Pelosi Then: Killing Osama Doesn’t Matter

Posted on by ( 6 comments already! )
Spread the love

Loading

Pelosi Now: It’s Huge!

Nancy Pelosi, press conference, September 7, 2006:

[E]ven if [Osama bin Laden] is caught tomorrow, it is five years too late. He has done more damage the longer he has been out there. But, in fact, the damage that he has done … is done. And even to capture him now I don’t think makes us any safer.

Nancy Pelosi, earlier today:

The death of Osama bin Laden marks the most significant development in our fight against al-Qaida. … I salute President Obama, his national security team, Director Panetta, our men and women in the intelligence community and military, and other nations who supported this effort for their leadership in achieving this major accomplishment. … [T]he death of Osama bin Laden is historic….

It is unfortunate that many public figures are unable to view events otherwise than through a partisan prism.

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
6 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Democrats are dopes who have absolutely no long term memory. Zero.

0
Reply

Yeah.
And I saw a collage of dems – both politicians and media types – posted here at the ”featured post” – who were saying that Obama’s high gas prices were GOOD for Americans.
(Not what they said when GWBush had them.)

It is called ”cognitive dissonance.”
Cognitive dissonance is a theory first proposed by Leon Festinger in the 1950’s.
He theorized that when an individual holds two or more ideas that are related but inconsistent with each another the inconsistency creates a state of discomfort.
Unfortunately, these Democrats have held so many conflicting views simultaneously that they have numbed their capacity to feel that discomfort.

0
Reply

Notice that “our men and women in the intelligence community and military” ranked number four. The one politician and his appointees ranked one, two, and three respectively. Tells you where she’s coming from.

0
Reply

A little something from Spiegel, Was Bin Laden’s Killing Legal?
Is this what justice looks like? Al-Qaida boss Osama bin Laden was killed on Sunday in a secret military operation in Pakistan. Americans are celebrating, but there are serious doubts about whether the targeted killing was legal under international law and the laws of war

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,760358,00.html

Not Everything the US Declares To Be War Really Is

But Obama and his predecessor Bush never sought the kind of justice that would have seen bin Laden tried in an international court. As early as his election campaign in 2008, Obama swore he would “kill bin Laden” and finish the job begun by his predecessor after 9/11. “We went to war against al-Qaida to protect our citizens, our friends and our allies,” the president explained on Sunday night. A US national security official didn’t beat around the bush, telling Reuters, “This was a kill operation.” And why shouldn’t it be? The very goal of war is the defeat of the opponent, the killing of enemies through legal means. War is war.

In truth, it isn’t quite that simple. And not everything that the United States declares to be war really is. Legal experts like Kress say it is “questionable whether the USA can still claim to be engaged in an armed conflict with al-Qaida.”

It was certainly still war when Bush began the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001. Operation Enduring Freedom targeted the Taliban government in Kabul as well as Osama bin Laden’s terrorist organization which it backed. At the time, al-Qaida maintained bases and training camps in Afghanistan — just like a warring party, in fact. The war on terror was understood to be an “asymmetrical war,” and the laws of war also permit the targeted killing of non-state combatants, provided they are really combatants who are organized in units with a military-like character, and that they are integrated into those units either as armed fighters or as a leader who issues commands.

One of Our NATO Allies and reluctant partner in the Libya Live Fire Exercise. Opinion for sure but Spiegel is widely read and rarely discredited. As I recall Obama addressed Germans on his Campaign Trail as if Germans had a vote in American Elections a while back. Lets see if this gets any attention in the MSM. Our Citizen of the World POTUS should be listening to this.

0

he CALL IT WAR, BECAUSE HE FITTED THIS INTO HIS AGREED WAR MEASURES; BUT HOW MANY TIMES DID HE CHANGE THE NAME ” WAR” WITH OTHER UNTRUTHFULL NAMES FOR AFGHANISTAN’S WAR. FOR HIS OWN AGREED ACTIONS AND TO KEEP HIS IMAGE WITH THE MUSLIMS OF THE WORLD TO SHOW THAT HE IS ON THEIR SIDE; REALY?, AND ON THE STRATEGY OF THE ROE ? .
THIS HAS TO BE CONFUSING FOR AMERICANS, AND THAT IS MEANT TO BE JUST LIKE THE LONG FORM CERTIFICAT SHOWING UP AT THIS TIME.

0
Reply

These fools have to hate the internet, you tube, and google. They knew they could count on the media not to bring up things like this. Imagine if this had been Palin….

0
Reply