Ralph Nader: Obama’s a ‘war criminal’

It’s no surprise that Ralph Nader isn’t a fan of former President George W. Bush. After all, the longtime activist ran against him in both 2000 and 2004. But Nader’s even less a fan of President Barack Obama, if only because he thinks Obama was capable of so much more.

On issues related to the military and foreign policy, Obama’s worse than Bush, “in the sense that he’s more aggressive, more illegal worldwide,” Nader told POLITICO, going so far as to call Obama a “war criminal.”

"He’s gone beyond George W. Bush in drones, for example. He thinks the world is his plate, that national sovereignties mean nothing, drones can go anywhere. They can kill anybody that he suspects and every Tuesday he makes the call on who lives and who dies, supposed suspects in places like Yemen and Pakistan and Afghanistan, and that is a war crime and he ought to be held to account.”

Originally posted by muse7
But I have yet to come across a Republican and right winger that admits George Bush invaded Iraq without proof of WMD's was a mistake

The poll, constructed by Dartmouth government professor Benjamin Valentino and conducted by YouGov from April 26 to May 2, found that fully 63 percent of Republican respondents still believed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction when the U.S. invaded in 2003. By contrast, 27 percent of independents and 15 percent of Democrats shared that view.

Source.

Originally posted by loam
reply to post by muse7

---

Originally posted by muse7
But I have yet to come across a Republican and right winger that admits George Bush invaded Iraq without proof of WMD's was a mistake

Addressing your edit:

I know many.

But you don't have to take my word for it, because you can look it up.

This was a poll taken this year that asked the question:

The poll, constructed by Dartmouth government professor Benjamin Valentino and conducted by YouGov from April 26 to May 2, found that fully 63 percent of Republican respondents still believed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction when the U.S. invaded in 2003. By contrast, 27 percent of independents and 15 percent of Democrats shared that view.

Source.

So more than a third of Republicans don't believe it was true.

Inform youself!

edit on 26-9-2012 by loam because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by talklikeapirat
reply to post by loam

---

I agree with you and i share your sentiments. My benchmark for the Obama admin. is not how much worse the policies of the Bush admin were or how much worse Romneys would be. It is the promises he made to the world before he was elected.
The man is a Nobel Peace Prize Winner, but to kill innocent civilians is a geostrategic and political necessity for his Administration as much as it were for the previous ones.

I'm having a hard time witnessing how people still believe he would be 'the lesser of two evils'.

Obama: No Doubt Benghazi Attack a Sign of Extremism
posted 9/25/12
Speaking today on ABC’s “The View,” President Obama insisted that he had “no doubt” that the attack on the Benghazi consulate earlier this month “wasn’t just a mob action” but was a sign of extremism.

Obama went on to say that he found it “interesting, just this past week, there were these massive protests against these extremist militias that are suspected, maybe, of having been involved.” Read more...

Originally posted by gladtobehere
reply to post by loam

---

Because Hitler was a bad man. The US government's mass murders are "good".

edit on 26-9-2012 by gladtobehere because: (no treason given)

And of course he's right... Obama now reserves the right to assassinate American citizens without judicial due process.