Discussion: The REPUBLICAN Party XV

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Marvolo, Mar 6, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Marvolo Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Messages:
    45,015
    Likes Received:
    8,442
    This government has always been about checks and balances. Install checks and balances and we do not have to worry about a president maliciously using it against the innocent. Congress is just too damn lazy and too partisan too set down and think up a smart plan for drone use in the States.
     
  2. craigdbfan Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2008
    Messages:
    31,173
    Likes Received:
    0
    Predator drones being used in American soil against Americans is a very scary thing to think about. The innocent casualties (collateral damage) that could (would) be inflicted is sickening regardless of who they're going after.
     
  3. enterthemadness The Triumvirate

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    28,543
    Likes Received:
    15

    Soldiers can keep themselves safe. And before you jump all over me, when you join the service, you should know the risks. However, now other countries are gonna have drones and they don't like us, and our drone policy isn't very good...which is why I say drones are worse than Nukes.

    I will say to you, it's gonna get to a point where we will be at war with someone and it be our troops and drones and whatever vs the other country's troops, drones, and whatever.

    Um, Paul has also bought attention to the matter. Trending on Twitter earlier and lots of press on-line from MSM and Indie sites.
     
  4. enterthemadness The Triumvirate

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    28,543
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ball is in the WH court. Rand will allow a vote to happen in the morning on Brennan becoming the CIA Director if he gets a answer in writing on drone use.

    Which may be...well...who knows, probably not anytime soon.
     
  5. Marvolo Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Messages:
    45,015
    Likes Received:
    8,442
    As opposed to the casualties of a dirty bomb going off that the target is threatening to set off.

    Drones keep our soldiers from being forced into certain situations, and our drones can get targets that a ground assault can't. Its the 21st century and we have the most advanced military in the world. The days of sending in thousands of troops to be slaughtered by our enemies should be behind us. Strategic airforce strikes should be the way to go on foreign soil.
     
  6. enterthemadness The Triumvirate

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    28,543
    Likes Received:
    15

    I don't want my rights taken away for the sake of the greater good. Basically, once you give up a civil liberty, good luck getting it back.


    I am anti-drones 100%. Anti-Nukes 100%. Rand Paul is in favor of drone use to help out our military overseas.

    However, I've said that other countries have Nukes...other countries are getting Drone technology. So I'm in the minority.
     
  7. Marvolo Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Messages:
    45,015
    Likes Received:
    8,442
    No one is taking your rights away. But we should have a plan in place in case of a worse case scenario. Sending in a ground assault to take out a terrorist in the States could cost many lives where-as a missle from a drone could take him out with very minimal loss of life.
     
  8. enterthemadness The Triumvirate

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    28,543
    Likes Received:
    15

    Drone Policy in America includes spying, so that is taking my right away from me. My Privacy. You do know by 2015, or 2020, that the FAA has to make room for a few thousand drones in our skies. Unarmed drones. And police forces, colleges want them. I, however, do not.
     
  9. Marvolo Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Messages:
    45,015
    Likes Received:
    8,442
    You have privacy in your home. When you are in public you are in public and a drone is no more taking your rights than google earth or a security camera.
     
  10. enterthemadness The Triumvirate

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    28,543
    Likes Received:
    15

    What about my backyard? Can't some drones have technolocy to see through houses to see what is going on inside?
     
  11. Marvolo Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Messages:
    45,015
    Likes Received:
    8,442
    With current tech the most they could see in your house would be heat signatures, and that is pushing it. There is so much heat running through your house that discerning you from your surrounding would be difficult. There are already laws in place to stop illegal spying so you needn't worry about it from the government.

    Most tech is already on the civillian market, and theoretically civillians can get into your privacy as easily if not easier than the government can. In the next 10-15 years with the continued tech advancements and interconnnectivity of poeple I expect our boundaries to become even smaller. Civillians will be more in your business than the government is right now. If you're really paranoid you can block these intrusions.
     
  12. enterthemadness The Triumvirate

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    28,543
    Likes Received:
    15
    The Filibuster....went bust, it end at over 12 1/2 hours. Little bit past that mark.

    Awwwwwwww.
     
