Northwest Indiana Discussion

CAIRO (Reuters) – The United States expressed alarm that its protégés in the Egyptian army were abusing hopes for democracy by ordering more military rule just as the Muslim Brotherhood was claiming victory in the country’s first free presidential election.

The Islamists’ self-assurance was contested by the other candidate in the run-off race, a former general who was prime minister whenHosni Mubarak was ousted last year by an army anxious to save itself from the revolution in the streets.

Washington, which only in March agreed to hand over $1.3 billion in annual aid to the biggest army in the Middle East, was far from pleased – not least, it seemed, because the man in charge of the council, Field Marshal Hussein Tantawi, failed to mention his plan when assuring Defense Secretary Leon Panetta on Friday that the target date for civilian rule would be met.

“We are deeply concerned about the new amendments to the constitutional declaration, including the timing of their announcement as polls were closing,” a Pentagon spokesman said, adding that he did not think Tantawi had alerted Panetta when they spoke.

“We believe Egypt’s transition must continue and that Egypt is made stronger and more stable by a successful transition to democracy,” spokesman George Little said. “We support the Egyptian people in their expectation that the (SCAF) will transfer full power to a democratically elected civilian government, as the SCAF previously announced.”

The US policy of using aerial drones to carry out targeted killings presents a major challenge to the system of international law that has endured since the second world war, a United Nations investigator has said.

Christof Heyns, the UN special rapporteur on extrajudicial killings, summary or arbitrary executions, told a conference in Geneva that President Obama’s attacks in Pakistan, Yemen and elsewhere, carried out by the CIA, would encourage other states to flout long-established human rights standards.

In his strongest critique so far of drone strikes, Heyns suggested some may even constitute “war crimes”. His comments come amid rising international unease over the surge in killings by remotely piloted unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs).

Addressing the conference, which was organised by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), a second UN rapporteur, Ben Emmerson QC, who monitors counter-terrorism, announced he would be prioritising inquiries into drone strikes.

The London-based barrister said the issue was moving rapidly up the international agenda after China and Russia this week jointly issued a statement at the UN Human Rights Council, backed by other countries, condemning drone attacks.

...after China and Russia this week jointly issued a statement at the UN Human Rights Council, backed by other countries, condemning drone attacks.

Very patriotic of -={ARCLIGHT}=- siding with China and Russia in condemning drone attacks that kill terrorists.

Oh really? Let's see....

So tell us smartass, DO YOU CONDEMN the airstrikes like China and Russia?
Is that a YES or No?
Does -={ARCLIGHT}=- support the president or not?

So who's side are you on?

DO YOU CONDEMN the airstrikes

Well I absolutely condemn them. They are an act of war that breaks the sovereignty of a number of nations. According to the Geneva Convention they are war crimes, just as the use of torture and detentions committed by GWB and Obama are.

Tell me edge ..... how do you feel about the presidents ability to arbitrarily assassinate US citizens?

I have absolutely no problem with killing terrorists.

That is after all how they developed the information that led us to UBL.

Fact is George Bush and Dick Cheney committed war crimes by approving the use of torture. Your ridiculous that Obama did the same nonsense. Detaining terrorists is not a "war crime."


I have absolutely no problem with killing terrorists. I could care less if they're a US citizen or not.
Are you telling me you do not approve of the killing of Bin Laden?

So you think the execution of someone that they deem a "terrorist" without any judicial authority is acceptable?

The president, in turn, has the constitutional duty to protect the country "from any imminent threat of attack."

Every country has an "inherit right of national self-defense," he said, and there is no prohibition on the use of drones in warfare.

Read more: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Special/201 ... z1yabuQ1xL

Do you think its acceptable to "take out" a terrorist US citizen on US soil?

Didn't Obama promise to shut down Gitmo? Going strong I see ..... but of course the Republicans made him do it.

Ok .... what would you call it if China used a drone to kill Tibetan Separatists on US soil? Would that be an act of war?

How about collateral damage? Is collateral damage acceptable in a foreign country to kill a terrorist?

"And if we have Osama bin Laden in our sights and the Pakistani government is unable or unwilling to take them out, then I think that we have to act, and we will take them out.
We will kill bin Laden. We will crush al-Qaida. That has to be our biggest national security priority."

ANKARA, Turkey (AP) — A Syrian minister is quoted as saying his country’s forces may have mistaken the Turkish plane they shot down for an Israeli one.

Syrian Information Minister Omran al-Zoebi was quoted as telling Turkish news channel A Haber in a telephone interview Wednesday that his country did “not want a crisis between Turkey and Syria.”

Al-Zoebi said Turkish and Israeli fighter jets were mostly U.S.-made, which may have led the Syrian forces to mistake it for an Israeli jet.

Turkey warned Syria on Tuesday to keep its troops away from the countries’ troubled border or risk an armed response, an angry reply to the downing of the Turkish reconnaissance plane last week.

Just days after the breakdown of talks with the West over Iran’s nuclear program, the deputy chief commander of the Revolutionary Guards announced that there soon will be war — and that Allah will ensure his forces are victorious.

The last round of talks between Iran and the P5+1 (the United States, Britain, France, China, Russia and Germany) ended in Moscow last week without any agreement on Iran’s illicit nuclear program.

Gen. Hossein Salami, in a televised interview, boasted that, “Iran has complete control of all the enemy’s interests around the world and is on a path to reach equivalency with world powers.” The commander emphasized that Iran’s nuclear program is irreversible, the Islamic Republic News Agency reported.