+ + + 3 BRANDNEW NewsTickers for your Website! + + + easy configurable in less than 1 Minute + + + GET'EM NOW! + + +

   Home | Join | Submit News | MyShortNews | HighScores | FAQ'S | Forums 0 Users Online   
                 01/17/2018 02:20 AM  
  ShortNews Search
search all Channels
RSS feeds
  ShortNews User Poll
Are you excited about the holiday season?
  Latest Events
  1.727 Visits   4 Assessments  Show users who Rated this:
Quality: Good
Back to Overview  
11/10/2008 04:21 PM ID: 74710 Permalink   

Bush Administration Authorized Special Forces Attacks in Syria, Pakistan


US officials have told the NY Times that nearly a dozen authorized secret operations have been conducted since 2004 in Syria, Pakistan and other countries. Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld signed the classified order and Bush approved it.

The recent Syrian operation that killed 8 civilians fell under this order. Another mission occurred in 2006, using Navy SEALs for a raid on a suspected terrorist compound on Pakistani tribal ground.

The raids are usually by special forces, with the CIA, in an Al-Qaida target hunt. Most missions, including the Syria and Pakistan missions, have to be approved by the President or the Defense Secretary.

    WebReporter: Mr. Wright Show Calling Card      
ASSESS this news: BLOCK this news. Reason:
The article doesn't mention "illegal" even once. Keep your opinion to yourself.
  by: greatwarrior1   11/10/2008 04:59 PM     
  If they were  
authorized, does that make them legal? Similar to the memos that authorized abuse in Guantanamo, etc. Any thoughts?
  by: nephew     11/10/2008 05:00 PM     
I think the implication was that we were conducting military maneuvers inside of countries that we are not officially at war with.
  by: nephew     11/10/2008 05:02 PM     
  criticism noted  
Perhaps I should have left illegal out of the title. Or emphasized that we were not at war with those countries.
  by: Mr. Wright     11/10/2008 05:41 PM     
My first bad assessment. That hurts.
  by: Mr. Wright     11/10/2008 05:43 PM     
If you are to write exactly as written at the source, you may as well just present the link only. Pertinent to the news, I think Illegal fits proportionally.

It does so since these operations will come to bite Americans oneday. USA and its might assumes no one can or will retaliate, and when they do, they will be known as terrorists and they hate our freedom rhetorics will resurface again. I dont understand this policy from USA, since past teaches us, it is mostly women and children who end up dead in groves.

While Muslim clerics from the same region are issuing this fatwa Do not assume for a moment they will condone these USA actions.

As I read their fatwa it NOTES. "We have no love for offenders whichever religion they might belong to. Our concern is that innocents should not be targeted and the career of educated youth not ruined," It surmises they dont like these actions also.

I hate WARS. Because Children get to die. GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
  by: isuzu     11/10/2008 05:56 PM     
Innocent children also die everyday via abortions, more then kids killed in war.
  by: cray0la     11/10/2008 06:14 PM     
Proof? Not that abortions kill children (that's another argument), but that they're so rampant that they kill more than war. I'd like to see those numbers.
  by: MomentOfClarity     11/10/2008 06:21 PM     
Yes I would also like to see those numbers.

Lets use everything from WWII and post as your starting point. So you just need roughly 60M abortions or so and then we might agree.

Oh and dont forget the 3M killed by the CIA in Indonesia, 5M in SE Asia by the US, The millions killed in the Chinese Civil war, the millions killed throughout the world by Soviet and US forces during the cold war, and not to mention our latest oil crusades in the middle east. I know I am forgetting lots of other wars but anyhow...

Should probably be around 90+ Million people or so.

So your task shouldnt be that hard. Just find proof that about 90+ million abortions have happened.
  by: slavefortheman     11/10/2008 06:34 PM     
  Of course they did.  
The Bush administration and there breaches of world policies regarding conflicts and national sovereignty , make them war criminals.
But being the US they will send others to the world court but not their own.
Biggest hypocrites on the planet!
  by: thinking   11/10/2008 07:01 PM     
US Government I meant not the people.
Obama will not see anything of the Bush administration go before the world court.
Maybe a new president but I think very little will change.
  by: thinking   11/10/2008 07:05 PM     
So because you think abortions kill children, that makes war justifiable?

I disagree. For one, abortions kill fetuses. It's more distinct than the difference between a child and an adult. The difference between a child and adult it a blurry line defined by age, experience and responsibility. The difference between a child and an embryo is pretty clear. I shouldn't have to explain that difference.

As for war, innocent people die all the time. Killing an innocent person can not be justified no matter how you look at it. There are other ways to solve problems besides blowing the shit out of a group of people who think differently from you.
  by: Mr. Wright     11/10/2008 07:37 PM     
Also if you want to debate morals on abortion perhaps we can debate the "Conservatives" stance on children.

You claim to care about a child before it is born and the Right is therefore anti-abortion. Yet you dont give a damn about that life once it comes into the world. IE: If a child is born to a poor family, the idea of welfare and social health care sickens you.

Its a pretty hypocritical attitude if you ask me.

I would assume that if you are for life, you would be for life before and after birth.

If you ask me, it appears that conservatives dont really care for the life of children at all. It is more or less a ideal of selfishness and greed than conservativism.
  by: slavefortheman     11/10/2008 08:04 PM     
I personally think Republicans are so anti-abortion because they want more people to make money off of. I am a fan of birth control, but it is a factor in the limited amount of social security my generation will provide for those who need it. But then again, if everyone had the kids they were supposed to have, we'd have quite a welfare crisis on our hands.
  by: Mr. Wright     11/10/2008 09:06 PM     
  @Mr. Wright  
Agreed. But my argument is this. How can he be against abortion but against the life of that very same child after it is born poor. Conservatives like to say "No Abortion", but as soon as you have a child, they tell you to go take a hike and that its your problem.

I think the solution needs to be, if you want to be pro-life, then you need to be pro-post-born-life as well. Not just pre-born life...

Its the most hypocritical part of the conservative movement.
  by: slavefortheman     11/10/2008 09:17 PM     
We are on the same page on this issue. I am pro-choice, although I do feel that choice is often abused. How someone can care more for a cellular amalgamation that can not think or feel than for someone who suffers from an oppressive environment on a daily basis is beyond me.
  by: Mr. Wright     11/10/2008 09:59 PM     
is a pile of shit. I am so glad I voted for Obama. Screw bush and his administration. Buncha cowards and liars.
  by: chimmy420   11/10/2008 10:53 PM     
Copyright ©2018 ShortNews GmbH & Co. KG, Contact: