2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins

Status
Not open for further replies.
If Trump started executing the families of terrorists - I know he wont, but just hypothetically, he said it would be a good policy so imagine he did it - would the rest of the world stand up to him? It would be fly in the face of international law, so would European and other countries actually do anything? Impose sanctions, go to war, anything?
 
Adebesi said:
If Trump started executing the families of terrorists - I know he wont, but just hypothetically, he said it would be a good policy so imagine he did it - would the rest of the world stand up to him? It would be fly in the face of international law, so would European and other countries actually do anything? Impose sanctions, go to war, anything?
Click to expand...

I think so... sanctions, arrest warrants etc

Though prior to that one would hope the military personnel would refuse to carry out the actions in the first place as they are war crimes?
 
sun_tzu said:
I think so... sanctions, arrest warrants etc

Though prior to that one would hope the military personnel would refuse to carry out the actions in the first place as they are war crimes?
Click to expand...

like they did with torture? :wenger:

It obviously won´t happen in the USA, but one could argue that it is already happening (to some extend) with drone-strikes overseas. How about the son of al-awlaki?
 
PedroMendez said:
like they did with torture? :wenger:

It obviously won´t happen in the USA, but one could argue that it is already happening (to some extend) with drone-strikes overseas. How about the son of al-awlaki?
Click to expand...

oh they will get away with as much collateral damage (or using white phosphorous as a makeshift chemical weapon to light up the daylight sky over Iraq) as they want just as long as they dont officially say we are trying to kill civilians... and as for the torture you have to remember a lot of that came to light under president Obama and we Europeans like Obama.

But if trump was stupid enough to officially make it policy to commit war crimes I think the preassure from the voting public would be too much for most European governments to ignore - not to say that the sanctions would actually be anything more than symbolic though and to appease people in their constituencies rather than bring about policy change
 
sun_tzu said:
oh they will get away with as much collateral damage (or using dropping white phosphorous as a makeshift chemical weapon to light up the daylight sky over Iraq) as they want just as long as they dont officially say we are trying to kill civilians... and as for the torture you have to remember a lot of that came to light under president Obama and we Europeans like Obama.

But if trump was stupid enough to officially make it policy to commit war crimes I think the preassure from the voting public would be too much for most European governments to ignore - not to say that the sanctions would actually be anything more than symbolic though and to appease people in their constituencies rather than bring about policy change
Click to expand...
So when the European countries start the sanctions against China? BS right?
 
barros said:
So when the European countries start the sanctions against China? BS right?
Click to expand...
when china starts blowing up civilians on purpose as punishment without trial in another country?... and specifically saying thats their policy... to the best of my knowledge that's not been something we are particularly well known for?
 
barros said:
Obamacare doesn't work, insurance premiums went to the top for less services, or we have health care like Canada or keep the same way we had.
Click to expand...

Premiums have risen at a much lower rate than the years preceding the legislation.

Anyhow, all I'm saying is this 'win' isn't really a win, Obama administration will appeal the ruling all the way to the SC if needs be, and get a favorable ruling one way or another.
 
sun_tzu said:
when china starts blowing up civilians on purpose as punishment without trial in another country?... and specifically saying thats their policy... to the best of my knowledge that's not been something we are particularly well known for?
Click to expand...
Arresting journalists and activists, also they have more death penalties than any other country.
 
sun_tzu said:
oh they will get away with as much collateral damage (or using white phosphorous as a makeshift chemical weapon to light up the daylight sky over Iraq) as they want just as long as they dont officially say we are trying to kill civilians... and as for the torture you have to remember a lot of that came to light under president Obama and we Europeans like Obama.

But if trump was stupid enough to officially make it policy to commit war crimes I think the preassure from the voting public would be too much for most European governments to ignore - not to say that the sanctions would actually be anything more than symbolic though and to appease people in their constituencies rather than bring about policy change
Click to expand...

killing al-awlaki´s 16 year old son wasn´t "collateral damage". Anyway, I am not completely serious, but it doesn´t get much bigger than invading and occuping a foreign country on made up grounds. The point is that, Europe will never sanction the USA (and it would be stupid anyway).
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
Premiums have risen at a much lower rate than the years preceding the legislation.

Anyhow, all I'm saying is this 'win' isn't really a win, Obama administration will appeal the ruling all the way to the SC if needs be, and get a favorable ruling one way or another.
Click to expand...
Insurance premiums went up with way less services covered and people prefer to pay the penalty than to pay for an useless insurance, the problem with Obamacare is not been full funded by the government and they expected the young people to buy insurance to cover the losses. UnitedHealthcare, the biggest health insurer in the United States is leaving obamacare because they are losing money and soon or later others would follow.
 
barros said:
Arresting journalists and activists, also they have more death penalties than any other country.
Click to expand...
Which is somewhat different to the hypothetical situation suggested of announcing an official policy of being judge jury and executioner of civilians abroad based on who you think their friends / family is... They can carry on killing as many people as they want and call it collateral damage and Europe won't lift a finger
I don't expect eu sanctions on the USA in respect of the death penalty and nor do I expect them on China though I expect governments in both cases may insist on that punishment being excluded prior to extradition.
 
sun_tzu said:
Which is somewhat different to the hypothetical situation suggested of announcing an official policy of being judge jury and executioner of civilians abroad based on who you think their friends / family is... They can carry on killing as many people as they want and call it collateral damage and Europe won't lift a finger
I don't expect eu sanctions on the USA in respect of the death penalty and nor do I expect them on China though I expect governments in both cases may insist on that punishment being excluded prior to extradition.
Click to expand...
UK is bombing Syria are you trying to say no civilians at all are killed? Wasn't a UK drone who killed that English coward who murderer innocent people?
 
barros said:
UK is bombing Syria are you trying to say no civilians at all are killed? Wasn't a UK drone who killed that English coward who murderer innocent people?
Click to expand...

Different though isn't it? Jihadi John was a confirmed terrorist, specifically a confirmed executioner. If, say, the UK kill his family in England, shit would have blown over.
 
barros said:
UK is bombing Syria are you trying to say no civilians at all are killed? Wasn't a UK drone who killed that English coward who murderer innocent people?
Click to expand...
No I'm trying to say that civilians are killed and we call it collateral damage
The policy proposed if you can be bothered to check the initial post was would we feel differently if president Trump changed the us policy to actively target civilians and I feel for the reasoned outlined that we would
We can easily turn a blind eye to accidents (even if we don't truly belive they are an accident)
But when somebody basically says fek the Geneva convention I'm going to kill innocent kids in another country on purpose to punish people who I think might be terrorists then I do think our governmental responce would be different
 
sun_tzu said:
No I'm trying to say that civilians are killed and we call it collateral damage
The policy proposed if you can be bothered to check the initial post was would we feel differently if president Trump changed the us policy to actively target civilians and I feel for the reasoned outlined that we would
We can easily turn a blind eye to accidents (even if we don't truly belive they are an accident)
But when somebody basically says fek the Geneva convention I'm going to kill innocent kids in another country on purpose to punish people who I think might be terrorists then I do think our governmental responce would be different
Click to expand...
That wouldn't happen unless they are terrorists.
 
barros said:
Insurance premiums went up with way less services covered and people prefer to pay the penalty than to pay for an useless insurance, the problem with Obamacare is not been full funded by the government and they expected the young people to buy insurance to cover the losses. UnitedHealthcare, the biggest health insurer in the United States is leaving obamacare because they are losing money and soon or later others would follow.
Click to expand...
Premiums went up for private coverage as well and typically for less services. I see this every single year. What is your stance on covering people who want insurance and can not afford it?
 
@sun_tzu
The us has (AFAIK) a declared policy to strike any first responders attending to the scene of a drone strike. That is pretty much equal to targeting family members (which they have done too). There is no possibility of hostile action by any other country.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
Different though isn't it? Jihadi John was a confirmed terrorist, specifically a confirmed executioner. If, say, the UK kill his family in England, shit would have blown over.
Click to expand...
The same here if US killed a family of a terrorist, well unless they are black, scary looking and not armed - that bit is very important.


Kidding the last part
 
Adebesi said:
If Trump started executing the families of terrorists - I know he wont, but just hypothetically, he said it would be a good policy so imagine he did it - would the rest of the world stand up to him? It would be fly in the face of international law, so would European and other countries actually do anything? Impose sanctions, go to war, anything?
Click to expand...

Impose sanctions, breaking of diplomatic ties, dissolution of NATO and other defense pacts would probably be the worst things that would possibly happen. Can't see WW3 kicking off over it.
 
berbatrick said:
@sun_tzu
The us has (AFAIK) a declared policy to strike any first responders attending to the scene of a drone strike. That is pretty much equal to targeting family members (which they have done too). There is no possibility of hostile action by any other country.
Click to expand...

To the best of my knowledge that has never been admitted as official policy (though as with the white phosperous in iraq and some of the "collateral damage" from drone attacks) - there is much evidence to suggest it does indeed happen but certainly to the best of my knowledge it does not officially happen (despite the evidence)
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/20/us-drones-strikes-target-rescuers-pakistan
 
This woman's twitter channel was taken down. I'd never heard of her but now I got tempted to watch (on youtube):


:)

On a side note, I've never seen her more passionate than when screaming that universal healthcare will never happen.
 
berbatrick said:
This woman's twitter channel was taken down. I'd never heard of her but now I got tempted to watch (on youtube):


:)

On a side note, I've never seen her more passionate than when screaming that universal healthcare will never happen.
Click to expand...

:wenger: that is all just republican smear. She is squeaky clean and always does what she promises.
 
Maybe I´ve missed it, but when was the last time you´ve heard a Republican front runner have a go at a massive corporation for tax dodging (getting away with "murder"), anti trust, and for rigging the system? You´re so used to Republicans with such a veiny corporate cock down their throat or up their bum, you have to do a double take when you hear their anointed nominee speaking in such terms.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/may/13/amazon-getting-away-with-on-tax-says-donald-trump

“This [Washington Post] is owned as a toy by Jeff Bezos, who controls Amazon,” Trump told Fox News. “Amazon is getting away with murder tax-wise. He’s using the Washington Post for power so that the politicians in Washington don’t tax Amazon like they should be taxed,.”

“He’s using the Washington Post ... for political purposes to save Amazon in terms of taxes and in terms of antitrust,” Trump said, referring to the process whereby large US companies can be investigated for anti-competitive behaviour.

“He thinks I’ll go after him for antitrust. Because he’s got a huge antitrust problem because he’s controlling so much, Amazon is controlling so much of what they are doing,” Trump said.

“The whole system is rigged ... whether it’s Hillary [Clinton] or Bezos.”
 
No WaPo is a beacon of journalistic integrity and not a tool for a billionaire to further perpetuate his wealth and push his agenda. Just ask @InfiniteBoredom or @Raoul (I think they're the ones that tried to convince me of that, if it was someone else, apologies.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.