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.
There's a stark difference between military action and funding terrorists.
WE have agreements with all of the countries we are in, which is why Obama pulled the troops from Iraq when there was no agreement renewal.
The way this bill is written it will not open that Pandora's box.
I agree with this. The families should have been paid off by the US government for the (NSA, FBI, CIA...ETC.) utter lack of comprehension and dropping the ball pre-911. They ignored all the signals for months and years leading up to it.
It's the CIC duty to listen to the military ans US intelligence, and consider the risks to U.S. troops and interests in the region, so the veto made sense.
As the Senators themselves are now pointing out, the flaws in the bill will allow families from other countries to sue the US over the deaths of their families caused by US.
Well good, it's high time that the U.S.be more careful in where/who they are bombing, instead of indiscriminately shedding innocent blood. Maybe this will also curb their bloodthirsty rush to war!
It's the CIC duty to listen to the military ans US intelligence, and consider the risks to U.S. troops and interests in the region, so the veto made sense.
As the Senators themselves are now pointing out, the flaws in the bill will allow families from other countries to sue the US over the deaths of their families caused by US.
My crystal ball says the US will regret overriding this veto.
An argument could be made for Iraq, although there were a lot of other countries involved in that as part of the coalition. Not to mention UN involvement.
But Afghanistan... nope.
Libya... definitely.
I don't like foreign entanglement any more than the next guy, but I am leery of blanket condemnations of the US.
My crystal ball says the US will regret overriding this veto.
Yep, mine as well.
You are just opening up the floodgates when you allow lawsuits against foreign governments. Now, I'm not saying the Saudi's are squeaky clean, because they aren't. But this is a BAD idea and could have some major repercussions.
There's a stark difference between military action and funding terrorists.
WE have agreements with all of the countries we are in, which is why Obama pulled the troops from Iraq when there was no agreement renewal.
The way this bill is written it will not open that Pandora's box.
I agree with this. The families should have been paid off by the US government for the (NSA, FBI, CIA...ETC.) utter lack of comprehension and dropping the ball pre-911. They ignored all the signals for months and years leading up to it.
The families were each paid an average of $1.8 million from the 9/11 Victim Fund. The challenge was and remains that many of the victims were very high earners.
Prior to 9/11, no one imagined that terrorists would fly airplanes into large buildings with the intent of causing buildings to collapse with people within, on live TV.
It remains a mystery to me that these 2 planes did not his at lower floors, thereby trapping a majority of people and causing a faster collapse. Pilot error or a desire to protract?
His own party in the congress rejected his dictatorship. What a pathetic failure his leadership has been.
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.
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.
