- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Posted on 12/7/25 at 10:16 pm to Riverside
quote:You didn't understand the first three times. Why bother with a fourth attempt?
Please explain what “rights” a criminal operating in international waters on an unflagged vessel enjoys under American law. This I want to hear.
Posted on 12/7/25 at 10:17 pm to BigPerm30
quote:Provision of "due process" is a Constitutional OBLIGATION of the US government.
Is there due process for the American victims who are murdered by fentanyl?
Do you contend that the US government is somehow denying due process to the junkies and addicts?
Do you (like SOS) believe that the US government has some Constitutional obligation to prevent junkies and addicts from killing themselves? If so (unlike SOS), can you point us to the Constitutional provision which gives rise to that duty?
This post was edited on 12/7/25 at 10:21 pm
Posted on 12/7/25 at 10:19 pm to CapnKangaroo
quote:A realist who also understands the Constitution. I like it.
Well by definition “victims” don’t ever get due process. That’s reserved for those accused of crimes by the criminal justice system. And I take issue with the use of the word murdered. They were addicts that made bad choices and died.
Posted on 12/7/25 at 10:23 pm to TigerAxeOK
quote:Bravo. You just earned 50 Reasonable Internet Points.quote:
Kevin O’Leary answers her and GOES OFF.
Goes off? He calmly and succinctly rebutted her question with a logical and well-stated response.
The click bait these people use in their posts gets tiresome. "From the top rope!" and "Scorched Earth!" and "Eviscerates!". For the love of GOD, these people are just responding. I'd have watched anyway even if she just typed out "check out his excellent response".
Posted on 12/7/25 at 10:26 pm to AquaAg84
quote:You don't read so good. I said exactly the opposite re Rachel Levine a day or so ago.
No. A chihuahua does not become a pit bull, just because you call him one. He may well be a vicious little fricker, but he ain’t a pit bull.quote:
But yet in your ... view a man can magically become a woman because the man claims to be a woman.
I do NOT accept the premise that Levine has BECOME a woman by choosing to live as one, any more than Dolezal "became" Black by living as a Black woman.
Posted on 12/7/25 at 10:29 pm to Westbank111
quote:You are wrong, and you clearly have a VERY shallow and narrow understanding of the law of the sea.
It’s proven that it IS NOT ILLEGAL!!!
Posted on 12/7/25 at 10:32 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
You are wrong, and you clearly have a VERY shallow and narrow understanding of the law of the sea.
Whatever “law of the sea” you’re talking about does not apply to the US Navy.
Posted on 12/7/25 at 10:33 pm to TenWheelsForJesus
quote:Very true.
They were called narcoterrorists long before Trump was elected.
The term was coined to provide cover for governments which didn't want to be bothered with their Constitutions when dealing with especially violent criminals. It goes all the way back to South America in the 1980s.
Posted on 12/7/25 at 10:36 pm to CapnKangaroo
quote:Well, sort of.
the United States Navy was founded for the specific purpose of fighting criminal activity outside our borders.
It was founded in large part to deal with piracy, which is certainly a very specific subset of "criminal activity."
The analogy to these drug runners falls apart when you look at the definition of "piracy" under UNCLOS.
Posted on 12/7/25 at 10:37 pm to AquaAg84
quote:I never bother downvoting you. You just aren't worth the effort.
can you downvote from each of your alter accounts?
Apparently, quite a few people hold you in rather low regard.
Posted on 12/7/25 at 10:38 pm to Bunk Moreland
quote:"If it saves just ONE junkie ...."
Not one person would die if people avoided drugs.
Posted on 12/7/25 at 10:39 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
It was founded in large part to deal with piracy, which is certainly a very specific subset of "criminal activity." The analogy to these drug runners falls apart when you look at the definition of "piracy" under UNCLOS.
Piracy has been considered a criminal enterprise for centuries and the UN is pretty much only legitimate when backed up by the US military, especially when when it comes to the world’s oceans. So their rules really don’t apply to us.
Posted on 12/7/25 at 10:40 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
The term was coined to provide cover for governments which didn't want to be bothered with their Constitutions when dealing with especially violent criminals. It goes all the way back to South America in the 1980s.
Perhaps, but then there’s the fact that they terrorize people and smuggle narcotics. Blow their asses up.
Posted on 12/7/25 at 10:46 pm to Bunk Moreland
It's amazing you guys fell for the regime propaganda so easily
Then what’s the upside. What’s the smoke and mirrors?
Do you think we don’t know this is happening because this is bigger than drugs on Venezuelan drug boats.
This is about Venezuela being a proxy to our biggest enemies as well as emptying their prisons into our country, while ALSO killing Americans with drugs.
The oil is negligible.
Then what’s the upside. What’s the smoke and mirrors?
Do you think we don’t know this is happening because this is bigger than drugs on Venezuelan drug boats.
This is about Venezuela being a proxy to our biggest enemies as well as emptying their prisons into our country, while ALSO killing Americans with drugs.
The oil is negligible.
Posted on 12/7/25 at 10:54 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
RelentlessAnalysis
AggieHank86 the dumbass
Posted on 12/7/25 at 11:27 pm to Timeoday
quote:
How do you feel about FDR not letting Pearl Harbor know what he knew?
I personally feel just fine about it, since all he knew was...
quote:
...the Office of Naval Intelligence on December 4 warned, "In anticipation of open conflict with this country, Japan is vigorously utilizing every available agency to secure military, naval and commercial information, paying particular attention to the West Coast, the Panama Canal and the Territory of Hawaii."
And also since that was only one of dozens of "tips," if you can call it that, as it doesn't warn of any sort of attack, only that Japan had been gathering intel over an area that spanned over a million square miles and each point was separated from the others by a minimum of 5,500 miles.
So yeah, if FDR had been psychic enough to determine which of the dozens of tips US intelligence had received were legitimate, then psychic enough to figure out that it was talking about a direct attack, then psychic enough to guess the location of the target in a scenario analogous to guessing the exact location of one needle in three separate potential haystacks separated by 10 miles between them, then yeah, we could have avoided being involved in WWII.
We were so close.
Posted on 12/7/25 at 11:37 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
Provision of "due process" is a Constitutional OBLIGATION of the US government.
Even to non-citizens conducting what is in effect chemical warfare against American citizens?
Posted on 12/8/25 at 12:08 am to AlwysATgr
quote:JFC, no one is conducting "chemical warfare against American citizens." They are selling a product to willing buyers.quote:Even to non-citizens conducting what is in effect chemical warfare against American citizens?
Provision of "due process" is a Constitutional OBLIGATION of the US government.
They are breaking the law, not engaging in warfare. They don't want to destroy the US. Our idiot junkies and addicts are their best customers.
This post was edited on 12/8/25 at 12:31 am
Posted on 12/8/25 at 12:10 am to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
They are breaking the law, not engaging in warfare. They don't want to destroy the US. Our idiot junkies and addicts are their best customers.
True. And we have no obligation to arrest them for their crimes. In fact, it could be argued that the USG has a legal and moral obligation to violently destroy them before their lethal products reach our shores.
Popular
Back to top


0