  13. Marvolo Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Messages:
    45,015
    Likes Received:
    8,442
    Ol McCaine gave Paul a bit of his mind:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/07/rand-paul-john-mccain-filibuster_n_2829358.html
     
  14. enterthemadness The Triumvirate

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    28,543
    Likes Received:
    15
    Well, we got a answer...and...


    http://www.paul.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=735

    It a 'NO'.

    Now of course what does combat mean? Well, it clearly doesn't mean protesting out in the streets, cause that isn't combat. But it's a good answer is leaves me happy.
     
  15. Marvolo Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Messages:
    45,015
    Likes Received:
    8,442
    It was always a no. This filibuster was pointless.
     
  16. Ant-manic Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    4,016
    Likes Received:
    0
    so if we stopped using drones then the other side would too?
     
  17. enterthemadness The Triumvirate

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    28,543
    Likes Received:
    15
    It can not be a vague answer. It has to be yes or no. Rand got a answer. It was a no.


    No, probably not. While I am 100% anti drone, it's going to be awfully hard to convince others to not use drones, when we use them on other countries. Hell, you can buy a unarmed drone today for $700 I saw the other night on CBS or ABC News...they have a camera......and can go up to 1,000 feet in the air.

    :o I wonder when a student film maker will make a movie using only a drone with a camera attached to it? Eh...Eh...-_- eh.

    http://news.discovery.com/tech/drones-sky-122302.htm

    ^ I have a few issues with the above in the link. But FAA has until end of Sept 2015 to clear the skies for Drones. One of the issues is I don't like drones being used to monitor traffic cause, lets be honest...everybody goes over the limit by 5 miles. It's called 'flow of traffic' :cmad: and you stop tail gating me you--:o well, ya get idea.
     
  18. hippie_hunter The King is Back!

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2003
    Messages:
    53,331
    Likes Received:
    0
    It wasn't always a "No." For the longest time various cabinet officials have been stating how the President can use his war powers to combat terrorism on American citizens and now Rand Paul has forced them to say a flat out "No" because it made them look bad. Really, really bad. Like lower than the Bush Administration in terms of bad.
     
  19. Victarion Iron Captain

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2006
    Messages:
    20,506
    Likes Received:
    2
    Is anyone surprised that John McCain called out Rand for the fillibuster?
     
  20. NickNitro Extra Terrestrial

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    Messages:
    8,222
    Likes Received:
    0
    Speaking of filibusters I found this little gem. Could you image talking for this long?

    The record for the longest individual speech goes to South Carolina's Strom Thurmond. Thurmond filibustered for 24 hours and 18 minutes against the Civil Rights Act of 1957, Senate historians say.
     
  21. Schlosser85 Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    0
    Likes Received:
    5
    That's quite a determined racist.
     
  22. Kelly #RESIST

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    70,135
    Likes Received:
    120
    I've read excerpts from that filibuster....quite interesting....
     
  23. Marvolo Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Messages:
    45,015
    Likes Received:
    8,442
    I never thought the president would bomb his own people without cause. That cause being an absolute extreme one of an american performing an act of terrorism on US soil requiring him to jump through hoops and red tape. Nothing has ever given me reason to think that he would do it for ****s and giggles whenever he pleases. It doesnt matter what cabinet officials say. Where do people come up with this stuff? Its like they forget the checks and balances this country has. And it looks like Rand only did this to get the Lib party media attention.
     
  24. Kelly #RESIST

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    70,135
    Likes Received:
    120
    Maybe he truly believes what he is saying?

    I understand that people have a very skewed view of politicians, and few if any trust them....I'm one of those people, I am very leary of politicians....but I don't necessarily AUTOMATICALLY write them off as being out for attention, in the pocket of whomever, or all the other things we say....He isn't a Boehner, or a Reid, or a Bachmann where we have watched them for a long time and know exactly where they are coming from. For some reason, I really believe he believes what he says, and did this solely because of that reason. He just doesn't have enough of a history at this level to really speculate. Now, I may be saying something totally different in a few years....but from hearing him talk about this and other things....I may not always agree with it, but I can't really question his sincerity at this point.
     
  25. enterthemadness The Triumvirate

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    28,543
    Likes Received:
    15
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"