SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - US Politics Thread 2021-24

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)

- General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)

- - US Politics Thread 2021-24 (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=248184)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockstar (Post 2916594)

The assassination or execution of U.S. citizens presumed guilty of any crime used to be something most Americans frowned upon.

Execution without benefit of a trial no less.

Quote:

Originally Posted by August (Post 2916622)

Execution without benefit of a trial no less.

That’s what I meant to say :D.

Congressman Wesley Hunt Reveals Jaw-Dropping Trump Story

https://x.com/VigilantFox/status/1808179617397719127

Quote:

In a tense meeting with Taliban leaders, Trump declared, “I want to leave Afghanistan, but it’s going to be a conditions-based withdrawal,” before issuing a stark warning.

A Danish view on this Presidential immunity

Quote:

- The Supreme Court gives the president immunity in core tasks and partial immunity in other official actions, and that is quite crazy, says Mads Dalgaard Madsen, who was previously a political advisor at the Danish embassy in Washington, DC

https://ekstrabladet-dk.translate.go..._x_tr_pto=wapp

Markus

Bush Jr better hope he has it or he might be deported to stand trial

Quote:

George W. Bush, the 43rd President of the United States, has faced various accusations of war crimes related to actions during his presidency, particularly concerning the Iraq War and the broader War on Terror. Here’s an overview of the primary accusations:
1. Invasion of Iraq

Illegality of the War: Critics argue the 2003 invasion of Iraq violated international law, specifically the United Nations Charter, which prohibits the use of force against sovereign nations without Security Council authorization or in self-defense. The claim that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), which was a primary justification for the war, was later found to be false.
Preemptive War Doctrine: The Bush administration's doctrine of preemptive war, used to justify the Iraq invasion, is controversial under international law. Critics argue it sets a dangerous precedent that undermines global stability and the legal frameworks governing the use of force.

2. Torture and Detention Practices

Torture Allegations: Under the Bush administration, practices such as waterboarding and other enhanced interrogation techniques were used on detainees suspected of terrorism. These techniques, employed in facilities like Guantanamo Bay and secret CIA black sites, are widely considered forms of torture.
Violation of the Geneva Conventions: The treatment of detainees is seen by many as violating the Geneva Conventions, which outline the standards of international law for humanitarian treatment in war. The administration’s legal stance that such detainees were "unlawful combatants" and not entitled to the same protections has been highly contested.

3. Extra judicial Killings and Drone Strikes

Targeted Killings: The Bush administration initiated the practice of targeted killings using drone strikes against suspected terrorists. These actions, expanded under subsequent administrations, have faced criticism for bypassing judicial processes and causing civilian casualties, raising ethical and legal concerns about due process and sovereignty.

4. Use of Depleted Uranium and Cluster Bombs

Environmental and Health Impact: The use of depleted uranium munitions and cluster bombs in Iraq has been criticized for causing long-term health problems and environmental damage. These weapons' residual effects have led to increased cancer rates and birth defects in affected areas.

5. Domestic and International Legal Proceedings

Calls for Prosecution: Various human rights groups and legal experts have called for George W. Bush and members of his administration to be prosecuted for war crimes. These calls have been based on alleged violations of international treaties, including the Convention Against Torture.
Investigations and Lawsuits: Although there have been numerous calls for investigations and lawsuits, both in the U.S. and internationally, no formal war crimes charges have been brought against Bush. Legal immunity and political factors have contributed to the lack of prosecution.

Context and Debate

While the accusations against Bush involve significant moral and legal concerns, opinions vary widely on these issues. Supporters argue the actions were necessary for national security and were conducted within the legal frameworks available at the time, while critics believe they represent grave violations of international norms and human rights. The debate over these issues continues to be a contentious aspect of his legacy.

I take this Immunity has it limitation and the line goes with war crimes.

Which I think is good-I support a political immunity, but I do not support war crimes.

Markus

SCOTUS has become a political battleground for sure, more so than it already was before the first Trump reign. It can only get worse while the trenches in the inner-American conflict are deepening and widening, with no chan ce for a healing in sight.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/sup...ega-rcna159945

Let someone else understand that (if it's not a statistical artifact)...

[FOCUS] US President Joe Biden has drawn level with his challenger Donald Trump in this week's election polls - despite his disastrous performance in the first TV debate between the two candidates. Both candidates each received 40 percent support among registered voters in a Reuters/Ipsos poll. An earlier poll from June had given Trump a slight lead of 41% to 39%, which Biden has now made up.

This is all the more surprising given that the poll found that 83% of Democrats and 97% of Republicans thought Biden "stumbled and showed his age" in the TV duel. Only 58 percent of Democrats and 11 percent of Republicans said this about Trump.

The medical analysis. The author is Prof. Dr. med. Dipl.-Psych. Wolfgang Meins, a neuropsychologist, doctor of psychiatry and neurology, geriatrician and associate professor of psychiatry. In recent years, he has mainly worked as a court expert in the field of civil law.

He confirms with way more competence than I could claim what I stated about Biden since very long time, and what many others know and can clearly see without needing to have any academic degree in the related prfessions.

He is not fit for office anymore, and he isn't that since a very long time already. One does not dare to imagine how he would "perform" if he really came under the pressure of an existential crisis or threat to the US when the events hammer down on him mericlessly, without taking care for his biological and kognitive status and timely needs. Or how he would be manipulated behind the stage in order to give the public the percepiton of the president still being functional.

https://www-achgut-com.translate.goo...en&_x_tr_hl=de

He is not one bit a better alternative to Trump. Both men only are very different in the nature of threat they pose to the US, and the West.

There he goes releasing a bit more fuel from the strategic Biden re-election reserve. https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/othe...el/ar-BB1phZJb

Is Michelle Obama the only Biden alternative who would beat Trump?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimbuna (Post 2916728)

Is Michelle Obama the only Biden alternative who would beat Trump?

I would say that it would not be a lock that she could beat him. The sticking point for voters might be .. get Mrs. Obama and you get Mr. Obama.

It has been all over the news here today-More and more Dems in the H.R are demanding Biden to step down.

Could be they don't see him win against Trump in the upcoming Presidential election, well is there any Dems who can win over Trump ?

Markus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimbuna (Post 2916728)

Is Michelle Obama the only Biden alternative who would beat Trump?

"Would"?

Quote:

Originally Posted by mapuc (Post 2916784)

The issue at hand isn’t whether Biden can win against Trump, that thinking is so far off the mark. The concern is the same concern people have had since before Biden was elected and what the unelected swamp who rode into power on the coat tails of an old man and their talking heads on TV can no longer hide. Biden is a senile old man and because there are a lot of deaf, dumb and blind fools in this country who would still waste their vote for him. There are a growing number of adults in the room on both sides of the isle who are done with the charade.

Thank you for the explanation.

Guess there are other more important things to why they ask him to step down.

Markus

They are both two/too old has-beens, they should both step down! :oops::doh: