Impeachment Inquiry What do y'all think?

[homersapien 11,362]

59 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

So murdering a US Citizen with a Drone is A-Okay, even without a trial or even a legal investigation?
But killing off a bad actor in a Army Uniform that has openly murdered 100s, if not 1000s, or even 10,000s to try and stop a war is a bad thing?

Do you ever read your own posts?

You are laugh-out-loud crazy at times.

A classic example of one of your red herrings. Classic DKW.  I didn't say or imply any of those things.

But they don't risk starting a war with another country, which was the basis of my response to the question Bird asked - Why are people upset with Trump's failure to notify Congress?   That was the sole issue I was addressing.

I was not addressing moral justification, which is a different question.

Obviously, too subtle for you.

(And that last sentence is supremely ironic coming from you for obvious reasons.)

[DKW 86 7,419]

Just now, bigbird said:

Well, then I'm sure they had tons of irrefutable, concrete evidence and had full bipartisan support 

Man if you keep posting, I aint gonna get anything done at work today...lol 

[bigbird 60,493]

1 minute ago, DKW 86 said:

Man if you keep posting, I aint gonna get anything done at work today...lol 

Work in the Senate?

[DKW 86 7,419]

43 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Because they aren't the same.  Assassinating one of the top officials in a sovereign country is typically seen as an act of war and thus equivalent to a declaration of war.  That is the critical difference that is generating the criticism of not consulting with Congress in this case.

None of the individuals Obama attacked come close to qualifying as an act of war against other country.  They were members of terrorist groups, not some high level official in another sovereign country. 

While I am not sure whether or not Obama notified the appropriate Congressional committees beforehand, but the requirement to do so would have been greatly attenuated, if existent at all for these "targets".

Did he have to get Congressional Approval for vaporizing wedding parties or was that in the bill?

Killing women and children is okay if it isnt a Top Govt Official in Iran?

https://www.newsweek.com/wedding-became-funeral-us-still-silent-one-year-deadly-yemen-drone-strike-291403

[DKW 86 7,419]

5 minutes ago, homersapien said:

A classic example of one of your red herrings.

It doesn't risk starting a war with another country, which was the basis of the question Bird asked - Why are people upset with Trump's failure to notify Congress?   That was the sole issue I was addressing.

I was not addressing moral justification, which is a different question.

Obviously, too subtle for you.

I am asking a question about the worth of life. Apparently you think the Federal Govt murdering an American Citizen sans legal reason is just fine.

Here's hoping the next one droned to death isnt a child of yours...

How do you sleep with yourself at night?

[DKW 86 7,419]

13 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Now you are lying.  I never made that statement and you could not provide it.

(You even allowed as to how you might have "inferred" it but still doubled down on my lying about it.)

I know exactly what happened David.  There was not "convoluted explanation".  You were very precise in what you claimed and I was quite simple in my denial of ever saying it.  You could not produce the post because it doesn't exist.

That's why I know you have no integrity. You cannot even admit what was probably an honest mistake - if it means admitting you were wrong.

You are more than a little crazy and I am not going to waste my time trying to reason with you.

I have forever maintained that I never, not one time, believed one word of your explanation.

Could I be wrong, .5% chance maybe. But I never, not one time believed even one word of your explanation. THAT NEVER EVER HAPPENED. 

Please dont start this again. We both promised we would not. But last statement, I found your explanation TOTALLY, CATEGORICALLY, 100% UNBELIEVABLE. 

[homersapien 11,362]

Just now, DKW 86 said:

Did he have to get Congressional Approval for vaporizing wedding parties or was that in the bill?

Killing women and children is okay if it isnt a Top Govt Official in Iran?

https://www.newsweek.com/wedding-became-funeral-us-still-silent-one-year-deadly-yemen-drone-strike-291403

I am not opining on the moral justification of the POTUS - Obama or Trump - of killing anyone of any category with drones - whether or not Obama needed permission to "attack a wedding party" or "women and children (clearly a prejudicial characterization that again demonstrates your inability to segregate emotional and cognitive reasoning.)

Bird asked a specific question relating to why there's a difference in the need for the POTUS to notify Congress prior to killing Soliemani and not necessarily other targets.

My understanding is that the basis for such thinking rests on whether or not the action is equivalent to declaring war (which only Congress can do).  Apparently, many experts feel the assassination of Soliemani - who is a high official of Iran (equivalent to Sec. of Defense (?) was a possible act of war, thus, Trump should have notified Congress first.

I am not an expert on these matters and I don't have a personal opinion.  But this is what I have read about it.  You may think it's BS reasoning and that's fine with me. 

All I am doing it providing that understanding, in good faith, with BB because he was asking why this case should be any different from previous cases where the need for Congressional approval might be required.

You obviously don't understand this.  This is why you are trying to attacking me with emotional, rhetorical questions meant to demean or attack my explanation instead of just accepting it cognitively. 

From observing you on this forum, I think you have major issues with differentiating emotional thinking (coming from your amygdala) with cognitive thinking (originating in your pre-frontal cortex).

This is why it's so difficult for you to have a reasoned discussion without immediately lapsing into emotional (childish) insults.   You cannot deal with someone who is making a reasoned, cognitive argument without becoming aggressive.  It's the same reason you cannot admit you may be mistaken about accusing someone else about lying about their position, in fact, its the very reason you call them a "liar" in the first place. You get emotionally evolved.

In fact, this whole exchange is classical DKW.

[homersapien 11,362]

52 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

I am asking a question about the worth of life. Apparently you think the Federal Govt murdering an American Citizen sans legal reason is just fine.

Here's hoping the next one droned to death isnt a child of yours...

How do you sleep with yourself at night?

Here we go.  Straw man arguments where you assign positions to me that I haven't even addressed.

And look where you have taken this. 

I provide Bigbird reasoning I have understood from reading various articles written by others because he asked a reasonable question about something very specific - the theoretical need for the POTUS to notify Congress before killing someone/anyone.

And in a matter of a few posts, you are now questioning my regard for innocent life and asking how can I sleep with myself at night.   

This is classic DKW. 

You have issues.  Frankly, issues that make me to not want to interact with you at all.  You are simply ill-prepared for a rational discussion, not to mention ill-mannered.

[homersapien 11,362]

31 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

I have forever maintained that I never, not one time, believed one word of your explanation.

Could I be wrong, .5% chance maybe. But I never, not one time believed even one word of your explanation. THAT NEVER EVER HAPPENED. 

Please dont start this again. We both promised we would not. But last statement, I found your explanation TOTALLY, CATEGORICALLY, 100% UNBELIEVABLE. 

What was my "explanation"?  

I don't recall any explanation other than denying I said what you specifically said I did.

Care to repeat that "explanation" or is it in the same place my original post is.