Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Another failure of Obama, another example of his executive penmanship destroyed. It looks so bad to be overridden, especially since it has never been done before during his terms.

It shows how weak and ineffective he is.

I do not agree with the veto override, and I think this is one of the times Obama did the right thing.

But instead of working with Congress to pass a bill that worked for all, he chose this path, which led to this, and for that I am disappointed in him.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-sept11-veto-override-20160928-snap-story.html

Why not do the equivalent of settling out of court? Let the pieces of shit in the Saudi government pay every single family who lost a loved one a certain amount of money.

Because it would be more effective to sanction them and stop defending them, make them pay for their own protection, and stop buying oil from them and to break all alliances with them, since it was proven they were behind it.

We have no business doing business with these disgusting people who beat and rape women and kill gays and funded the worst attack on America since Pearl Harbor.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Saudi_Arabia

wtf i hate obama now

Originally posted by Tzeentch
wtf i hate obama now



So you disagree with his veto?

Wow its happening right now!

54 Yes, 0 No so far

Now 56

61-0!

70-0!

Override complete, thanks Obama

So is it common for these types of votes to be landslides and not have even a couple votes for the opposing side?

No this isn't common at all, Obama just got rebuked by his own party. This has never happened before to him, or anyone else like this, this is a complete loss for him and its a complete disappointment.

86-0

97-1!!!!



Thank you for disappointing me yet again, Barack.

You failed on this, and you have failed to close Gitmo like you promised.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/08/01/why-obama-has-failed-to-close-guantanamo

Perfect example of vested interests lobbying politicians to act against the people.

Can't say it's unexpected. The UK government is about to do another massive arms deal with Saudi Arabia despite massive opposition to it.

Didn't 9/11 survivors already receive benefits?

Obama's veto isn't being done out of spite; he's trying to be pragmatic. The idea would be an international relations disaster.

Care to back that up with facts?

The one part I read thst raised an eyebrow, it would be a two-way street. Where people from other countires could start suing the US. eg Any Iraqi citizen that suffered during Bush. Jr.'s war.

Incorrect. There is a difference between terrorism and a congressionally backed war. The bill provides no option for what you are suggesting.

Apparently, congress backing a military intrusion automatically justifies any and all atrocities that the military subsequently commits.

Couldn't a case be made by say some average Iraqi father who lost his children because a "smart" bomb had a moment of idiocy, went off course and hit his house? As killing innocent people is a key componemt of terrorism, no?

There is no provision in the bill for what you are talking about. If you really want to end wars, stop voting for government and supporting it. Thats why I am voting for Trump, I want him to destroy it.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Apparently, congress backing a military intrusion automatically justifies any and all atrocities that the military subsequently commits.

Except that isn't actually what he said. All he did was point out the bill won't let you do things like sue over the type of thing Robtard brought up.

There was literally no talk about the justification of any of these acts.

The first family is ready to sue, this is going to be great.

Plus if we did shit like 9/11 to other countries..WE'D DESERVE TO BE SUED.

I know why Obama did what he did, the Saudi's are his masters. Im glad this veto override happened now the more I think about it.. Of coarse all the liberals here are not glad about it.

Plus remember just giving them the option of suing doesn't guarantee a 100% chance of winning those lawsuits.

Originally posted by Sin I AM
Didn't 9/11 survivors already receive benefits?

But from where did those benefits come?

Originally posted by Surtur
Plus remember just giving them the option of suing doesn't guarantee a 100% chance of winning those lawsuits.

Obama needs to help the Saudi's out as much as he can, after all they are lazy ass people who use foreign workers to do their dirty work and don feed them or pay them. The liberals love these people.

Tens of thousands of foreign workers – mainly Indian, Filipino, and Pakistani – are stranded in Saudi Arabia where they haven’t been paid for seven months, and in some cases even longer. They are employees of the construction giant Saudi Oger, which is facing financial turmoil linked to the fall of oil prices. The situation for these employees has now turned into a humanitarian crisis, after the company stopped providing them with food or collecting trash at the camps where most of them live.

http://observers.france24.com/en/20160804-saudi-arabia-construction-company-oger-foreign-workers-india-pakistan-philippines

Originally posted by Robtard
The one part I read thst raised an eyebrow, it would be a two-way street. Where people from other countires could start suing the US. eg Any Iraqi citizen that suffered during Bush. Jr.'s war. All the drone strikes we commit against terrorists could certainly be tried in court, for example. We aren't "at war" with ISIS (or the insurgents in Afghanistan) because a country can't officially declare war against non-state entities.

So every person who's family member got blown up accidentally because they were within proximity of a terrorist at the time of a drone strike could, potentially, have a case.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
All the drone strikes we commit against terrorists could certainly be tried in court, for example. We aren't "at war" with ISIS (or the insurgents in Afghanistan) because a country can't officially declare war against non-state entities.

So every person who's family member got blown up accidentally because they were within proximity of a terrorist at the time of a drone strike could, potentially, have a case.

No proof

Isn't your king Obama the king of drone strikes

Didn't he say he would end both wars, and now he is sending back more troops every month

You got lied to and you ate it up like candy, still are.

nigga what the **** are you talking about

Bah, what a toothless proposition. Saudi Arabia is the source and major promoter of Whabbisim. They also kill people for the crime of witchcraft, and yet, we're allied with these degenerates.

Originally posted by Lucius
Bah, what a toothless proposition. Saudi Arabia is the source and major promoter of Whabbisim. They also kill people for the crime of witchcraft, and yet, we're allied with these degenerates.

Wait they kill people for witchcraft? As in, recently?

Originally posted by Surtur
But from where did those benefits come?

Taxpayers. Iirc it ranged from a quarter grand to millions. Congress and the Bush war machine ensured that they were taken care of. I just dont understand why they need MORE money. Seems like a greed thing more than anything else.

Originally posted by Sin I AM
Taxpayers. Iirc it ranged from a quarter grand to millions. Congress and the Bush war machine ensured that they were taken care of. I just dont understand why they need MORE money. Seems like a greed thing more than anything else.

Maybe instead they could have just paid the government directly money. That way the extra money isn't going into the peoples pockets if they have already gotten paid.

On the other hand, the taxpayers weren't responsible for these attacks. We picked up the tab for something this other country did.

Originally posted by Surtur
Wait they kill people for witchcraft? As in, recently?

Yes.

Also stuff like this: In 2004 a bunch of teenage girls died in a burning building; the religious police wouldn't let firefighters rescue them, because it would have been indecent.

Go take a look at Saudi Arabia's human rights record. There isn't much difference between how ISIS polices the cities under its control, and Saudi law.

Originally posted by Surtur
Maybe instead they could have just paid the government directly money. That way the extra money isn't going into the peoples pockets if they have already gotten paid.

On the other hand, the taxpayers weren't responsible for these attacks. We picked up the tab for something this other country did.

Yea i get all that. Im just not seeing the victims side. I dont understand the NEED to sue SA for anything oher than personal gain and a symbolic win seems petty. Plus all our clandestine activities could be brought to light. The trade off isn't worth it

It seems the only difference is ISIS has nothing we want.

Originally posted by Surtur
It seems the only difference is ISIS has nothing we want.

It's pretty disgusting.

We're currently helping the Saudis with their war in Yemen. How many Americans know were involved in a war in Yemen? How many Americans know what the Saudis have been doing in Yemen, with our help?

And we have the gall to whine about Assad?

We should cut all ties with the Saudis. Which is what Obama should have done. Then congress would have not done this.

Originally posted by Sin I AM
Yea i get all that. Im just not seeing the victims side. I dont understand the NEED to sue SA for anything oher than personal gain and a symbolic win seems petty.

Yes the symbolic win is a big part of it. For some people they just want those responsible to somehowface some kind of consequence.



You see this is what disturbs me though. I acknowledge that I'm sure some people would try to maybe do this just to get money. However, we can't say all of them will be like that. So I just find it wrong to say these people can't even attempt to get any type of closure on this because our country is shady and we don't want our shadiness being exposed.

If we're going to say this is wrong because they were already paid, I understand. But I just can't get behind the idea that it's somehow noble or good to ignore anything terrible we have done. If it's wrong it's wrong, but it shouldn't be wrong merely because something shady about us might come out.

We're too powerful to not be held responsible for the shit we do.

Obama refuses to cut ties with his masters.

You guys want to actually cut ties with Saudi Arabia instead of just posturing around? Fine: invest in alternative energy research, so that we can alleviate our dependency on the fossil fuel industry. Of course, conservatives aren't really onto that sort of thing...

How about you do some research on Solyndra before you just make up wild accusations.

Here is a weird question: is the average citizen in Saudi Arabia happy? Like okay I understand the place does horrible things, like the witchcraft stuff. But in general..do the people accept that kind of thing? Or are they against it?

I'm not saying they could necessarily do anything to stop it, I'm just wondering if they actually like living in their country.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
How about you do some research on Solyndra before you just make up wild accusations.

You mean because one company failed, the entire concept of generating power through ways independent of fossil fuel is broken?

How brilliant; are you going to backtrack again and say this is just an "opinion" now?

Im the only person on this board that lives in a 100% solar powered house, you really are barking up the wrong tree. Now you are just going to say something more stupid then the last thing you just said.

Originally posted by Surtur
Here is a weird question: is the average citizen in Saudi Arabia happy? Like okay I understand the place does horrible things, like the witchcraft stuff. But in general..do the people accept that kind of thing? Or are they against it?

I'm not saying they could necessarily do anything to stop it, I'm just wondering if they actually like living in their country.

I have no idea. I know there is a vocal segment of the female population that has been trying to get more freedom for women, but as for everyone else? No idea.

I had several classes in college with a guy from Saudi Arabia. Like most rich Saudis, he was going to school in the States. I avoided bringing up anything cultural or political with him, but he didn't seem to find anything strange about a western college campus with coed dorms. It could be his background; rich Saudis are much more cosmopolitan than your average Saudi citizen.

The saudis are dirt bags.

Originally posted by Surtur
Yes the symbolic win is a big part of it. For some people they just want those responsible to somehowface some kind of consequence.



You see this is what disturbs me though. I acknowledge that I'm sure some people would try to maybe do this just to get money. However, we can't say all of them will be like that. So I just find it wrong to say these people can't even attempt to get any type of closure on this because our country is shady and we don't want our shadiness being exposed.

If we're going to say this is wrong because they were already paid, I understand. But I just can't get behind the idea that it's somehow noble or good to ignore anything terrible we have done. If it's wrong it's wrong, but it shouldn't be wrong merely because something shady about us might come out.

We're too powerful to not be held responsible for the shit we do.



Good post. Its a slippery slope. Doing time in the military i know 1sthand there are things that we did that shouldn't come to light. Its just is what it is. But you are correct everyone should be policed and held to a certain standard. Its just hard because to most America is the standard.

Im almost certain that the victims at this point are only in it for monetary gain. I cant see how even a symbolic win would appease those who died. Its so arbitrary its pathetic.



Originally posted by Surtur
Here is a weird question: is the average citizen in Saudi Arabia happy? Like okay I understand the place does horrible things, like the witchcraft stuff. But in general..do the people accept that kind of thing? Or are they against it?

I'm not saying they could necessarily do anything to stop it, I'm just wondering if they actually like living in their country.

On average the same as anyone

this forum edit is ****ed

TI, the very people who pushed for the bill against Obama's wishes are now the one's saying it's a concern for the same reasons Obama wanted it to not go through and then blaming Obama.

"Both House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said that the measure could have unintended consequences -- including the fact that it could leave U.S. soldiers open to retaliation by foreign governments"

Dude, read my OP, I am really not in favor of this.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Another failure of Obama, another example of his executive penmanship destroyed. It looks so bad to be overridden, especially since it has never been done before during his terms.

It shows how weak and ineffective he is.

I do not agree with the veto override, and I think this is one of the times Obama did the right thing.

But instead of working with Congress to pass a bill that worked for all, he chose this path, which led to this, and for that I am disappointed in him.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-sept11-veto-override-20160928-snap-story.html

Yet you were happy because Obama failed?

I am disappointed in him for not working with congress on this to make a bill that he would not have vetoed.

Also this
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
97-1!!!!



Thank you for disappointing me yet again, Barack.

You failed on this, and you have failed to close Gitmo like you promised.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/08/01/why-obama-has-failed-to-close-guantanamo


These two issues that I agree with, he has failed to do. He has refused to close Gitmo, and it could have been done already, and before you blame congress, read the article.

Lmao. So Obama didnt want the bill passed. Congress opposed him. Now they're backtracking and people are blaming the guy who opposed it in the 1st place. Comical

Exactly, trying to pass the the blame when they fully knew the potential risk going in. They pushed this through because it's an election year and anything to do with 9/11 is going to invoke an emotional responses.

In Captain Turtle's own cowardly words:

McConnell blamed the White House for an inadequate effort to explain its concerns, saying there was "a failure to communicate early." -snip

Dianne Feinstein(D) already said she is going to revise the bill to make sure this is not allowed to happen.

clowns

http://i.imgur.com/INzFpoO.png

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
clowns

http://i.imgur.com/INzFpoO.png

Yeah, honestly that was one of the dumbest excuses I've ever heard come out of a politician's mouth.