Dept. of Justice "White Paper"

[goDel]

Good point. A drone strike is just like a traditional airstrike. The only change is on the side of the aggressor (safety, precision and costs).

 

I've taken a quick look at the document and must say I expected something different. It's not nearly as final as i thought. It's mostly a discussion about what might be needed for a bill. But it's left at that, as far as i can tell. This is not even close to the legalese which is needed for a bill.

I think it's pretty interesting actually. It kind of shows the legal struggle with potential threats. And in a way it is implied 911 happened (or one of the reasons) because the governmental institutions did not have the legal framework to act on their intelligence. So the discussion is about what such a framework could look like. Obviously this framework discussion completely sidesteps the intentions of (and the humane way to deal with) 'forces' like Al'qaida.

Too bad I would have to really read the entire white paper to have something actually meaningful to add to the discussion. But that's just way too time consuming for me at this point.

 

@deer: so nobody gives a shit (although plenty do), but if people give a shit it's nevertheless pointless? That argument is like a dog biting its own tail. I hope it really hurts! If it does, loosen your jaws a bit and the pain will go away.

[YO303]

 

I did a segment on my sisters show about this last week. What's most disturbing to me about NDAA and this, is that with everything combined it literally takes away posse comitatus, congressional approval and habeus corpus 10 whole fucking years after 9/11. No other time in american history have civil liberties been this eroded during 'peace time'. When i say peace time i mean not in the midst of a civil/world war or a nuclear standoff. The longest civil liberties were stripped in America was during the McCarthy era, but that really only lasted 6 years. We're already going 10+ with a gulag of people indefinitely detained, sneak and peak searches without a warrant and now this shit. Most disturbing of all is that it has become background noise, effectively normalized. We are not getting these rights back without a huge push back from the American public and i honestly don't see that happening.

 

Obama is going to go down in history as the person who basically made indefinite warfare normal and put the final nail in the coffin of American freedom of speech, investigative journalism and activism. I hope hes proud of his legacy

 

sorry to go off on a tagent

 

censorship? freedom of speech? activism? give me a break, the government has just to sit back and enjoy as the general public become more and more oblivious to the crimes this government is committing.

There is plenty information out there to cause an uproar but nobody gives a shit, what else do people need to see to realize what its government is doing.

People have become so jaded, oblivious and self centered no amount of information will make them change things.

 

Maybe this general feeling of obliviousness was caused the conditions this government created but you know what people like you or your sister keep shouting all the information the population need to "wake up" and nobody is doing shit (not even the people that are paying attention)

 

I dont understand why you (and people who are "awake") give a shit about this god forsaken population of fucking idiots, is it worth it worrying about all this shit when the people you are trying to help dont give a shit and call you paranoid or crazy?

 

I feel defeated, i will live the rest of my life in a selfish way (care about me and my loved ones), hopefully "they" will stay away from me, hopefully they will let me live and let me die.

 

(tried to edit this in but ran out of time sorry didnt mean to)

[chenGOD]

I've taken a quick look at the document and must say I expected something different. It's not nearly as final as i thought. It's mostly a discussion about what might be needed for a bill. But it's left at that, as far as i can tell. This is not even close to the legalese which is needed for a bill.

 

 

lol of course, it's a white paper. However, this is important because it demonstrates the frame of mind that the Office of the President has regarding these sorts of situations.

[goDel]

Personally I'm not too worried about this frame of mind. Imo, the government, or any other 'something', should be allowed to use any frame of mind when searching for a solution. The more frames the better the end result will be.

 

The current discussion suggests we've got the whole story, but this might be just a snippet. Other white papers might exist with complete opposing frames of mind. If that's the case, i wouldn't have difficulties with a paper like this.

[chenGOD]

Unfortunately, white papers in modern government are considered almost as good as legislation.

[goDel]

Ehm, as long as there are multiple white papers that shouldn't be a problem. Can we be certain this is the entire story?

 

I remember having read somewhere that in the current administration multiple people are to write a paper about the same issue from different viewpoints.

 

Imo, it's tooeasy to make generalised statements about some leaked document without even knowing wether or not we know the whole story. ( but i'm repeating myself here...)

[chenGOD]

Ehm, as long as there are multiple white papers that shouldn't be a problem. Can we be certain this is the entire story?

 

I remember having read somewhere that in the current administration multiple people are to write a paper about the same issue from different viewpoints.

 

Imo, it's tooeasy to make generalised statements about some leaked document without even knowing wether or not we know the whole story. ( but i'm repeating myself here...)

 

uhh my point is: there is generally one white paper that gets accepted as the basis for most legislation. Although white papers wre originally supposed to provide multiple points of view, the case now is that one white paper tends to be the marker for a perticular piece of legislation.

Think tanks come up with several points of view, this is true. But the presidential (or congressional, as the case may be) pick th ePOV that they think will play most easily with the voting population.

[goDel]

 

 

Ehm, as long as there are multiple white papers that shouldn't be a problem. Can we be certain this is the entire story?

I remember having read somewhere that in the current administration multiple people are to write a paper about the same issue from different viewpoints.

Imo, it's tooeasy to make generalised statements about some leaked document without even knowing wether or not we know the whole story. ( but i'm repeating myself here...)

uhh my point is: there is generally one white paper that gets accepted as the basis for most legislation. Although white papers wre originally supposed to provide multiple points of view, the case now is that one white paper tends to be the marker for a perticular piece of legislation.

Think tanks come up with several points of view, this is true. But the presidential (or congressional, as the case may be) pick th ePOV that they think will play most easily with the voting population.

