|
Hey, if Muir's decided that the proper thing to do to Obama is impeach him, rather than lynch him, then progress has been made.
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 05:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 21:15 |
|
|
 1 2 3
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 05:50
|
|
|
All the people on that list have been released though?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 06:03
|
|
|
Obama assesses the situation, waiting for the facts to show up re: Bergdahl. Republicans have delved right into the histrionic attacks on him. An Accurate Cartoon.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 06:09
|
|
|
Three Walking Phalluses: The Cartoon
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 06:22
|
|
|
Pththya-lyi posted:
No no no no. You do not get to use Young Frankenstein in your disgusting rear end pointless pornographic gibberish diatribe Muir. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 06:25
|
|
|
Somfin posted:Hey, if Muir's decided that the proper thing to do to Obama is impeach him, rather than lynch him, then progress has been made.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 07:05
|
|
|
Post 9-11 User posted:The facility exists for purely political reasons, to sustain the narrative that tens of millions of bearded psychos are dog paddling across the oceans to cut out heads off with steak knives. There is at least one person there that is innocent if not most of them, some of them have already been cleared of charges without even a trial. They are in limbo, the discarded campaign posters for a narrative that is already obsolete. The reasons for Guantanamo Bay remaining open aren't quite as you paint them, as are explained BBJoey posted:Basically the problem is that there's actually nowhere for Guantanamo inmates to go. There are people locked up there who have been completely cleared, but some can't be released because their home country won't accept them due to the stigma associated with being a detainee. For those who can potentially be repatriated, there's no guarantee that they won't be tortured by foreign governments. The alternative is to send them to a third country which is understandably complex, or to put them through the American legal system which lol, congress has barred the government from doing. The US has realised that it's tough to get rid of people you've tortured for years who may understandably be inclined to radicalism, and their solution is "welp too bad I guess". It's lazily done, but it's actually also pretty funny!
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 07:07
|
|
|
Serious question but if we accept the argument that we can't release Guantanamo inmates because we have no place to release them and even further accept the argument that some have been cleared of their crimes, why are they still being held in such awful and dehumanizing conditions? Does Obama have no authority to, for example, give them more freedoms within the compound, maybe better food, ability to access television, Internet, letters? If Obama takes the position that we should be able to release these people but we can't, why isn't he at a minimum pushing in a direction so that the conditions in which they <are> held aren't so hellish? Why are the only two options "release them" or "torture them"?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 07:27
|
|
|
Serrath posted:
That's easy--the 14 words. "Obama makes the terrorists comfortable while ARE TROOPS can not get three meals anymore."
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 07:38
|
|
|
Serrath posted:Why are the only two options "release them" or "torture them"? They haven't been tortured since the beginning of the Obama administration. To the best of my knowledge, conditions have improved, aside from for those detainees who have undertaken hunger strikes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 08:46
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:They haven't been tortured since the beginning of the Obama administration. To the best of my knowledge, conditions have improved, aside from for those detainees who have undertaken hunger strikes. I'm really interested in this, do you know where I might read about the ways conditions have changed since Obama took power? Unless I've really been falling behind on staying up to date on this issue, the administration must not be publicizing these changes (for very understandable reasons). I guess it goes without staying but if the official line has changed from "we need to keep these people locked up because terrorism" to "we want to release them but we cant" than they're better described as detainees so continuing to treat them as prisoners would be unconscionable. Given that the US created this situation in the first place, I'd argue that they have an extraordinary responsibility to make conditions are pleasant and non-oppressive as possible.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 09:11
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:They haven't been tortured since the beginning of the Obama administration. To the best of my knowledge, conditions have improved, aside from for those detainees who have undertaken hunger strikes. Oh right the force-feeding. Good to know that conditions have improved aside from the torture.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 09:11
|
|
|
Well, I'm not sure what the alternative to force-feeding is here, killing them? It's a normal practice in response to hunger strikes. The strikers do this because they know that it's a PR coup for them whether they're force-fed or assisted in death. I'd agree that the US has extraordinary responsibility here, but that doesn't make the sitation any more subject to resolution. It is worth restating that the problem actors in this situation no longer appear to be the federal government, and are now the various other nations and state governments that are refusing to take these guys. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 09:30 on Jun 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 09:27
|
|
|
If they'd rather starve to death to prove a point than spend the rest of their lives in a torture/concentration camp, can you really blame them? Don't absolve the US government of responsibility for the future here. There are options for their release besides sending them home. If not for the US government, for example, they could have been transferred to much more comfortable facilities on the US mainland, but nope, that wasn't allowed because of NIMBYism. The US government is continuing to confine and torture dozens of innocent people, who have committed no crime and done no wrongdoing, because of domestic political concerns about releasing so-called terrorists or the backlash they would get from treating so-called terrorists with any degree of dignity or respect. Not releasing innocent people back to their home countries because you're afraid they'll be tortured there, so instead you keep them in your own concentration camp so you can torture them instead, is so hosed up that you absolutely cannot say the US government is not a problem actor in the situation.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 09:38
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Well, I'm not sure what the alternative to force-feeding is here, killing them? It's a normal practice in response to hunger strikes. The strikers do this because they know that it's a PR coup for them whether they're force-fed or assisted in death. I'll grant that it's possible that they'd be unwilling to accept anything short of freedom, and that no matter how comfortable we made their stay it wouldn't entice them to eat. So you know, once we've tried that and failed, then I'm open to the "well would you rather they starve?" argument. But since any media leak of (real or imagined) improvement in conditions there is met with public outrage about Club Gitmo, the blame still has to fall squarely on America for making the environment so miserable that people would rather starve themselves.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 10:01
|
|
|
Cramming for finals and I came across this gem.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 10:07
|
|
|
Dr. Killjoy posted:Cramming for finals and I came across this gem. DASGC in a nutshell, doesn't really become any better just because he's making fun of something stupid unfortunately.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 10:09
|
|
|
I tend to think of the war in Afghanistan as a simple USSR - Mujahedin conflict, with factions emerging mainly after the Soviets have left the country to its own devices. With that in mind, it's surprising to see how many of the contemporary Afghani political cartoons were all about "gently caress the atheist drunkard president and his government, double gently caress those regions of the country that support that government" etc, with the USSR often relegated to a secondary target.                  Barbak says the words, but he's a goddamn atheist pinko-commie at heart.  The more Babrak Kamal listens to the Soviets, the more Kaffir he becomes.  Of course, there's a lot of perfectly expected "warriors of Islam, repel the infidels with your jihad superpowers" stuff:         As well as "Soviets are literally the devil"               Something for the Soviet warriors out to do their international duty:       Please don't gently caress the locals or their sheep, don't buy drugs, and don't flash your buff Soviet supermen bodies in front of the locals. They're all just waiting to Doshtols you anyway. One of the better known Soviet memes - various bureaucrats going "Hey, I wasn't the one who sent you there" to returning veterans.  European / American cartoons on the subject:          Edit - You'll note that (ironically?) these are all done by someone educated in a Western / Soviet school. Also, I didn't post a lot of pictures of actual Afghan fighters, since that would be kinda irrelevant, but you'll see a LOT of Lee-Enfield's being used by them (in the 1980's!). With all due respect to the M16 / AK47, that is quite the accomplishment. Xander77 fucked around with this message at 12:22 on Jun 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 11:21
|
|
|
The Kiss Army invaded Afghanistan...? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 11:53
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:I'll grant that it's possible that they'd be unwilling to accept anything short of freedom, and that no matter how comfortable we made their stay it wouldn't entice them to eat. vyelkin posted:If they'd rather starve to death to prove a point than spend the rest of their lives in a torture/concentration camp, can you really blame them? Both of you are treating the US government as a monolithic entity in these responses- for the reasons already stated above, I don't think that's an adequate portrayal of the situation.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 12:25
|
|
|
Imagine this being published in Britain today, it reads like satire.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 12:51
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Both of you are treating the US government as a monolithic entity in these responses- for the reasons already stated above, I don't think that's an adequate portrayal of the situation.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 12:56
|
|
|
 Privacy!!  The generation gap is getting wider! Labels: Apps, facebook, Generation Gap, mobile phones, privacy, smart phones, Technology, Telecommunications
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 12:57
|
|
|
JaggerMcDagger posted:The generation gap is getting wider! That must be why he has no idea what young people are thinking! 
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 12:58
|
|
|
Kurtofan posted:Imagine this being published in Britain today, it reads like satire. Doubly so quote:QE.A.69.02. AFGHAN SUPPORT COMMITTEE (ASC) (actually it's not the same as the London based charity, nowadays named Afghanaid, but it was the first hit for 'Afghanistan Support Committee')
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 13:03
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Both of you are treating the US government as a monolithic entity in these responses- for the reasons already stated above, I don't think that's an adequate portrayal of the situation. I think it is acceptable to portray the US government as a monolithic entity, because for those being subject to its power it is a monolithic entity. Differing agendas and political infighting within this entitity should not be relevant for those outside it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 13:39
|
|
|
JaggerMcDagger posted:The generation gap is getting wider! If this was a Kelly it would say that the generation g-app is getting wider. Anyway, have you guys also noticed that lately in DbD, they always have a smart device in their hand? They either have a smartphone or a pad and are reading the news. It seems that Muir no longer tries to make it look like they naturally talk about the news but rather is like "Have you heard of this thing I'm reading about right now?".
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 14:07
|
|
|
Flaskraven posted:If this was a Kelly it would say that the generation g-app is getting wider. Pretty soon it's just gonna be a hastily-blurred screenshot of some blog, with a poorly-drawn thumb in a corner, some yellow dialogue boxes, and then that same Cruz picture surrounded by love hearts.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 14:10
|
|
|
Flaskraven posted:If this was a Kelly it would say that the generation g-app is getting wider. Which is probably about how much thought Muir gives his ideas before regurgitating them to someone else / his comic - "i just read a thing" combined with "i recently watched Indiana Jones" or something
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 14:10
|
|
|
Pththya-lyi posted:
This Obama caricature is fairly recent in DbD right? I seem to remember Muir loving the hell out of the "elitist Obama sticking up his nose with his eyes closed" one and while that one was bad too it certainly looked better than this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 14:14
|
|
|
Somfin posted:Pretty soon it's just gonna be a hastily-blurred screenshot of some blog, with a poorly-drawn thumb in a corner, some yellow dialogue boxes, and then that same Cruz picture surrounded by love hearts. Can't forget the porn tracings!
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 14:16
|
|
|
Somfin posted:Pretty soon it's just gonna be a hastily-blurred screenshot of some blog, with a poorly-drawn thumb in a corner, some yellow dialogue boxes, and then that same Cruz picture surrounded by love hearts. That's, uh, that's not a thumb.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 14:20
|
|
|
Regarding Guantanamo Bay:New York Times, May 20, 2009 posted:The Senate voted overwhelmingly on Wednesday to cut from a war spending bill the $80 million requested by President Obama to close the detention center at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and to bar the transfer of detainees to the United States and its territories. http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/votes/111/senate/1/196 Russ Feingold and Bernie Sanders voted against the closure of Guantanamo Bay, which shows you how much support Obama had.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 14:20
|
|
|
Cruel and Unusual posted:Regarding Guantanamo Bay: Did Sanders give any reason for voting against it because he's been banging the typical socialist isolationist drum pretty hard.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 14:38
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:Did Sanders give any reason for voting against it because he's been banging the typical socialist isolationist drum pretty hard. probably for the same reason that all the republicans voted for it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 14:43
|
|
|
8bitAsplode posted:probably for the same reason that all the republicans voted for it. And that is? I'm sorry if asking why someone who constantly talks about how gitmo is a national disgrace voted to cut the funding to at the very least start the process of closing it is a dumb question?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 14:51
|
|
|
edit: I misunderstood nothing stupid to see here no sir
Mirthless fucked around with this message at 15:38 on Jun 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 14:53
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:And that is? I'm sorry if asking why someone who constantly talks about how gitmo is a national disgrace voted to cut the funding to at the very least start the process of closing it is a dumb question? I'm assuming there is something republicans wanted in that funding cut for their political gain and sanders feels he has to vote against it for that reason. And I wasn't suggesting it was a dumb question. Just giving my own guess.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 14:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 21:15 |
|
|
Randler posted:Your legislative is actually able to forbid people your country considers criminals from being prosecuted under your country's own legal system? That's rich. Xander77 posted:*Snip* Do you happen to have a folder of these somewhere you wouldn't mind uploading?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2014 15:17
|
|
