PDA

View Full Version : Obama Administration Punishes Navy Seals



huntinman
05-04-2011, 08:30 AM
This is old news... But remember the case where the Seals supposedly gave the terrorist a fat lip? Obama, Holder et al decided to prosecute the SEALS for roughing up a defenseless terrorist? I think at least one, maybe 2 of the SEALS are in jail over that incident. Now we are celebrating, (maybe even kicking off Obama's re-election campaign) with the death of an unarmed terrorist. Little double standard here.

Don't you think the administration owes those SEALS in the former case an apology? Shouldn't they be released from jail if they are still in custody?

mjh345
05-04-2011, 11:56 AM
Really!!! Thats the best you've got
Pretty desperate to avoid congratulating a job well done and long overdue

Cody Covey
05-04-2011, 12:02 PM
Really!!! Thats the best you've got
Pretty desperate to avoid congratulating a job well done and long overdue

So you see no hypocrisy is what you are saying?

Losthwy
05-04-2011, 12:12 PM
Just like the far right to dredge up old news or any news to discredit someone. Birth certificate, then lets see his transcripts... Remember how they dragged John Kerry's service record through the mud. Nothing is beneath them.

huntinman
05-04-2011, 02:04 PM
So you lefties think those Navy SEALS that got punished for giving a terrorist a fat lip... the same terrorist who killed 3 Americans, burned their bodies and dragged them behind a truck before hanging them from a bridge... deserve to be punished while Obama is celebrated as the second coming for pretending to have planned every detail of this raid that was done by more great Americans? You are being about as intellectually honest as Nancy Pelosi.

huntinman
05-04-2011, 02:06 PM
Just like the far right to dredge up old news or any news to discredit someone. Birth certificate, then lets see his transcripts... Remember how they dragged John Kerry's service record through the mud. Nothing is beneath them.

HAHAHA! Kerry screwed his own record up. He is the one who shot a barrel of rice from close range, resulting in getting an ass full of rice and then claiming a purple heart for it! Jeez:rolleyes:

road kill
05-04-2011, 02:25 PM
Just like the far right to dredge up old news or any news to discredit someone. Birth certificate, then lets see his transcripts... Remember how they dragged John Kerry's service record through the mud. Nothing is beneath them.

Kerry's record was NOT dragged through the mud.
His recollection of his concocted heroics and what actually happened were just reconciled.:rolleyes:


RK

Losthwy
05-04-2011, 03:03 PM
Even in the killing of OBL you are incapable of giving due credit to the President. Kinda sad.

road kill
05-04-2011, 03:08 PM
Even in the killing of OBL you are incapable of giving due credit to the President. Kinda sad.

I will....PROPS to President Obama for unilaterally sending combat troops unannounced onto sovereign soil to kill an unarmed foreign leader!!
Though I have no issue with it, I am sure some do!!!;-)


RK

duk4me
05-04-2011, 03:38 PM
This is old news... But remember the case where the Seals supposedly gave the terrorist a fat lip? Obama, Holder et al decided to prosecute the SEALS for roughing up a defenseless terrorist? I think at least one, maybe 2 of the SEALS are in jail over that incident. Now we are celebrating, (maybe even kicking off Obama's re-election campaign) with the death of an unarmed terrorist. Little double standard here.

Don't you think the administration owes those SEALS in the former case an apology? Shouldn't they be released from jail if they are still in custody?

I have to disagree. He was well armed. He had his two arms plus the arms of his wife he was holding in front of him.:p

badbullgator
05-04-2011, 03:44 PM
Even in the killing of OBL you are incapable of giving due credit to the President. Kinda sad.

As if ANYONE occupying that office would not have signed off on it.....well maybe not Clinton since he let UBL walk away once....at least....

I am glad that America got him. I am happy the potus did his job and signed off on it. Credit goes too many, the Military including the Seals, the CIA and all other intelligence agencies involved, and the last two presidents.

Exactly what more credit should he get? If you believe he did much more than sign off from start to finish you are naive.

badbullgator
05-04-2011, 03:52 PM
Just like the far right to dredge up old news or any news to discredit someone. Birth certificate, then lets see his transcripts... Remember how they dragged John Kerry's service record through the mud. Nothing is beneath them.

Interesting too that the libs are not bitching about the possibility that UBL was "captured and killed" rather than shot in a firefight. There is a distinct possibility that he was unarmed, held and executed by the Seal team. I have no problem with it, but it would seem a double standard that a Seal is disciplined for giving a terrorist a fat lip and the same folks who would charge this Seal would look the other way if in fact an unarmed terrorist was shot in the eye. Come on 20 some Seals could not capture UBL when supposedly only three people in the house were armed (the two brothers/couriers and UBL's adult son). Captured and killed per BHO.....now lets see you seek action against the Seal that put a bullet in UBL's eye. Fair is fair after all

Roger Perry
05-04-2011, 04:56 PM
I will....PROPS to President Obama for unilaterally sending combat troops unannounced onto sovereign soil to kill an unarmed foreign leader!!
Though I have no issue with it, I am sure some do!!!;-)


RK

Exactly what Country was UBL a foreign leader of??????????? And would you rather have UBL in GITMO with the rest of the Bush detainees that still have not gone to trial???????????????
You already congratulated Bush for something he had no part in IE waterboarding to get the information that let to UBL.

Clay Rogers
05-04-2011, 06:32 PM
Exactly what Country was UBL a foreign leader of??????????? And would you rather have UBL in GITMO with the rest of the Bush detainees that still have not gone to trial???????????????
You already congratulated Bush for something he had no part in IE waterboarding to get the information that let to UBL.

Dude, do you think before you post? BHO took office on Jan 22, 2009. Why hasn't he came through on his campaign promise to shut Gitmo down? Why hasn't he tried, convicted and sentenced these same detainees you talk about? The reason is there is nothing else to do with them. We can't turn them loose, no country wants them and they would just hit the battlefield again. Its now May 4th 2011, almost 2 1/2 years since your beloved president took office. They are no longer Bush's detainees, they are now BHO's detainees. Get some.

Cody Covey
05-04-2011, 06:40 PM
I will ask this again since all of the liberals so far have dodged it....Do you see this as hypocritical or not? If not why not?

M&K's Retrievers
05-04-2011, 07:19 PM
Exactly what Country was UBL a foreign leader of??????????? And would you rather have UBL in GITMO with the rest of the Bush detainees that still have not gone to trial???????????????
You already congratulated Bush for something he had no part in IE waterboarding to get the information that let to UBL.

Stan did not say bin Laden was a leader of a foreign country. He said he was a foreign leader. Surely you cannot deny that he was a foreign leader. I sure like using "was" when referring to that scum bag.

Roger Perry
05-04-2011, 07:35 PM
Dude, do you think before you post? BHO took office on Jan 22, 2009. Why hasn't he came through on his campaign promise to shut Gitmo down? Why hasn't he tried, convicted and sentenced these same detainees you talk about? The reason is there is nothing else to do with them. We can't turn them loose, no country wants them and they would just hit the battlefield again. Its now May 4th 2011, almost 2 1/2 years since your beloved president took office. They are no longer Bush's detainees, they are now BHO's detainees. Get some.

Because Congress stopped him from shutting GITMO down or had you not heard???????????????

M&K's Retrievers
05-04-2011, 07:39 PM
Because Congress stopped him from shutting GITMO down or had you not heard???????????????

I wasn't aware that Congress stopped him. I thought the AG gave up because of NYC objections and other problems.

Losthwy
05-04-2011, 08:08 PM
Obama signed an executive order to shut down GITMO Jan. 22, 2009 but ran into opposition in congress in the months that followed. Some over issues of security. Our prisons already house some of the most violent and unrepentant of society. A few more won't cost me any sleepless nights.
There are certainly some folks at GITMO that should stay in prison. And some that may not deserve to be there at all. Only a court should decide guilt. Only a court should decide punishment. We fought a revolutionary war in part for such issues as due process. To hold persons, citizens or not, for years without trial goes against our basic principles. Stalin had the gulag, we have GITMO.

road kill
05-04-2011, 08:25 PM
Obama signed an executive order to shut down GITMO Jan. 22, 2009 but ran into opposition in congress in the months that followed. Some over issues of security. Our prisons already house some of the most violent and unrepentant of society. A few more won't cost me any sleepless nights.
There are certainly some folks at GITMO that should stay in prison. And some that may not deserve to be there at all. Only a court should decide guilt. Only a court should decide punishment. We fought a revolutionary war in part for such issues as due process. To hold persons, citizens or not, for years without trial goes against our basic principles. Stalin had the gulag, we have GITMO.

Which court found Bin Laden guilty and decided to kill him??

Just askin' by your rules.


RK

Clay Rogers
05-04-2011, 08:56 PM
Because Congress stopped him from shutting GITMO down or had you not heard???????????????

So what you and lost on the highway are saying is that even with control of the house and senate, he couldn't come through on the one campaign promise. Maybe, just maybe even the democrats know that is a bad idea.

Clay Rogers
05-04-2011, 08:59 PM
Obama signed an executive order to shut down GITMO Jan. 22, 2009 but ran into opposition in congress in the months that followed. Some over issues of security. Our prisons already house some of the most violent and unrepentant of society. A few more won't cost me any sleepless nights.
There are certainly some folks at GITMO that should stay in prison. And some that may not deserve to be there at all. Only a court should decide guilt. Only a court should decide punishment. We fought a revolutionary war in part for such issues as due process. To hold persons, citizens or not, for years without trial goes against our basic principles. Stalin had the gulag, we have GITMO.


Theses are prisoners of war, not offered the same benefits of the constitution that we are. These people are being held at a military prison, exactly where they should be. Maybe, just maybe, if your president would keep one campaign promise he made, he could end the wars and shut gitmo down. There's alot of difference is thinking you can lead, and actually leading, huh? Get some. And the last time I checked, we didn't ask for gitmo.

Losthwy
05-04-2011, 09:02 PM
Which court found Bin Laden guilty and decided to kill him??
Just askin' by your rules.
RK

Do you really fail to see the difference of one killed in the field and prisoners held without due process? Or blowing smoke?
That is like not seeing the difference of a policeman shooting a suspect in the act and a prisoner held in custody.
Fairly basic concept, not my rules.

Losthwy
05-04-2011, 09:12 PM
Theses are prisoners of war, not offered the same benefits of the constitution that we are.
If they are prisoners of war are they not entitled to military trials? Though some suggest they are enemy combatants. Being either does the US or any other country have the right to hold someone in prison for 2-4-6-10-20-30 years without trial?

luvmylabs23139
05-04-2011, 09:23 PM
If they are prisoners of war are they not entitled to military trials? Though some suggest they are enemy combatants. Being either does the US or any other country have the right to hold someone in prison for 2-4-6-10-20-30 years without trial?


Prisoners of war are held until the war is over!!!!! The war is far from over.

caryalsobrook
05-05-2011, 04:46 AM
If they are prisoners of war are they not entitled to military trials? Though some suggest they are enemy combatants. Being either does the US or any other country have the right to hold someone in prison for 2-4-6-10-20-30 years without trial?

This President bitches about it before he became President. Now 2 1/2 years after he took office, he still has not put them on trial. WHY NOT???? Ever thought to ask that question??? Probably not.

badbullgator
05-05-2011, 05:31 AM
Do you really fail to see the difference of one killed in the field and prisoners held without due process? Or blowing smoke?
That is like not seeing the difference of a policeman shooting a suspect in the act and a prisoner held in custody.
Fairly basic concept, not my rules.

Hummm, lets see. Depending on WHICH story you buy, up to 25 Seals took a house that had only three armed men inside. UBL was unarmed and yet shot in the head (I have no problem with that at all) and you want to say "killed in the field" in regard to his killing. If anyone believes he was not, as the president himself said, "captured and killed" you are a bigger fool that your post shows. To think for one minute he could not have been captured is naive. They did the right thing and killed him, but easily could have toted is ass off to Gitmo. I know you think the Seals are just human, but even you would have to agree that 20-25 Seals, who at least at one point had UBL at gun point while he was unarmed, could have easily captured him. Lets think about it. UBL in his bedroom with no weapons and everyone in the house with a weapon is dead on the first or second floor. I am going to go out on a limb here, at the risk of sounding like our very own seal roger, and say that alone in a room with a defenseless UBL I think I could probably detain him and certainly could with the help of one or two others.....
Your example of the police shooting a suspect in the commission of a crime would not work if that policeman shot the suspect after 10 officers busted through his door and found him unarmed and then shot him in the face. IF that scenario happened the LEO would be in trouble because that would not be legal.

Roger Perry
05-05-2011, 06:54 AM
PRESIDENT Bush said yesterday that he wanted Osama bin Laden, the Saudi exile, "dead or alive" in some of the most bellicose language used by a White House occupant in recent years.

"I want justice," he said after a meeting at the Pentagon, where 188 people were killed last Tuesday when an airliner crashed into the building. "And there's an old poster out West that says, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive.' "

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/1340895/Bin-Laden-is-wanted-dead-or-alive-says-Bush.html

Western Justice Regards

M&K's Retrievers
05-05-2011, 08:10 AM
PRESIDENT Bush said yesterday that he wanted Osama bin Laden, the Saudi exile, "dead or alive" in some of the most bellicose language used by a White House occupant in recent years.

"I want justice," he said after a meeting at the Pentagon, where 188 people were killed last Tuesday when an airliner crashed into the building. "And there's an old poster out West that says, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive.' "

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/1340895/Bin-Laden-is-wanted-dead-or-alive-says-Bush.html

Western Justice Regards

And your point is?:confused::confused:

badbullgator
05-05-2011, 08:20 AM
And your point is?:confused::confused:

None as usual, but it makes him feel good.

Buzz
05-05-2011, 09:28 AM
Pure politics...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kP_AQZEBR-s

Buzz
05-05-2011, 09:38 AM
Even worse politics.

These guys have no shame...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DW_ZLK1R-os

road kill
05-05-2011, 10:06 AM
Even worse politics.

These guys have no shame...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DW_ZLK1R-os

I agree Buzz......


ContentionsThe Intellectual Dishonesty of Nancy PelosiPeter Wehner 05.03.2011 - 9:40 AM

Here’s Nancy Pelosi from a press conference on September 7, 2006:

[E]ven if [Osama bin Laden] is caught tomorrow, it is five years too late. He has done more damage the longer he has been out there. But, in fact, the damage that he has done . . . is done. And even to capture him now I don’t think makes us any safer.

And here’s Nancy Pelosi yesterday:

The death of Osama bin Laden marks the most significant development in our fight against al-Qaida. . . . I salute President Obama, his national security team, Director Panetta, our men and women in the intelligence community and military, and other nations who supported this effort for their leadership in achieving this major accomplishment. . . . [T]he death of Osama bin Laden is historic. . . .

This devastating then-and-now comparison comes to us courtesy of John Hideraker of Power Line. It underscores the degree to which partisanship can ravage people’s fair-mindedness and, in the process, make them look like fools and hacks. Such things aren’t uncommon in politics—but what is rare is to see such intellectual dishonesty proven so conclusively.


The hypocrisy is appaling, isn't it???:D



RK

Losthwy
05-05-2011, 10:10 AM
Even worse politics.

These guys have no shame...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DW_ZLK1R-os

I guess after a steady diet of stuff like the videos and audio you posted, it is no wonder why some here say what they do.

JDogger
05-05-2011, 09:10 PM
This is old news... But remember the case where the Seals supposedly gave the terrorist a fat lip? Obama, Holder et al decided to prosecute the SEALS for roughing up a defenseless terrorist? I think at least one, maybe 2 of the SEALS are in jail over that incident. Now we are celebrating, (maybe even kicking off Obama's re-election campaign) with the death of an unarmed terrorist. Little double standard here.

Don't you think the administration owes those SEALS in the former case an apology? Shouldn't they be released from jail if they are still in custody?


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/05/06/navy-seal-guilty-assaulting-suspected-terrorist/


What more do you require? JD

Roger Perry
05-06-2011, 07:19 AM
I agree Buzz......



The hypocrisy is appaling, isn't it???:D



RK

It is you the right that are full of hypocrisy. First you complain that President Clintoin did not "take out" bin Laden when he had the chance even though bin Laden was not positivetly identified and the only way to get to him was to drop a bomb never once calling bin Laden a "foreign leader" or saying that it would be an invasion on another Country.

Now you complain that President Obama sent U.S. Navy SEALS into another Country killing a "foreign leader" and not giving Obama the acolades of a job well done.

And you say not one word about President Bush not once but twice said he did not know where bin Laden was nor did he care where bin Laden was after starting a war with Afghanistan on the premise of killing or capturing bin Laden and other high ranking al Qaeda officials. When bin Laden was not killed or captured Bush kept the war going with the Taliban who were never the target which has turned out to be the longest war in U.S. history.

If the finding and killing of bin Laden had happened on Bush's watch you righties would be doing cartwheels, singing praises and dancing on the rooftops.

Not that is hypocrisy at it's highest level.