Usa Thread

[jon46]

I feel uncomfortable with the current drone policy of the Obama administration...that of killing Americans overseas without due process in addition to the news reporting an American base in Niger for drones.

 

I do not like the idea that there is no oversight over the authorization to kill overseas American except to say it rest with the White House. Just because the White House says a person is a terrorist doesn't make it so.

 

Pls refer to George W. Bush stating that Iraq had weapons of mass destructions and the ensuing invasion of Iraq that led to US spending hundreds of billions and finding no weapons of mass destructions.

 

I find it ironic in that at the outsight of Obama's first term, the Nobel committee awarded Obama, the Nobel Peace Prize.

[Flashermac]

U.S. sends troops to Niger for drone missions

 

 

WASHINGTON — About 100 U.S. troops have deployed to the West African country of Niger to help establish a drone base for surveillance missions, in the latest step by the United States to aid French forces battling Islamic militants in neighboring Mali.

 

In a letter to Congress on Friday, President Obama said the deployment would "provide support for intelligence collection and will also facilitate intelligence sharing with French forces conducting operations in Mali, and with other partners in the region."

 

The last 40 American troops in the deployment arrived in Niger on Feb. 20 with the consent of the government, Obama said.

 

A senior U.S. officer described the troops as a security unit that will protect crews flying and maintaining U.S. Air Force drones now operating from an airfield near the capital, Niamey. The force includes drone pilots, intelligence liaison officers and aircraft maintenance personnel, the officer said.

 

"We're basing drones there to help the French, and this deployment is the security element," the officer said.

 

He spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss details of the operation publicly.

 

French forces have been battling to push Islamic militants out of northern Mali in recent weeks in an effort to oust insurgents who seized local control after the civilian government collapsed last year.

 

Predator drones are already flying over Mali to assist French troops, who intervened in January and have driven back militants and Tuareg rebels, who had taken over three major cities and were threatening Mali's capital, Bamako.

 

The drones flying from Niger will be unarmed surveillance aircraft tracking suspected militants operating in the remote parts of northern Mali. The aircraft could also be used over other countries in the region, the officer said.

 

The Obama administration has not yet decided to establish a permanent drone base in Niger, the senior officer said. For the moment, the operation is considered a temporary mission to assist the French.

 

But some senior officers in the Pentagon's Africa Command, which oversees military operations on the continent, favor a permanent base to develop a better picture of the militant threat in West Africa, the officer said.

 

Among the groups the U.S. is worried about is Boko Haram, an Islamist extremist group in neighboring Nigeria.

 

Currently, the only permanent base in Africa from which drones operate is in Djibouti, thousands of miles to the east.

 

In addition to the militants in Mali — some with loose ties to Al Qaeda groups — extremists have taken refuge in the largely ungoverned desert areas of southern Libya and Algeria.

 

If the Obama administration decides to authorize a permanent base in Niger, it would probably be in Agadez, near northern Mali, the officer said, confirming a report in the New York Times.

 

Some senior military commanders, in arguing for a permanent base, say the militant threat in the region is growing and could eventually threaten the U.S. and its allies unless more aggressive action is taken.

 

But some Obama administration officials are skeptical about getting more deeply involved in the region, saying there is no strong evidence that militants there want to target the United States.

 

Some officials also argue against getting involved in a low-level military operation just as direct U.S. involvement in the war in Afghanistan is nearing an end.

 

The Obama administration has helped the French operation in Mali with intelligence, transportation for French troops and air refueling of French fighters. But the White House has kept the U.S. role limited.

 

The U.S. buildup in Niger, though still small in numbers, has unfolded quickly. Last month, the U.S. and Niger signed an agreement outlining legal protections for American troops operating there.

 

The U.S. also has been operating surveillance drones across the region, including over a natural gas complex last month in eastern Algeria, where militants took hundreds of people prisoner during a four-day siege that killed 37 hostages.

 

 

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-obama-drone-20130223,0,7202135.story?track=lat-email-topofthetimes

[Steve]

My greatest fear are these precedents. Obama killing American citizens without due process. The actions of Bush. The complete violation of civil liberties and constitional rights regarding privacy and such.

 

The problem is this. You will get bad Presidents. At times a Nixon or Bush gets in the White House and they can and will use precedence. That is the big danger. Its more difficult for a President to do something that hasn't been done before. Its an easy 'out' to say that they are just doing what has been before. Imagine a Nixon these days with the things that have already been done and are still being done? Scary shit.

 

Even the 'good' Presidents may do it but eventually and inevitably you do get a President who got us fooled in the election or changes and that is the real danger.

[Flashermac]

Remember Clinton firing Cruise missiles at a pharmaceutical factory in the Sudan? 1 dead, 10 wounded ... on the charge the plant was helping Bin Lardon. No proof, just a charge.

[dean]

Interesting (and very long) article on the cost of health care in the U.S. Definitely worth reading; http://healthland.time.com/2013/02/20/bitter-pill-why-medical-bills-are-killing-us/

[Steve]

Good article. Not unlike others we have read. The real issue is this. Those in the know, know why its abhorrently high, the problem is no one in the government can tackle it because the people (the entire medical industry from drug companies to HMOs to doctors and nurses) that make their living off it has too much power in the government and has the populace fooled. The old and tired 'best medical care in the world' keeps trotted out as if America is the only one that can provide good medical care. This is told to a populace where the vast majority of people have never traveled across the country much less to a foreign country. This lie would never work in Europe where people regularly travel across their borders because of ease of access.

 

Another factor that will impede any future reformation was the fight over Obamacare. I'm not here to say it was good. I'm just saying that the right co-opted the issue to gain political points and in doing so, stunted any future reforms to medical care. Reform, massive reform is needed. Now its going to be harder. Political expediency exceeded common sense. They didn't want to work with Obama. Even though they knew medical reform is a crisis with almost 2/3 of all bankruptcies due to medical costs. That number means crisis.

 

The medical industry through the politicians it owns has also successfully brainwashed us that any sort of federal or national program is akin to socialism. While I typically don't like big federal programs because they almost always far exceed the estimated cost. There are cost overruns because the pols load it up with goodies for the industries involved.

 

The Dems are not innocent either. They are paid off by unions and there are plenty of unions tied to the medical industry. The sad fact is there is no political will to do it.

 

Nothing will happen. If any congressperson or family member gets the same malady that afflicts the family in the article they will be well taken care of. There is no personal exposure for them so they don't have a personal stake in the issue.

 

The only thing any of us can do is pray you or yours doesn't get seriously ill and save enough so that one day you can move to a country that has good, affordable care that or become a billionaire.

[dean]

The main point that I got out of the article is that healthcare pricing is a game. The initial price that the hospitals, doctors and labs come up is called the chargemaster. Its a ridiculously high, absurd amount. Anything that is used in a hospital is marked up 5-10 times, or more. The author frequently referred to items that you can buy on Amazon or Ebay for a fraction of what the hospital charges. Doctors go around the hospitals, particularly on Mondays, to look at the charts of medicare patients, just so that they can bill medicare. Labs and medical equipment are frequently owned by doctors, or groups of doctors, who will order unnecessary tests and procedures, so that these labs and medical devise companies make obscene profits (it also covers the Doctor's ass in case of a malpractice lawsuit, even if its an extremely expensive test and there little chance of the test turning up anything). Medicare has the power to regulate what it pays hospitals and doctors but not the drug company. The U.S. subsidizes the drug costs of the rest of the world. If you are lucky enough to have medicare and the supplemental insurance, out of pocket expenses is little. The same applies to cadillac insurance policies that many labor unions and government employees have. For the rest that have insurance through their employer, you have an increasing co-pay at best. You may have limits set on the amount that your insurance will pay out (this ends in Jan. 2014). Then, you have the people that have pre-existing conditions that cannot change jobs or can't get affordable insurance (at least until Jan. 2014). Finally, you have the people without health insurance. Those are the people that pay the full amount of the chargemaster bill, or go bankrupt (or pay a monthly amount for the rest of their life). Medicare gets most hospitals bill down 80%. Even insurance companies get the bill reduced 50-60%. For me, the idea of allowing hospitals and doctors, once I'm a patient, to do almost whatever they medically want to me and not be constrained by costs is not acceptable. For as long as I can, I will not use the U.S. health system and will go out of the country for my medical needs. You are right, Steve, that the U.S. health care system is not sustainable. With no changes, eventually the last person to leave the U.S. can turn the lights off.

[Flashermac]

"Medical tourism has been a growing segment of Thailand's tourism and health-care sectors. In 2005, one Bangkok hospital took in 150,000 treatment seekers from abroad. In 2006, medical tourism was projected to earn the country 36.4 billion baht.

 

Treatments for medical tourists in Thailand range from cosmetic, organ transplants, cardiac, and orthopaedic treatments to dental and cardiac surgeries. Treatments also include spa, physical and mental therapies, as well as procedures that are considered more along the lines of fringe medical practices. One patient who had coronary artery bypass surgery at Bumrungrad International hospital in Bangkok said the operation cost him US$12,000 (8,200 euros), as opposed to the $100,000 (68,000 euros) he estimated the operation would have cost him at home."

 

http://en.wikipedia....Medical_tourism

[Flashermac]

BOB WOODWARD: A 'Very Senior' White House Person Warned Me I'd 'Regret' What I'm Doing

 

 

Bob Woodward said this evening on CNN that a "very senior person" at the White House warned him in an email that he would "regret doing this," the same day he has continued to slam President Barack Obama over the looming forced cuts known as the sequester.

 

CNN host Wolf Blitzer said that the network invited a White House official to debate Woodward on-air, but the White House declined.

 

"I think they're confused," Woodward said of the White House's pushback on his reporting.

 

Earlier today on MSNBC's "Morning Joe," Woodward ripped into Obama in what has become an ongoing feud between the veteran Washington Post journalist and the White House. Woodward said Obama was showing a "kind of madness I haven't seen in a long time" for a decision not to deploy an aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf because of budget concerns.

 

The Defense Department said in early February that it would not deploy the U.S.S. Harry Truman to the Persian Gulf, citing budget concerns relating to the looming cuts known as the sequester.

 

"Can you imagine Ronald Reagan sitting there and saying, 'Oh, by the way, I can't do this because of some budget document?'" Woodward said on MSNBC.

 

"Or George W. Bush saying, 'You know, I'm not going to invade Iraq because I can't get the aircraft carriers I need?'" Or even Bill Clinton saying, 'You know, I'm not going to attack Saddam Hussein's intelligence headquarters,' ... because of some budget document?"

 

Woodward began stirring controversy last weekend, when he called out Obama for what he said was "moving the goal posts" on the sequester by requesting that revenue be part of a deal to avert it.

 

 

http://www.businessi...politics-2013-2

[dean]

"Medical tourism has been a growing segment of Thailand's tourism and health-care sectors. In 2005, one Bangkok hospital took in 150,000 treatment seekers from abroad. In 2006, medical tourism was projected to earn the country 36.4 billion baht.

 

Treatments for medical tourists in Thailand range from cosmetic, organ transplants, cardiac, and orthopaedic treatments to dental and cardiac surgeries. Treatments also include spa, physical and mental therapies, as well as procedures that are considered more along the lines of fringe medical practices. One patient who had coronary artery bypass surgery at Bumrungrad International hospital in Bangkok said the operation cost him US$12,000 (8,200 euros), as opposed to the $100,000 (68,000 euros) he estimated the operation would have cost him at home."

 

http://en.wikipedia....Medical_tourism

I emailed the author of the Time article and told him that I agreed with most of his points for reforming healthcare. As he said nothing about ex pats, I suggested Medicare be available to use overseas, where health costs are lower and many times, much lower. I also suggested that hospitals outside of the U.S. be accredited by the U.S. government and Americans be allowed to use their private or government health insurance to seek treatment overseas and increase competition, which may help drive down hospital costs in the U.S. Surprisingly, I emailed him last night and he responded today. I ended the email saying if there was a lobbying group created that represented Americans who want affordable healthcare, sign me up.