (who know who was killed and what they were up to) know that the friendly-fire claims are just terrorist propaganda, then why are we losing our allies there, why is terrorism surging, and why are our allies asking Dick Cheney (for instance) why America always protects and stands with its enemies and shafts its allies?

Why should Obama be impeached rather than hit with a drone, using the legal justifications that Obama gives himself?


52 posted on 06/25/2014 10:29:59 AM PDT by butterdezillion (Note to self : put this between arrow keys: img src=""/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson