This is pretty much why the Supreme Court ruled that a president’s actions cannot be considered illegal, when performed in the name of their official capacity as president. They didn’t just give Trump the authority to violate the law…they retroactively gave it to every other president that has committed atrocities during their time in office.
In a twisted sort of way, they were affirming what’s already considered established precedent.
Obama was really just piggy-backing on previous “approvals”. He was also conducting drone strikes wherever he felt like…in or out of active war scenarios. It was also all based on shadowy intelligence, and done without any due process for those he killed. All in the name of the Republic…just like how Trump is claiming his actions are.
Congress approved military strikes in the entire middle east region under Bush. Even if the strikes weren’t in active war zones, they were approved uses of military force. Trump has no such authority for his strikes on boats in the Pacific and Caribbean.
I agree that the authorizations granted under Bush were bullshit and tantamount to war crimes, but the actions of the president is starkly different.
Yeah, you can thank one of the bushes for that shit. It’s a fucking insult to the world
I think that at this point, if the US wants to ever be eleven remotely respected again, that it will have to rid itself of bullshit laws like that, and acknowledge and fully support the ICC
To be fair…Obama did “just kill people” by the thousands.
Liberals like Obama because he did it while keeping a low profile so they could keep their conscious clean.
MAGA like Trump cuz he gloats about it so they can revel in it.
conscience
Where the fuck did I say I liked Obama.
When you hear people insult liberals do you always take it personally?
Maybe go back to the original comment for this thread and read usernames
They were clearly responding to the person who instinctively jumped to defend Obama, if you look at the usernames, he was clearly not taking to you…
That person absolutely wasn’t defending Obama. They were clearly calling him out, likely for his drone strikes.
Wasn’t even directed at anyone in particular, just stating the observation.
I know you were at the top, what I don’t understand is why you thought my comment was directed at you.
deleted by creator
Every US president practically has.
This is pretty much why the Supreme Court ruled that a president’s actions cannot be considered illegal, when performed in the name of their official capacity as president. They didn’t just give Trump the authority to violate the law…they retroactively gave it to every other president that has committed atrocities during their time in office.
In a twisted sort of way, they were affirming what’s already considered established precedent.
I thought Obama had congressional approval for all his military actions.
That’s not just killing people, it’s part of the job of being president: executing the will of the republic. What Trump is doing is very different.
Obama was really just piggy-backing on previous “approvals”. He was also conducting drone strikes wherever he felt like…in or out of active war scenarios. It was also all based on shadowy intelligence, and done without any due process for those he killed. All in the name of the Republic…just like how Trump is claiming his actions are.
So…not much different.
Congress approved military strikes in the entire middle east region under Bush. Even if the strikes weren’t in active war zones, they were approved uses of military force. Trump has no such authority for his strikes on boats in the Pacific and Caribbean.
I agree that the authorizations granted under Bush were bullshit and tantamount to war crimes, but the actions of the president is starkly different.
Do you care to name an incident, so we can compare?
Yes, I see, lots of parallels there.
Apparently Trump is quite a fan of drone strikes too:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47480207
That Trump is worse does not trivialize the fact.
No, but it is telling that trump then, according to these number, killed 4x more people in 2x less time
Both numbers suffice that either men should be in an ICC prison
And highlights the reason why the US doesn’t acknowledge the authority of the ICC.
We have a law that explicitly states we’ll invade if a US citizen is tried.
Yeah, you can thank one of the bushes for that shit. It’s a fucking insult to the world
I think that at this point, if the US wants to ever be eleven remotely respected again, that it will have to rid itself of bullshit laws like that, and acknowledge and fully support the ICC
That, amongst much, much more
Yeah I’m not arguing with you on this just sharing information I found.
If my math is right, that’s not by the thousands. That’s by the tens.
Roughly %10 casualty rate. That’s dog shit 💩