Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-05-2013, 01:57 PM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,431,094 times
Reputation: 9618

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
It is nothing at all like a coup.

Did the National Guard in WI take over ?
A recall is another election process, not a military takeover.
And if they lose the recall then they make due until the next election.

You really have no clue.
1. a coup does NOT have to be military...

2. its funny the fascist lieft was calling walker and his ilk a coup against democracy...

here is the leftist huffpo and the leftist robert reich calling what walker did on a bill to get it passed a coup
Robert Reich: Governor Walker's Coup D'Etat

here again its named a coup
Unions Looking Like Losers in Wisconsin Recall | Via Meadia

or here also
http://sonoranalliance.com/2011/12/1...lpe-de-estado/



or here also:
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...Glp3I_fsXsxo5A
Wisconsin Democrats attempt coup-by-recall


so do I reaaly have no clue...or has a precedence been set by the MSM
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-05-2013, 02:06 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,321,515 times
Reputation: 27718
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
1. a coup does NOT have to be military...

2. its funny the fascist lieft was calling walker and his ilk a coup against democracy...

here is the leftist huffpo and the leftist robert reich calling what walker did on a bill to get it passed a coup
Robert Reich: Governor Walker's Coup D'Etat

here again its named a coup
Unions Looking Like Losers in Wisconsin Recall | Via Meadia

or here also
http://sonoranalliance.com/2011/12/1...lpe-de-estado/



or here also:
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...Glp3I_fsXsxo5A
Wisconsin Democrats attempt coup-by-recall


so do I reaaly have no clue...or has a precedence been set by the MSM
And calling those that disagree with Obama either racists or terrorists are more precedents.

Using extreme verbage are tactics of activists. Their goal is to stir your emotions, not your mind.
There was no "coup" in Wisconsin. There wasn't even talk of a coup in any city, state in the US.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2013, 02:06 PM
 
17,387 posts, read 9,207,763 times
Reputation: 11857
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
Obama won't even say the word "coup" and Congress is meeting to decide if a coup even happened in Egypt.


It was a military coup, plain as the nose on your face.
I've seen you post this bit about Congress meeting to decide about the "coup" at least 4 times.

Where did you get that info?
I've checked RollCall, The Hill, Bloomberg & Washington Post.

We've already given Egypt their $1.5 Billion dollars for 2013 (Congress said NOPE, but Clinton "waived" that NOPE). There are always "waivers" in these appropriations Bills for the President and the Secretary of State. Congress bloviates, they don't actually do much. They are all out of town for the July break, so they certainly are not doing anything now. They haven't even started on the 2014 appropriations and won't (according to Leahy) until Oct 1.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2013, 02:14 PM
 
Location: Flippin AR
5,513 posts, read 5,230,375 times
Reputation: 6242
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1547 View Post
Well....overthrowing the government means you throw everything out and start over with a brand new government--not just new leaders--that creates new laws and a new constitution.
Yes, but even the new laws will prohibit all others from using force to seize power from the newly-established government leaders. It is never "legal" for the military (which is led by non-elected officials) to overthrow an existing government by force--remember, the primary purpose of laws and the legal system is to protect those in power.

Such laws do not preclude a combined military/government system like we saw in Nazi Germany, where those who show exemplary service in the military can be promoted to powerful government positions, which is different from seizing power by force. Of course, history shows us that militaristic governments (like Empire-style governments) rank low in terms of human rights and civilian freedoms, but very high in danger to their geographic neighbors and the world community.

The military is supposed to be a tool to be directed by government leaders for the exclusive purpose of defending the nation and its interests (note the "supposed to be"). America does have some limits to the power given to elected officials: for instance, the President cannot accomplish a nuclear strike without the express support of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who represent the Top Brass of the armed services.

Because a military coup is orchestrated by those willing to kill countless numbers of their own countrymen for personal gain, it almost always results in a very repressive regime based on heavy-handed use of power against the citizenry. And even if the previous government was tyrannical, a military coup will also result in a tyrannical government--unless, of course, the leader of the coup is both an intellectual with a firm grasp of history, and an idealist for the freedom of the common man such as our Founding Fathers. Since these types of people are almost unheard of today (maybe 1 in 1,000 people), and since they don't rise to the levels of power needed to orchestrate a military coup, it is pretty much certain that a military coup is not going to improve the lot of the citizens.

There is a big difference between a military coup (like Castro's Cuba) and a citizen-led rebellion (think of the French Rebellion and Marie Antoinette, or the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia). Our Founding Fathers warned that even the most well-designed centralized (federal) government will constantly grow and eat away at the restrictions that were put in place to contain it, until it has confiscated so much of the wealth and freedom of the citizenry and the economy that it is unsupportable. Luckily America's previous wealth (plus limitless borrowing and printing money) has allowed huge numbers of people to survive and proliferate, even with the following fundamental problems: an economy structurally changed to minimize jobs and continually lower median wages (even as the labor force grows); wealth confiscating at the very top via a number of different economic mechanisms (e.g., dollar devaluation and the stock market); non-productive spending of government increasingly diverting taxpayer income from economy-stimulating spending (the theoretical "government multiplier" ONLY applies to new fiat currency, not dollars confiscated via taxes); and government debt that is now so large it can only be inflated away (along with the value of wages and savings for the working class).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2013, 02:28 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,321,515 times
Reputation: 27718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kibby View Post
I've seen you post this bit about Congress meeting to decide about the "coup" at least 4 times.

Where did you get that info?
I've checked RollCall, The Hill, Bloomberg & Washington Post.

We've already given Egypt their $1.5 Billion dollars for 2013 (Congress said NOPE, but Clinton "waived" that NOPE). There are always "waivers" in these appropriations Bills for the President and the Secretary of State. Congress bloviates, they don't actually do much. They are all out of town for the July break, so they certainly are not doing anything now. They haven't even started on the 2014 appropriations and won't (according to Leahy) until Oct 1.
And in March Kerry promised them another $1 billion to fix their economy.


US hopes to use aid as incentive for Egypt generals to restore democracy | World news | guardian.co.uk
Under the terms of Foreign Operations Appropriations law enacted each year by Congress, the US government is prohibited from giving aid to "the government of any country whose duly elected head of government is deposed by military coup d'état or decree or … a coup d'état or decree in which the military plays a decisive role"


But Washington officials have been very careful not to describe Wednesday's events in Egypt in precisely such terms yet – leaving open the possibility they may use any power sharing by the generals in Cairo as an excuse not to trigger the clause.
..

(and here's the State Dept's statement..clear as mud)
"With respect to the ongoing situation in Egypt, it's premature to suggest that we have taken steps, we're thinking about taking steps. I'm not going to get ahead of, of course, events on the ground, but clearly assessments would be made based on the facts on the ground and choices made by all parties, if needed."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2013, 02:56 PM
 
Location: Too far from home.
8,732 posts, read 6,769,906 times
Reputation: 2374
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
Well that's how it ended up isn't it ?
We have the NSA now remember so it's not just a "handful of operatives" anymore.

It was a mere phone call that caught him.
And the caller's name was given to the CIA by a prisoner held in a secret CIA prison in eastern Europe years ago.
Who and what the hell are you talking about now?? You tend to go in a completely different direction and babble on about something else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2013, 03:01 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,321,515 times
Reputation: 27718
Quote:
Originally Posted by softblueyz View Post
Who and what the hell are you talking about now?? You tend to go in a completely different direction and babble on about something else.
You were the one that talked about our soldiers looking for bin Laden.
You were the one that said a handful of CIA agents couldn't do it.

Not knowing what I'm "babbling" about means you don't know how bin Laden was finally caught.
It was not due to us invading Afghanistan and Iraq with hundreds of thousands of US soldiers.

Here's your post:

Originally Posted by softblueyz
If an army of thousands from various countries couldn't find OBL in Afghanistan, do you really think a handful of CIA operatives would have?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2013, 04:20 PM
 
Location: Too far from home.
8,732 posts, read 6,769,906 times
Reputation: 2374
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
You were the one that talked about our soldiers looking for bin Laden.
You were the one that said a handful of CIA agents couldn't do it.

Not knowing what I'm "babbling" about means you don't know how bin Laden was finally caught.
It was not due to us invading Afghanistan and Iraq with hundreds of thousands of US soldiers.

