Monday, October 24, 2011

kaboom

According to Wikipedia, there were a total of 42 drone attacks in Northern Pakistan during the final 5 years of the Bush Administration. During the first 3 years of the Obama administration, there have already been 231 (this, also according to Wikipedia). I guess that my question here is, if President Bush was a war criminal......

15 comments:

w-dervish said...

The real authorities laugh at your suggestion of war crimes. No charges equals no crimes. The courts determine if crimes have been committed, thank goodness.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

I'm not the one making the charges.

w-dervish said...

Will: I'm not the one making the charges.

You could of fooled me. At the bottom of the post I see the following...

posted by Will "take no prisoners" Hart at 8:13 PM on Oct 24, 2011.

Did you allow your new best friend ecc102 to guest post a commentary?

Anonymous said...

@W-dervish,

You caught us, it seems. It is true that on a regular basis, (at least 5 times a day), Will and I talk on the phone about you, w-d, and how much we care about your opinions.

It's been a wonderful learning experience. I feel like I truly know you. :)

Sounds to me like someone is a little jealous...

Don't be, w-d. You should know you have a special place in my heart.

Now go fetch me a turkey pot pie!

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

I was playing devil's advocate, wd. I don't think that Mr. Obama is anything approaching a war criminal. I was just using YOUR criteria; the fact that neither the Congress nor the UN had ever approved these bombings in Pakistan, the fact that innocent civilians have been majorly killed in the process, etc..

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

I gotta get my Republican talking points somewhere (I apparently use them frequently), ecc102.

dmarks said...

Will said: "I was playing devil's advocate, wd"

At least you weren't acting like WD's main source Francis Boyle, who likes to declare people "war criminals" on wild whims. Attorney Alan Derschewitz earned this condemnation from Boyle. Probably just for being Jewish and being out spoken.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

wd stakes out the most extreme positions humanly possible (Reagan - the worst President in U.S. history, Bush is a war criminal, drop the retirement age to 55, protectionism on steroids, a top tax rate of 77.65%, handing over evidence to the Taliban, handing over bin Laden to bunch of anti-American dictators, the breaking up of Walmart, the Democrats getting ALL the credit for the 90s having a good economy, the Republicans getting ALL the blame for the current financial meltdown, an unwavering, uncritical support for anything labor-union, etc.). His unabashed support for this Boyle individual (no doubt because she reaffirms his preexisting notions) shouldn't come as any sort of a surprise, dmarks.

w-dervish said...

Will stakes out the most extreme positions humanly possible (FDR was a terrible president who prolonged the depression, Bush can only be mildly criticized for launching two illegal wars, "bums" are worthless human garbage, "free trade" on steroids, a tax rate of over 40 percent is unthinkable, going to war when war is avoidable is preferable, refusing to accept an offer to hand over bin Laden, allowing monopolies to dominate, the Democrats NOT getting all the credit for the 90s having a good economy, Conservatism NOT getting all the blame for the current financial meltdown, an unwavering, uncritical support for corporatism). His not reading my comments and going along with dmarks' lie about me having unabashed support for "this Boyle individual" (even though I don't) shouldn't come as any sort of a surprise...

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Lie #1) I never said that Roosevelt was a terrible President. I said that he was an overrated President. Lie #2) The first year of this blog was largely dedicated to criticizing President Bush. And very little of it was considered "mild". What, because I don't think that he's war criminal or a fascist? My God. Lie #3) I NEVER said that bums are "worthless human garbage" (an idiotic extrapolation if ever I heard one). Lie #4) Yes, I generally believe in free trade. But I've also said on several occasions that I'm a never say never kind of guy. And when I do propose free trade, I also advocate job retraining and middle class tax cuts. Lie #5) Name ONE monopoly that I've ever said should dominate. What, you've never heard of K-Mart, Target, Kohls, etc.?......As for my unwillingness to hand over evidence to the Taliban/bin Laden to a kangaroo court and wanting to annihilate the ENTIRETY of al Qaeda, sorry, buddy, but you're in the major league minority on that one (part of the 1%, if you will LOL) - ditto, with the knuckle-draggingly partisan economic posturing.

w-dervish said...

[Lie #1] It is a gross exaggeration to call my positions the "most extreme humanly possible". [Lie #2] You said Roosevelt's administration was akin to a Biblical plague. That most certainly DOES qualify as implying he was terrible in my book. [Lie #3] Reagan was the worst President in US history, hands down. To suggest otherwise is to ignore his record. [Lie #4] You expressed distain for "bums". The extrapolation isn't idiotic at all. [Lie #5] Bush committed war crimes, thus he is a war criminal [Lie #6] Jerry Critter was the one who first posted the link to the article by Thom Hartmann, the NUMBER ONE rated progressive talk show host in the nation, suggesting dropping the retirement age to 55 for people who were game... as a way to open up jobs for all the young people who are unemployed... it is a GOOD idea, not "extreme". [Lie #7] I am not for "protectionism on steroids", I'm for BRINGING BACK the old tariff rates. [Lie #8] Generally believing in free trade IS extreme. MANY people, Democrats and Republicans, see, or are beginning to see, the utter folly of "free trade". [Lie #9] I mentioned a top tax rate of 77.65% because it is endorsed by Robert Reich, a guy YOU use to support one of your positions! [Lie #10] I never said anything about handing over sensitive info to the Taliban... that was you! [Lie #11] The OIC is a non-governmental organization (with a delegation to the UN), thus turning bin Laden over to them for trial is NOT "handing over bin Laden to bunch of anti-American dictators" [Lie #12] Labeling the OIC a "kangaroo court". [Lie #13] Name ONE monopoly that you've ever said should dominate? What about Walmart?? You've never heard about Walmart moving into town and putting dozens of small stores out of business? [Lie #14] I have never expressed "unabashed" support for Francis Boyle... I strongly disagree with his views on Israel. [Lie #15] Labeling my views on economics "knuckle-draggingly partisan". Everything Will disagrees with is "partisan". It's a favorite insult of his... even though I've pointed out many times how I am not partisan. [Lie #16] Suggesting that the "entirety" of al Qaeda has been wiped out. bush's actions increased recruitment and made terrorism worse!

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

a) Name somebody more extreme in their views than you. b) I've stated on MANY occasions that I would give Mr. Roosevelt a B- (largely because of his leadership during the war). If that in your book is "terrible", then you're an idiot. c) Akin to a Biblical plague. What in the fuck are you talking about? d) I know how I feel about the homeless and it isn't what you say. I feel bad for people who are down on their luck and I donate regularly to the food bank. Do you? I also feel bad for people who are unable to stop drinking and taking drugs. e) Bush being a war criminal is strictly your opinion and no mainstream politician from either party has ever said that they concur with you. That and, has dmarks has consistently pointed out, apparently no court agrees with you, either. f) One business putting another business out of business doesn't constitute a monopoly. Walmart has a great many competitors (Target, K-mart, Kohls, etc.) and it often creates new businesses in the wake of those that they put out of business. g) The only way that we could have given proof to the Taliban would have been to compromise our intelligence. Evidence necessitates intelligence! Duh! h) I never said that Bush knocked out al Qaeda in it's entirety. That is a bald-faced lie and I've criticized Bush decisively for fucking up.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

And no mainstream historian has EVER said that Reagan was the worst President ever; not even the liberal Arthur Schlesinger. You're just being a total idiot on this one.............And find me just ONE reputable Democratic politician or pundit who thinks that Bush should have handed over bin Laden to Saddam Hussein, Muammer Gadaffi, Yasser Arafat, Hafez al Assad, the Iranian mullahs , and the Saudi royal family....For Christ sakes, he probably would have gotten impeached for that.

w-dervish said...

Will: Name somebody more extreme in their views than you.

Will Hart.

Will: Akin to a Biblical plague. What in the fuck are you talking about?

The post you wrote comparing Sarah Palin to FDR. You said at least Palin doesn't have locusts (a Biblical plague). In my your book that most certainly qualifies as "terrible".

Will: I know how I feel about the homeless and it isn't what you say.

I wasn't referring to how you feel. I was referring to what you've previously written.

Will: Bush being a war criminal is strictly your opinion and no mainstream politician from either party has ever said that they concur with you.

No "mainstream politician" has used those exact words, but Dennish Kucinich did introduce articles of impeachment that definitely implied that bush committed war crimes.

A politician using those exact words would be inflammatory and pointless... therefore I dismiss your criticism as meaningless.

Will: ...dmarks has consistently pointed out, apparently no court agrees with you, either.

Well, dmarks (and you) are wrong. A 3/28/2009 Guardian article says, "Criminal proceedings have begun in Spain against six senior officials in the Bush administration for the use of torture against detainees in Guantánamo Bay. [Judge] Baltasar Garzón... has referred the case to the chief prosecutor before deciding whether to proceed".

But the Obama Administration leaned on the Spanish government and the case was squashed.

Will: Walmart has a great many competitors...

A 7/24/2006 article from Alternet titled "The Case for Breaking Up Wal-Mart", says, "...one in every five retail sales in America is recorded at Wal-Mart's cash registers [and] the firm's revenue nearly equals that of the next six retailers combined".

Not much "competition" if you ask me.

Also, as pointed out by the same article, "...what should concern us today even more is a mirror image of monopoly called monopsony. Monopsony arises when a firm captures the ability to dictate price to its suppliers, because the suppliers have no real choice other than to deal with that buyer".

A 11/16/2004 PBS Frontline article says, "...our major mass retail chains call the shots in today's global economy, with a powerful impact on the decline of manufacturing in America and the rise of manufacturing in China and Asia. ... Wal-Mart is one of the key forces that propelled global outsourcing... precisely because it controls so much of the purchasing power of the U.S. economy...".

Monopoly or Monopsony, Walmart is bad for America and should be broken up.

w-dervish said...

Will: The only way that we could have given proof to the Taliban would have been to compromise our intelligence.

The only way you could know this is if you knew what that "intelligence" was. Which you don't.

Will: I never said that Bush knocked out al Qaeda in it's entirety. That is a bald-faced lie and I've criticized Bush decisively for fucking up.

Where did bush "fuck up"? Tora Bora? You think that if he hadn't "fucked up" there we could have "annihilated the ENTIRETY of al Qaeda"? I'm not sure I agree, but it certainly would have been a decisive blow, so I'll give you that one.

Will: And no mainstream historian has EVER said that Reagan was the worst President ever.

So what? We were talking about my views being "extreme", not out of step with "mainstream historians". A fairer metric would be a poll of Democrats. I looked for one on Google, but couldn't find anything. But I'd bet Reagan would be on the list of worst presidents... as ranked by Democrats.

Will: You're just being a total idiot on this one.

I think you're just being a total idiot on this one. There were these dummies called "Reagan Democrats", but I think most Democrats would be with me in thinking Reagan was a bad president.

Will: ...find me just ONE reputable Democratic politician or pundit who thinks that Bush should have handed over bin Laden to Saddam Hussein, Muammer Gadaffi, Yasser Arafat, Hafez al Assad, the Iranian mullahs...

Why? I've never suggested we should have done that. The OIC is a NON-GOVERNMENTAL organization. The group is unaffiliated with the individuals you listed.

As for a pundit who thinks we should have taken the Taliban up on their offer to turn bin Laden over to the OIC... Thom Hartmann. He's the No. 1 rated Liberal talk show host in the nation.