Tonight the White House said it will release the Drone Memo!
The ACLU called the move "a small step in the right direction,"
Here is a link that might be useful: The memo
released or not it will change nothing.
Germany now has armed drones...
So, it will be mutually shared between the White House and Congress.
And what did WikiLeaks teach us about cover ups and unethical behavior?
But, since this has been talked about before, and nobody has a solution, shall we move on to amateur mental health advice, the preservation of yeast, and Barney?
Yes true international law has not yet decided on the machinations of nations.
Theseus wandering through the labyrinth will have to continue for awhile.
Some things I do not think every detail should be released to the public. We live in a dangerous society. If we elect our officials to protect the country there has to be some secrecy.
If the public is uncomfortable with policy then discuss policy but not the details of the planning to protect or the process. That is not smart to let your enemy know the details.
I would be willing to bet if we have a 9/11 under this President you will hear screams from the roof top from the Fox crowd of this President cannot keep us safe and he told his Muslim friends how to drive the planes through tall buildings.
We have proof of what they will do by the BENGHAZI incident. David posted all the embassy attacks under other Presidents and none were blamed on the sitting President but Benghazi "Oh My this President just watched them on video begging for help and did not lift a finger" and he lied.
8 years of Bush torture and nothing. But now everybody wants to know every detail. Under Bush American citizens were locked up for months
So I say this President should protect the details as much as possible and keep America safe.
Eventually, drone and robotic warfare will have to be limited internationally with some kind of Accord. That will likely occur after the US or Israel gets hit by one.
Meanwhile, watch "Fahrenheit 911" if you want to claim outrage over unilateral war and civilian casualties...and never forget, you voted for Bush, twice.
Here is a link that might be useful: Fahrenheit 911
This post was edited by heri_cles on Thu, Feb 7, 13 at 11:19
- snip "We've been here before, with President George W. Bush, who told us to trust him after 9/11 and gave us illegal wiretapping, kidnapping, rendition, indefinite detention, torture, military trials and Guantanamo Bay. And that's just what we know about.
We argued at the time that we are supposed to be a nation of laws, not personalities, and that powers, once acquired, are never given up. Mr. Obama denounced Mr. Bush's actions during the 2008 campaign but upon taking office pursued the same abuse of the state secrets privilege in court cases involving rendition, torture and indefinite detention.
Just as Mr. Bush decided that his constitutional powers and the Congressional authorization for war in Afghanistan gave him the authority to tap our phones without a warrant and to approve the torture of prisoners, Mr. Obama decided he had the power to order the killing of Americans. He does not even think enough of the American people to come before them and explain his decision. - snip -end quote
Here is a link that might be useful: just trust me
First of all, whenever a Republican refuses to say "President" and states "Mr. Obama" , that tells me a lot about where they come from and what their bias is.
The presumption that clandestine warfare is not necessary to maintain Peace is wrong. Look no further than the failure of President George W. Bush to heed intelligence and make preemptive strikes prior to 9/11 and the prior failure of President Clinton to follow up when he missed Bin Laden with a (edit) cruise missile strike.
Similarly, the presumption that clandestine warfare and intelligence gathering is always abusive is wrong. We have signed on to Treaties on torture and inhumane treatment of prisoners and should know that water boarding is torture.
The rise of Al Qaida following the first attack on the WTC raised our concern about terrorism as the main threat to our nation, just like it has been to Israel for a long time. That caused us to increase the use of clandestine warfare including drones to suppress multiple threats coming from distant places.
So, there is no simple answer to dealing with terrorism and the mounting threats from those who build weapons, train kamikaze pilots and suicide bombers, and otherwise plot against us. Until we figure that out, we have to error on the side of protecting our country from threats, especially imminent threats that our intelligence agencies discover. We have to empower our President (or Mr. Obama as the sore losers refer to him) to authorize the military to deal with those threats without delay.
It is possible that we have dodged some major attacks (911 style hijackings, poisoning of water systems, train and bus bombings, subway bombings, etc.) that would have killed a lot of Americans.....all because of preemptive attacks including drone strikes. We don't know about that either.
But if you hate our President, you won't mention that, will you? You want to see proof before a known terrorist and his gang of thugs are hit by a drone strike in a bomb making facility.
There is a lot of hypocrisy surrounding this issue from the Right and from the Left. There is no simple answer but having said that, I trust President Obama more than anyone in the party that Bobby Jindal calls "the Stupid Party." Logical and reasoned argument and deliberation on this issue is what is needed, not conservative ideology or blind hatred toward "Mr. Obama." To be fair, no one thinks that the Stupid party is really stupid as Jindal stated, they are just closed minded and angry, especially after taking a whoopin' in the past election. Maybe they should take a break from that and help solve some problems that face us with an open mind and a renewed sense of cooperation.
This post was edited by heri_cles on Thu, Feb 7, 13 at 14:06
heri_cles, YES!!!!! THANK YOU.
President Obama makes decisions on the information given to him by the same, vast, bloated, often-privatized intelligence bureaucracy that President Bush used. The same ones that gave us Iraq and WMD's. The same ones who, if they can't find targets, will lose turf, face, and go out of business.
Once again, if you put these people on trial, even in absentia, you let the world know what they've done and why we're going after them. Far better than locking somebody up for life or killing them on the basis of secret information, just saying "trust us".
When wars change rules change.
When some one wants me dead and are agitating for others to do it on the internet in video after video I want them stopped. If the nation they're in can't capture or extradite them "send in the drones"
Which is all fine and dandy...
Until they are using drones against you and suddenly the use of drones is barbaric and evil.
It's only righteous and good when we use it against those "Other" people, (and only when it's done by a Democratic president, apparently)
Good to see you back, HG.
Your sane assessments are always welcome.
It really troubles me when citizens are willing to give up their rights and their country for a mere man who has no principles. Tsk Tsk.
I love a good sanctimonious victim/bystander!
"It really troubles me when citizens are willing to give up their rights and their country for a mere man who has no principles. Tsk Tsk.
Are you talking about the citizen who gave up his rights and enlisted in Al-Q?
Let me ask this.
Say a bank robber just shot up a bank and was coming out the door with a sack of money in one hand and a gun in the other. Would you prefer a cop to shoot him dead or a drone shoot him dead? Assuming the drone just killed him alone of course. Did he give up his rights? How about if the cop hit a bystander before hitting his target?
Now mind you, I'm not endorsing drone attacks on US soil unless it's an Al-Q member who just climbed over the border fence in the middle of the desert.
Before too long we won't be worrying about drones and hellfires, eventually we'll arm them with more accurate lasers that kill at the speed of light. Killing is becoming more creative all the time.
Vg you are right it will be sooner than many realize. Soon they will not need to even register their gun. The drone will know.
By 2025, law enforcement hope to be able to use them to patrol highways.
Here is a link that might be useful: Drones the next Police Officer
I seem to remember US hostages being taken in Iran because we wouldn't surrender the SHAH!
This post was edited by labrea on Fri, Feb 8, 13 at 0:04
Words. No intention of transferring ideas or facts or knowledge.