Here's your post:

Originally Posted by softblueyz
If an army of thousands from various countries couldn't find OBL in Afghanistan, do you really think a handful of CIA operatives would have?
And my response (above) was to your original post:

Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
I knew we were in for the long haul when we sent troops into Afghanistan instead of a covert CIA operation to take out one man.

No, we had to decimate an entire country, take out another country while we were in the neighborhood only to find out he was living a quiet life in Pakistan right under the government's nose all this time.
So...............who opened up the subject of troops, the CIA and one man (OBL)??

If you are referring to Iraq being decimated, the reason behind the US going into Iraq had nothing to do with OBL because we were already in Afghanistan looking for him. The second country you refer to would be Afghanistan - the US invaded Afghanistan in 2001; the US went into Iraq in 2003. If you look at a map you will see that they are hardly neighboring countries. Finally we reach Pakistan, where the Pakistani government gave shelter to OBL for years. And that's where the US found him, because someone phoned it in, according to you. (See below)

Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
It was a mere phone call that caught him.
And the caller's name was given to the CIA by a prisoner held in a secret CIA prison in eastern Europe years ago.
If that's how it happened explain to me why there is a Pakistani doctor sitting in a prison in Pakistan, sentenced to 33 years, for helping the US track down OBL? At least that's the story that has been out there ever since they captured OBL. I can provide numerous links to support that.

How about you provide a couple of links to support your claim that it was a phone call that did OBL in. I would be very interested in reading them. I'm sure there will be some fascinating information.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2013, 04:28 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,321,515 times
Reputation: 27718
Quote:
Originally Posted by softblueyz View Post
And my response (above) was to your original post:



So...............who opened up the subject of troops, the CIA and one man (OBL)??

If you are referring to Iraq being decimated, the reason behind the US going into Iraq had nothing to do with OBL because we were already in Afghanistan looking for him. The second country you refer to would be Afghanistan - the US invaded Afghanistan in 2001; the US went into Iraq in 2003. If you look at a map you will see that they are hardly neighboring countries. Finally we reach Pakistan, where the Pakistani government gave shelter to OBL for years. And that's where the US found him, because someone phoned it in, according to you. (See below)



If that's how it happened explain to me why there is a Pakistani doctor sitting in a prison in Pakistan, sentenced to 33 years, for helping the US track down OBL? At least that's the story that has been out there ever since they captured OBL. I can provide numerous links to support that.

How about you provide a couple of links to support your claim that it was a phone call that did OBL in. I would be very interested in reading them. I'm sure there will be some fascinating information.
The CIA got him to run the vaccine program to get bin Laden's DNA.
Now think about that. The CIA knew where he was but needed the DNA.
It was bin Landen's runner that made the phone call that tracked him to Pakistan.
But the CIA had to verify that and that's where the doctor came in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2013, 04:43 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,321,515 times
Reputation: 27718
Quote:
Originally Posted by softblueyz View Post
And my response (above) was to your original post:



So...............who opened up the subject of troops, the CIA and one man (OBL)??

If you are referring to Iraq being decimated, the reason behind the US going into Iraq had nothing to do with OBL because we were already in Afghanistan looking for him. The second country you refer to would be Afghanistan - the US invaded Afghanistan in 2001; the US went into Iraq in 2003. If you look at a map you will see that they are hardly neighboring countries. Finally we reach Pakistan, where the Pakistani government gave shelter to OBL for years. And that's where the US found him, because someone phoned it in, according to you. (See below)



If that's how it happened explain to me why there is a Pakistani doctor sitting in a prison in Pakistan, sentenced to 33 years, for helping the US track down OBL? At least that's the story that has been out there ever since they captured OBL. I can provide numerous links to support that.

How about you provide a couple of links to support your claim that it was a phone call that did OBL in. I would be very interested in reading them. I'm sure there will be some fascinating information.
The phone call led to the courier. The courier lead to his location. The doctor verified it was him.
The doctor didn't find him. The CIA had already found his compound but couldn't verify he was in it.
The courier's name was given to the CIA in 2007.
Search for Osama bin Laden - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:06 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top