This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Rand Paul Seems Okay With Killing Americans With Drones Now

#51Valnor50Posted 4/25/2013 2:19:42 AM
How about we make some drones that hose suspects down with some foamy crap?
#52IamvegitoPosted 4/25/2013 6:06:58 AM
From: Orange Clockwork | #050
This should be a non story. Paul's filibuster was about killing Americans just walking around who didn't pose an immediate threat, which was an absurd notion to begin with considering the only reason we do it in places like Yemen is because we don't have law enforcement capable of arresting people there. What he's saying here is different.

Yeah, in one case he defended due process, and in the other pissed on due process. TOTALLY THE SAME, ESPECIALLY WITH THE RACIAL UNDERTONES
---
"A day will come when you think yourself safe and happy, and suddenly your joy will turn to ashes in your mouth, and you'll know the debt is paid."
#53Orange ClockworkPosted 4/25/2013 11:52:44 AM(edited)
The situations are completely different. Due process is very different when a guy is throwing bombs and shooting at the police. Saving lives is the priority; giving the guy his day in court is a secondary consideration.
---
If you build a man a fire, he is warm for the rest of the night.
If you set a man on fire, he is warm for the rest of his life.
#54Tech_N9ne666Posted 4/25/2013 12:07:03 PM
[This message was deleted at the request of a moderator or administrator]
#55DJStrongPosted 4/25/2013 12:23:10 PM
Orange Clockwork posted...
The situations are completely different. Due process is very different when a guy is throwing bombs and shooting at the police. Saving lives is the priority; giving the guy his day in court is a secondary consideration.



No one cares, just call him a hypocrite and move on, no facts allowed
---
"On the contrary my friend, we're going to live!"
#56KwancahiPosted 4/25/2013 12:31:02 PM
No one cares, just call him a hypocrite and move on, no facts allowed

The fact of the matter is that Rand Paul went on an embarrasingly long winded rant, garnering national media attention over a ridiculous paranoid fantasy he has about the government blowing up citizens with drones for absoluetly no reason, than immediatly turns around and advocates the use of drone strikes when placed in a context that removes his paranoid delusions that the government is just itching for the opportunity to start blowing people up with drones.

It doesn't necessarily point to hypocrisy, but it does point to how much of Paul's anti-drone stance is based on a paranoid 'but the government might be evil' mythology he has created for himself. And Paul only makes it worse for himself when you factor in the issue of his stance on the limitation of government.
#57DJStrongPosted 4/25/2013 12:47:30 PM
Kwancahi posted...
No one cares, just call him a hypocrite and move on, no facts allowed

The fact of the matter is that Rand Paul went on an embarrasingly long winded rant, garnering national media attention over a ridiculous paranoid fantasy he has about the government blowing up citizens with drones for absoluetly no reason, than immediatly turns around and advocates the use of drone strikes when placed in a context that removes his paranoid delusions that the government is just itching for the opportunity to start blowing people up with drones.

It doesn't necessarily point to hypocrisy, but it does point to how much of Paul's anti-drone stance is based on a paranoid 'but the government might be evil' mythology he has created for himself. And Paul only makes it worse for himself when you factor in the issue of his stance on the limitation of government.


His entire filibuster was about making sure Americans were not treated the same way we treat suspects in foreign lands. It arose from incredibly ambiguous responses from the administration on this question, he fully qualified using force on active threats, read the filibuster. Holder answered him because of the filibuster, he did not say 'see my former answer' because it was a resounding "maybe"

This is truly a non-story that reading even beyond the first paragraph of his speech shows and has been posted. I don't even like the guy that much but this is getting really ridiculous.

If the administration came out with 'no' and not 'maybe' I would be more inclined to agree with your sentiments.
---
"On the contrary my friend, we're going to live!"