Legal Case for Drone Strikes on Americans

[GoFins!]

There are enough former Bush supporters who loved that idea of drone strikes and now 'hate' it.

Did Bush target American citizens?

Did drone strikes cause as much "collateral damage" (women, children and other non-combatants)? If yes and yes, then you have a point.

[GoFins!]

Can we order drone strikes on the terrorists on capitol hill? Threats to our rights and liberties are nothing if not terroristic

Could those who arm terrorists be considered an "associated force"?

If so ...


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

his is a great example of how liberalism is damaging our foreign-policy standing around the world. They can’t seem to recognize who the enemy is? and what is even worse, is arming our enemy with planes and tanks.The arsenal the Obama Administration gave to Egypt includes sixteen F-16s and 200 Abrams tanks are to be given to the Egyptian government before the end of the year under a foreign aid deal signed in 2010 with then-Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, a longtime U.S. Allie, who Obama threw to The wolves
These very same weapons that we sold to Egypt could very well be used against Israel, or even us for that matter. Egyptian President Morsi called President Obama a liar and urged that hatred of Jews be instilled in children. I don’t see this collaboration between the Obama administration and the Muslim brotherhood working out very well for the Israelis and the Christians in Egypt.

[MoFinz]

Yes, up until the point it is abused. I don't see the problem with the U.S. government can order the killing of ANYONE if they are believed to be “senior operational leaders” of al-Qaida or “an associated force” .

US citizens on US soil.....yeah, how long before an "oops" moment occurs...then happens again. You never give the government that kind of power to use against the citizens of the US. Plus, how much information do you lose by killing instead of aprehending suspected terrorists?

No way man.....no way at all

[phins_4_ever]

Did Bush target American citizens?

Did drone strikes cause as much "collateral damage" (women, children and other non-combatants)? If yes and yes, then you have a point.

In my opinion it doesn't matter if they are US citizens or citizens of other countries. Do we have the right to live longer and being treated better just because we are Americans?
My problem with drone strikes is that they are based on 'believe to be terrorists..". There is no question about actually being guilty. All the CIA has to say: we believe.....

Any killing of innocent people is horrifying. I guess those supporting drone strikes call it: collateral damage. Nobody here ever says a word (except 9954) about killing innocent people only if it becomes American. My stand against drones is not JUST because it has now made legal to kill US citizens but because drone strikes are killing innocent people period. Plus we don't have the right to just bomb wherever we want to and however we want to just because we "believe".
And the final thing about drone strikes: it makes wars a game on a screen with a couple of joy sticks. One of the deterrents of war was the horror of war. Playing a remote war game takes these horrors away and drone strikes become acceptable.

Here we are bitching about Ahmadinejad and his use of words or some cheap cartoonish video from North Korea yet some of us support the bombing everywhere and killing innocent people.

I am not sure if under Bush there were US citizens killed. The Bush administration was much more secretive. But under Bush it started. And when you give authorization for something it is just a matter of time when things like that are being expanded.
Under Bush we started the Patriot Act: expanded
Under Bush we started Homeland Security: expanded
Under Bush we started spying via telephone, email and cameras: expanded

And if you go back to my post: I mentioned drone strikes. It doesn't matter what nation the innocent was a part of. Bush authorized it, enacted it, built it and now it is being expanded. And we are fools to let it happen now as much as we were fools back then.

[Locke]

Don't like it. Never have liked it. I laugh at the righties who defended Bush's drone strikes tooth and nail, though. Now it's this great evil. ****ing morons. Not referring to anyone in this thread, by the way. Just in general.

On a side note, everyone is ignoring the easy solution here. Don't ****ing get involved with Al Queda or terrorists. Oh look, now there is absolutely no danger to taking a missile to the face...

[MoFinz]

In my opinion it doesn't matter if they are US citizens or citizens of other countries. Do we have the right to live longer and being treated better just because we are Americans?
My problem with drone strikes is that they are based on 'believe to be terrorists..". There is no question about actually being guilty. All the CIA has to say: we believe.....

Any killing of innocent people is horrifying. I guess those supporting drone strikes call it: collateral damage. Nobody here ever says a word (except 9954) about killing innocent people only if it becomes American. My stand against drones is not JUST because it has now made legal to kill US citizens but because drone strikes are killing innocent people period. Plus we don't have the right to just bomb wherever we want to and however we want to just because we "believe".
And the final thing about drone strikes: it makes wars a game on a screen with a couple of joy sticks. One of the deterrents of war was the horror of war. Playing a remote war game takes these horrors away and drone strikes become acceptable.

Here we are bitching about Ahmadinejad and his use of words or some cheap cartoonish video from North Korea yet some of us support the bombing everywhere and killing innocent people.

I am not sure if under Bush there were US citizens killed. The Bush administration was much more secretive. But under Bush it started. And when you give authorization for something it is just a matter of time when things like that are being expanded.
Under Bush we started the Patriot Act: expanded
Under Bush we started Homeland Security: expanded
Under Bush we started spying via telephone, email and cameras: expanded

And if you go back to my post: I mentioned drone strikes. It doesn't matter what nation the innocent was a part of. Bush authorized it, enacted it, built it and now it is being expanded. And we are fools to let it happen now as much as we were fools back then.

WTF is it with bashing Bush....hold Obama accountable. The POTUS in almost every case seeks to expand the power of the central government. It's up to us to reign it in. We dont. Dont blame Bush for drone strikes to day.....blame Obama.

And talking about power grabs and how they dont seem to work out for us...hows that ACA going to be to us and our healthcare? Anyone want to bet...not so good?

[phins_4_ever]

WTF is it with bashing Bush....hold Obama accountable. The POTUS in almost every case seeks to expand the power of the central government. It's up to us to reign it in. We dont. Dont blame Bush for drone strikes to day.....blame Obama.

And talking about power grabs and how they dont seem to work out for us...hows that ACA going to be to us and our healthcare? Anyone want to bet...not so good?

You really need to read and comprehend. I blame both: Bush for starting it and Obama for expanding it. Can't make it any clearer.

[TheWalrus]

You support this? Seriously?

Actually, most Americans support this kind of thing. Some 65%, according to a Washington Post poll.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


The best historical analogy I can think of for this situation is the American citizens of German descent who fought on behalf of the Nazis in WWII. It's unknown exactly how many, but there were at least "hundreds" of them.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


What was the right thing to do with these people on the battlefield, in your opinion? Let's say it's 1945, you're plowing through eastern France on your way to Germany, and there's a town you have to get through... and you know there's an American citizen in that town fighting with the Nazis. Is it okay to call in a bombing strike, or do you have to capture that soldier and send him home for a trial?

[MoFinz]

You really need to read and comprehend. I blame both: Bush for starting it and Obama for expanding it. Can't make it any clearer.

Really? How many times did you drop Bush's names? And how did doing it now bring up who started it?

Let me be clear (as your man crush would say), i support drone strikes as strategic opportunities on terrorists on foreign soil. I do not and will not ever condone drone strikes or assasinations of us citizens, on foriegn soil, or especially at home. Doesnt matter who orders it.

[MoFinz]

Actually, most Americans support this kind of thing. Some 65%, according to a Washington Post poll.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


The best historical analogy I can think of for this situation is the American citizens of German descent who fought on behalf of the Nazis in WWII. It's unknown exactly how many, but there were at least "hundreds" of them.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


What was the right thing to do with these people on the battlefield, in your opinion? Let's say it's 1945, you're plowing through eastern France on your way to Germany, and there's a town you have to get through... and you know there's an American citizen in that town fighting with the Nazis. Is it okay to call in a bombing strike, or do you have to capture that soldier and send him home for a trial?

Better yet, lets use the argument in a way im sure you can understand......FDR has ordered Asians and the descendants of Asians to be interned. You find out one is actually a Japanese operative and has given material aid to the Japs. You can't locate him specifically, so you call in a drone to hit an area he is known to be in.

Not so funny when it's on US soil. And American citizens fighting on foreign soil in a combat role with the enemy is a fair target. A guy climbing a mountain with his son, not engaged in combat.....not so much. Drones are not the be all end all of warfare this President pretends it is....or did you ever stop to wonder why he ordered SEAL team 6 in to get OSB, instead of leveling the whole thing with drone strikes? You have to capture people, you have to have human intellegence to go with all the signal intelligence. We dont do that anymore....maybe youve seen the pics...i'm not allowed to post them here anymore.