Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
As a matter of national political morality, the United States does not put out hits on inconvenient folks around the world like Assange. What individuals within government fantasize about is not relevant.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Actually we do if they so happen to be living in Afghanistan, Pakistan, or any of the other countries where we actually have drones in the air.
We did do that all over the world in the good old fashioned way during the cold war, particularly in Latin America.
edited 4th Oct '16 6:48:58 AM by CaptainCapsase
![]()
![]()
Martyr.
Unlike most of the people the US has been droning, Assange like it or not is a high profile public figure. Besides can you name any public figure opposing the US that wasn't Omar or Bin Laden? Even then most of those people that were droned weren't top grade assholes leaking information, the sheer majority of them were in terrorist cells or terrorist leaders.
The only ones that have killed a high profile public figure regarding information leak so far were the Russians in the murderer of Alexander Litvinenko, which doing something like this would be a huge PR disaster and tarnish the image of the US even further.
edited 4th Oct '16 6:51:03 AM by AngelusNox
Inter arma enim silent legesAnd that's not even counting the 90+ people Clinton had killed!
Is using "Julian Assange is a Hillary butt plug" an acceptable signature quote?![]()
![]()
Killed in war and killed while working for terrorist organizations is leagues different from killing someone who just happens to be inconvenient and an useful fool working for a data leaking organization.
Tell me, how many journalists and whistle blowers the US has killed directly or indirectly for releasing compromising information?
Inter arma enim silent legesHonestly, the best solution is to just let Assange die in that embassy of old age. He might even piss Ecuador enough for them to hand him over. Either way, he's going to be that houseguest that refuses to leave.
"For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die."If Assange ever becomes enough of an asshole that killing him stops being inconvenient, it will have become unnecessary long before because people would have lost all trust in him.
edited 4th Oct '16 7:23:29 AM by Medinoc
"And as long as a sack of shit is not a good thing to be, chivalry will never die."@Capsace: We are at declared war with the terrorist forces in the Middle East and consider them combat kills. They are not political assassinations. You can argue the morality of that all you want, but you must recognize the distinction.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"![]()
Political assassination is inherently inconvenient, since it always runs the risk of creating a martyr. Better to just let him reveal himself as the bitter, idiotic Paper Tiger that he is.
@Fighteer: That's only because the US decided that anyone it kills in a drone strike must be a terrorist and thus counts anyone killed in a drone strike as an enemy combatant. A good number of the people targeted are just people saying unkind things about the US who happen to live in a place where our citizens don't particularly care about us bombing. It's no cleaner than conventional strategic bombing which itself is a form of terrorism by the official defenition of the term.
edited 4th Oct '16 7:41:46 AM by CaptainCapsase
And, by your logic, this means that the U.S. government must be fine with bombing civilians outside of declared war zones? Your biases are tainting your thought processes.
"Organized violence against civilians for political purposes."
Some defenitions restrict this to non-state actors but I don't see the point. Strategic bombing is frequently a euphemism for "bombing population centers and infrastructure until the local population capitulates.
![]()
I specifically said Assangr hasn't been assassinated since he isn't in a place.
edited 4th Oct '16 7:47:23 AM by CaptainCapsase
Guess I should have added an /s
I can't think of the last political assassination the US carried out. Bin Laden, technically, I guess?
Is using "Julian Assange is a Hillary butt plug" an acceptable signature quote?Bin Laden doesn't even count as a political assassination, he would be closer to the assassination of Pablo Escobar than the assassination of a politician.
Also just because you don't have an state behind you it doesn't mean you can't be a combatant or that makes you only a civilian, Al Qaeda and ISIL are very self evident of that.
Only if you count that terrorist cells and leaders who actively engage in terrorism and attacks count as politicians, which by pretty much almost everyone's definition, they aren't.
edited 4th Oct '16 7:56:50 AM by AngelusNox
Inter arma enim silent leges

Yeah, pretty sure it's the martyr thing than anything.
Like we could probably put a bullet in Snowden's head if we wanted and why would we care what Russia thinks of us? So why haven't we?
Oh really when?