What's the actual status of his document? Is this your so called final white paper? Or is that just the assumption behind the current discussion, even though we don't/ can't know? Imo, there are too many implicit assumptions to have any meaningful discussion.

I know this may read like a collection of obvious statements about things which seem already established. My only point is that those obvious things are notthat obvious.

There are too many unknown unknowns to make any definite generalizations at this point, imo.

[awepittance]

 

 

I did a segment on my sisters show about this last week. What's most disturbing to me about NDAA and this, is that with everything combined it literally takes away posse comitatus, congressional approval and habeus corpus 10 whole fucking years after 9/11. No other time in american history have civil liberties been this eroded during 'peace time'. When i say peace time i mean not in the midst of a civil/world war or a nuclear standoff. The longest civil liberties were stripped in America was during the McCarthy era, but that really only lasted 6 years. We're already going 10+ with a gulag of people indefinitely detained, sneak and peak searches without a warrant and now this shit. Most disturbing of all is that it has become background noise, effectively normalized. We are not getting these rights back without a huge push back from the American public and i honestly don't see that happening.

 

Obama is going to go down in history as the person who basically made indefinite warfare normal and put the final nail in the coffin of American freedom of speech, investigative journalism and activism. I hope hes proud of his legacy

 

sorry to go off on a tagent

 

censorship? freedom of speech? activism? give me a break, the government has just to sit back and enjoy as the general public become more and more oblivious to the crimes this government is committing.

There is plenty information out there to cause an uproar but nobody gives a shit, what else do people need to see to realize what its government is doing.

People have become so jaded, oblivious and self centered no amount of information will make them change things.

 

Maybe this general feeling of obliviousness was caused the conditions this government created but you know what people like you or your sister keep shouting all the information the population need to "wake up" and nobody is doing shit (not even the people that are paying attention)

 

I dont understand why you (and people who are "awake") give a shit about this god forsaken population of fucking idiots, is it worth it worrying about all this shit when the people you are trying to help dont give a shit and call you paranoid or crazy?

 

I feel defeated, i will live the rest of my life in a selfish way (care about me and my loved ones), hopefully "they" will stay away from me, hopefully they will let me live and let me die.

 

(tried to edit this in but ran out of time sorry didnt mean to)

 

i really don't even know how to respond to your level of cynicism. Why are me and my sister doing this? We still have hope that people inherently want to be free. I'm not an optimistic person, but i'm not going to sit back and not do anything. I'm concerned, i have been ever since i watched this country slip into insanity after 9/11 and i have no way of shutting my brain off at this point and relaxing about the state of things. If i could turn back and stop caring i probably would, but it's not possible for me.

[awepittance]

Well really, Americans don't die in traditional air strikes anymore, unless by pilot error. can you link me to that failure rate study please?

Compson I think, posted a really interesting article about a drone pilot's experiences from a german magazine. I'll try and remember the link and post it for you, the effect that these missions have on the psyche of the people flying them is quite intense.

 

what do you mean americans don't die in airstrikes anymore? When i say airstrikes i mean that as a blanket term for any flying vehicle launching bombs onto the ground. Apache helicopters were shot down quite a few times Afghanistan and Iraq. I wasn't specifically talking about jet planes, as far as i know nobody flying a jet was ever shot down.

 

and here is the study conducted jointly by researchers at Stanford and NYU

http://livingunderdrones.org/report/

 

the 2% is specifically referring to the official reasoning we launch drone strikes, to kill important members of 'al qaeda' or other 'top terrorist' militants. This only happens 2% of the time in terms of the actual causality data.

Not saying that you said this.. but I think assuming that a 'drone strike' is anymore accurate or surgical than a jet plane bombing as we've been doing since post Vietnam would be a mistake. We have more sophisticated guidance systems now but bombs and rocket attacks will always destroy many things around the intended target. It's an unavoidable aspect of a military strike. Until we invent Akira stye lasers there will never be a very high 'success' rate in killing people from flying vehicles.

[chenGOD]

 

 

 

Ehm, as long as there are multiple white papers that shouldn't be a problem. Can we be certain this is the entire story?

I remember having read somewhere that in the current administration multiple people are to write a paper about the same issue from different viewpoints.

Imo, it's tooeasy to make generalised statements about some leaked document without even knowing wether or not we know the whole story. ( but i'm repeating myself here...)

uhh my point is: there is generally one white paper that gets accepted as the basis for most legislation. Although white papers wre originally supposed to provide multiple points of view, the case now is that one white paper tends to be the marker for a perticular piece of legislation.

Think tanks come up with several points of view, this is true. But the presidential (or congressional, as the case may be) pick th ePOV that they think will play most easily with the voting population.

What's the actual status of his document? Is this your so called final white paper? Or is that just the assumption behind the current discussion, even though we don't/ can't know? Imo, there are too many implicit assumptions to have any meaningful discussion.

I know this may read like a collection of obvious statements about things which seem already established. My only point is that those obvious things are notthat obvious.

There are too many unknown unknowns to make any definite generalizations at this point, imo.

 

OK, final attempt, cause I've had one too many delicious ales.

Historically speaking, white papers (note the plural!) were supposed to provide multiple points of view. However, this has morphed over time to the point where now we have one white paper that provides the basis for most legislation. In my opinion, this white paper will provide the basis for legislation regarding this particular option for done strikes on individuals associated with al-qaeda.

 

I suspect you're being deliberately stubborn in order to play the role of devil's advocate.

[goDel]

Just trying to keep an open mind.....