Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

as if that's what anyone wants

I don't think anyone wants that, but I do think some people haven't thought through the consequences of their policies.

Aren't you the ass who came up with "green lanternism"?

I didn't invent it but I did mention it. Here's a more original description: http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/845

Just as I said: status quo Beltway-insider conventional wisdom.

This is so weird. The invocation of green lanterism was coined to make fun of Beltway insiders and their bizarre fixation on using magical thinking to solve all problems.

he could send an email and have wheels up within an hour.

Except for when Congress passed a law making that illegal. Hey, are military officers required to obey illegal orders?



...magical thinking to solve all problems.

The problems are created when some defense contractor's lobbyist floats some vile proposal and then makes it worth a few Pentagon staffers' time to implement it. The magical thinking is saved for the talking-head shows, when enough of the public notices the travesty. Then an ex-general or columnist or whoever must be sent around to argue the dubious proposition that stopping indefensible conduct is much more difficult than starting it. As if that were even an argument. When I fuck up, I experience the consequences. Why is that impossible for people in the federal government?

Hey, are military officers required to obey illegal orders?

Now I know you're trolling me. Anyway, Obama signed that law in 2011.


NOTE: I am not the OP

>Now I know you're trolling me.

Come on, seriously? There's no need for that.

>Anyway, Obama signed that law in 2011.

... and in 2010, 2012, and 2013. It's been part of the National Defense Authorization Act every year Mr. Obama has been in office. The last two years he's stumped around the time the bill was moving through the house, trying to use the Bully Pulpit to remove the prohibition of funds being used to relocate the prisoners. So far, he has been unsuccessful.


The important part is, "Obama signed that law". No one held a gun to his head. No one will be holding a gun to his head next year while he signs it either. Every year, Obama chooses to sign the law that gives him a pretext to continue operating the Guantanamo obscenity for another year. Is it so hard to see this pattern?

Sure, it might cost him some political capital to do the right thing. That merely illustrates that to Obama, keeping his campaign promise is not worth spending some political capital. That's a far cry from this "impossible" bullshit I've been reading.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: