Liberal critics of drone-warfare standards are simply wrong
In a secret 16-page “white paper” leaked to NBC, Justice Department lawyers have laid out an argument attempting to justify the president’s decision to launch drone attacks even against overseas terrorist leaders who are U.S. citizens.
According to authors of that memo, that presidential authority is derived from “his constitutional responsibility to protect the country, the inherent right of the United States to national self-defense under international law, Congress’s authorization of the use of all necessary and appropriate military force against this enemy, and the existence of an armed conflict with al-Qaida under international law.”
The document also explains the standards implemented by the current administration in using that authority. It concludes that such strikes are legal when:
– The targeted individual is “a senior operational leader of al Qaida or an associated force of al Qaida — that is, an al Qaida leader actively engaged in planning operations to kill Americans.”
– “… an informed, high-level official of the US government has determined that the targeted individual poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the U.S.”
– The capture of the individual located in a foreign country is deemed “infeasible.”
It’s important to point out that this is not a theoretical exercise. President Obama has used this life-and-death authority to order a successful drone strike against Anwar al-Alwaki, a U.S. citizen who became a top regional leader for Al Qaida in Yemen, where arresting him was impossible.
Among other plots, Al-Awlaki helped plan the attempted airliner bombing on Christmas Day in 2009, as well as two attempted cargo-plane bombings using plastic explosives. As a recruiter for al Qaida, he also encouraged the attack by Major Nidal Hasan that killed 13 U.S. soldiers at Fort Hood, Texas.
In the video below, Al-Awlaki makes his loyalties and his intentions quite clear:
“We have chosen the path of war in order to defend ourselves against your oppression,” he says, in one of many damning statements. “God willing, we will continue in this war and you will find us persistent.”
In his particular case, God was not willing. Al-Alwaki died in a drone attack in Yemen on Sept. 30, 2011.
Personally, I have no problem whatsoever with launching such an attack. His citizenship does not outweigh the threat that he clearly posed to the security of this country. Others, however, have expressed deep concern about what they see as a violation of al-Alwaki’s right to legal due process, and about an unconstitutional, even radical expansion of executive powers.
You will sometimes run across a half-hearted version of that critique coming from conservatives, but it is hard to take such complaints seriously. If you doubt that conclusion, imagine what conservative critics would be saying if the Obama administration had announced that it would NOT target known al Qaida leaders out of deference to due process concerns.
The howling would be epic.
On the other hand, those liberals who take issue with the policy tend to be sincere and serious about it, to the point of near-hysteria.
In Salon, for example, columnist David Sirota claims that in the leaked white paper, the White House has asserted the radical power to kill citizens “without any concrete intelligence suggesting a citizen is linked to terrorist activity” (emphasis original). It is a claim that he repeats throughout the column, asserting that “evidence is not required to kill someone,” that “the president doesn’t actually need evidence to order someone’s death” and that “not a single shred of actual evidence is needed not just to prosecute (the target), but to outright execute him.”
Here’s the section of the memo on which Sirota bases that charge:
“The condition that an operational leader present an ‘imminent’ threat of violent attack against the United States does not require the United States to have clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests will take place in the immediate future. Given the nature of, for example, the terrorist attacks on September 11, in which civilian airliners were hijacked to strike the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, this definition of imminence, which would require the United States to refrain from action until preparations for an attack are concluded, would not allow the United States sufficient time to defend itself.”
The memo states that the president doesn’t need evidence of a particular, specific plot being hatched in the immediate future in order to take action against an al Qaida leader. That’s a far cry from “not a single shred of actual evidence is needed.”
And again, the case of al-Alwaki offers a useful example. Given what we already knew about his actions, and given his own public testimony, we did not need evidence of a specific new plot in the immediate future to justify taking action against him. We knew more than enough already.
Glenn Greenwald, writing in The Guardian, takes a tack similar to Sirota, accusing the administration of obviating a citizen’s constitutional right to due process before his life can be taken by his government.
Like Sirota, he writes:
“Specifically, the president’s assassination power ‘does not require that the US have clear evidence that a specific attack . . . will take place in the immediate future’. The US routinely assassinates its targets not when they are engaged in or plotting attacks but when they are at home, with family members, riding in a car, at work, at funerals, rescuing other drone victims, etc. ”
I’m not sure what that last sentence is intended to communicate. Are bank robbers only to be arrested in the actual act of robbing the bank?
That aside, here’s the most basic problem with the criticisms raised by Sirota, Greenwald and others: What is the cure?
If you do not want “an informed, high-level official of the US government,” i.e., the president and commander in chief, to determine whether a “targeted individual poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the U.S.,” to whom would you give that authority?
By casting it as a question of due process, you necessarily invest that full power in the judiciary. You would require a judge or panel of judges to decide from the bench whether it is operationally plausible to capture rather than kill this particular terrorist in this particular country. A judge or judges would have to balance a citizen’s right to due process against the threat of an attack imminent enough to justify military intervention.
No judge is capable of such a decision. On what legal basis could such judgments be based? The answer is none. No reasonable judge would want the power or responsibility to make such national security judgments.
This is not wiretapping, a field in which judges have years of legal training, decades of experience and centuries of constitutional precedent to fall back upon. This cuts to the core of the commander in chief’s duty, and I do not believe for one second that the Founding Fathers envisioned giving judges the power to make such decisions. Giving judges that kind of power and responsibility would make a joke of the separation of powers and seriously damage the security of this country.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
497 comments Add your comment
Brosephus™
February 5th, 2013
7:24 pm
Jay
I think this is the “we” that they’re saying is doomed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_CAs3q7G48
After all, it’s all fun and games until the flying monkeys attack.
keith
February 5th, 2013
7:25 pm
The poop is going to hit the fan when those homegrown terrorists like the survivalists get whacked! The government used its death power against the terrorists in Waco and Ruby Ridge.
Terrorists at Ruby Ridge?
In August 1995, the US government avoided trial on a civil lawsuit filed by the Weavers, by awarding the three surviving daughters $1,000,000 each, and Randy Weaver $100,000 over the deaths of Sammy and Vicki Weaver. The attorney for Kevin Harris pressed Harris’ civil suit for damages, although federal officials vowed they would never pay someone who had killed a U.S. Marshal (Harris had been acquitted by a jury trial on grounds of self-defense). In September 2000 after persistent appeals, Harris was awarded a $380,000 settlement from the government.[
TaxPayer
February 5th, 2013
7:25 pm
Does the 2nd amendment give US citizens the right to bear arms capable of taking out a drone.
F. Sinkwich
February 5th, 2013
7:28 pm
“Dubya the Dumb had done this instead of starting two senseless wars, we’ d all be a lot better off–especially the 5000 soldiers that have died and the thousands that have lost limbs.”
But Debbie luvs herself some LBJ! 58,000 on a wall.
Debbie the Doofuss is, well, sad.
keith
February 5th, 2013
7:28 pm
Does the 2nd amendment give US citizens the right to bear arms capable of taking out a drone.
Hell yea
USA Patriot
February 5th, 2013
7:28 pm
This is kinda funny, as a bystander…….whoa…..is that a drone? Watching the liberals/progressives/democrats try to defend this position of the POTUS (POS)! Hysterical!
indigo
February 5th, 2013
7:29 pm
Keith
Yes, I’m just sure your AK-47 will be a big help against artillery and JADAM’s, right sport model?
Brosephus™
February 5th, 2013
7:29 pm
I hope it dont get here but my AK-47 will protect a whole lot better than your silly words of encouragement to the brain dead sheeple that buy into your crap.
Unless your “AK-47″ was imported pre-automatic weapon ban and you possess a Class III license, you should stop lying now. Even td will tell you that claiming ownership of such a gun is pretty much guaranteed to be a lie. If anything, you own a semi-automatic replica of that gun. The AK-47, however, is a fully automatic, Russian military rifle and is very unlikely to be legally owned here in the US.
So, either you’re lying or you’re illegally possessing a gun. Which is it?
barking frog
February 5th, 2013
7:30 pm
josef
possibly, but the consequences of birth can be intertwined with
the consequences of war, regrettable but sometimes unavoidable..
TaxPayer
February 5th, 2013
7:32 pm
I wonder if poor keith has priced some of the weaponry needed to defend oneself against drones and fighter jets and helicopters and tanks and such. And on top of that, WalMart’s shipping fees have got to be a game buster.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
February 5th, 2013
7:32 pm
Brosephus:
Some AK-47’s are semi-auto and some are fully-auto just like AR-15’s.
Surely (and don’t call me Shirley) you know that !
TBS
February 5th, 2013
7:32 pm
Bro
Do you really have to ask after reading his other posts?
keith
February 5th, 2013
7:33 pm
Unless your “AK-47″ was imported pre-automatic weapon ban and you possess a Class III license, you should stop lying now. Even td will tell you that claiming ownership of such a gun is pretty much guaranteed to be a lie. If anything, you own a semi-automatic replica of that gun. The AK-47, however, is a fully automatic, Russian military rifle and is very unlikely to be legally owned here in the US.
So, either you’re lying or you’re illegally possessing a gun. Which is it?
Another liberal passing off bogus info. you and jay should room together.
CLASS IN SESSION:
Arsenal is a company in Las Vegas NV that imports receivers from Bulgaria. They put American furniture on the weapon thus making it completely legal. Go to their website, You can buy an Arsenal AK-47 right now, COMPLETELY LEGAL there nimrod.
CLASS DISMISSED.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
February 5th, 2013
7:33 pm
There are thousands of legally owned AK-47’s here in the U.S. (semi-auto).
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
February 5th, 2013
7:34 pm
keith @ 7:33
And you would be correct.
TBS
February 5th, 2013
7:34 pm
Legal ownership of the AK-47 varies by state, county, city, and local laws and ordinances. Persons interested in owning one of these types of rifles are strongly encouraged to research the laws where they reside or plan to buy, transport, keep, and use the weapon. Manufacturing the AK-47 for civilian use is prohibited.
The 1989 Semi-Automatic Rifle Import Ban (18 USC 925(d)(3)) and the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban specifically banned the AK-47 by name. Many other such weapons (including obvious clones of AK-47’s) manufactured after 1994 had to be modified (e.g. removal of barrel threading, bayonet lug and folding stock). This ban expired on September 13, 2004, as part of the law’s sunset provision. The import of rifles with certain features are still banned. However, certain states such as California, New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts have specific restrictions with some mentioning AK-pattern firearms by name.
Private ownership of AK-47 rifles was regulated by the National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934. The Gun Control Act of 1968 ceased the import of foreign-manufactured fully automatic firearms for civilian sales and possession. The ATF enforced a provision banning importation of small arms from Communist Bloc nations without a trade agreement with the United States. This ban is still enforced with the former Soviet Union republics and post-Communist Eastern European nations without USA trade agreements. A few Communist nations e.g. China and the former Yugoslavia have trade agreements with the United States.
In 1986, an amendment called the Firearm Owners Protection Act stopped all domestic manufacturing of fully automatic weapons for civilian use. Fully automatic weapons are still manufactured in the US for military and law enforcement use. However, automatic firearms manufactured domestically prior to 1986 or imported prior to 1968 may be transferred between civilians in accordance with federal, state and local law. A number of Soviet and PRC rifles were brought into the U.S. during the mid-1960s, when returning Vietnam veterans brought them home after capture from enemy troops. Some of these were properly registered during the amnesty period under the 1968 NFA law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_the_AK-47
keith
February 5th, 2013
7:35 pm
Liberals are very good at making themselves look stupid.
комисса́р (Occupation)
February 5th, 2013
7:36 pm
keith: “Liberals are very good at making themselves look stupid.”
You’re still big on that word “liberals”. Obviously very, very important to you.
josef
February 5th, 2013
7:37 pm
BROSEPHUS
@ 7:24
and FROG
@ 7:30
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oz50_MWWKwg
keith
February 5th, 2013
7:39 pm
Look at all those illegal AK-47s for sale on Gunbroker. Better call the ATFE. LOL
http://www.gunbroker.com/All/BI.aspx?Keywords=arsenal+ak-47
USA Patriot
February 5th, 2013
7:39 pm
Hey, TurnerBroadcastingSystem – Check w/ Chicago – apparently, the “boys” don’t pay attention to “laws”. Just sayin’. Carry on!
Peace
February 5th, 2013
7:39 pm
Bro @ 7:14:
There’s always going to be a post that causes invocation of the …
Habeeb Akandew question.
“I wonder if you can taste the bullsh*t that’s coming out of your mouth.”
― Habeeb Akandew
keith
February 5th, 2013
7:42 pm
Brosephus dont bother going to gunbroker. You couldnt afford one. Thanks to dear leader my AK-47 is worth 4 times what I paid for it.
keith
February 5th, 2013
7:42 pm
Brosephus dont bother going to gunbroker. You couldnt afford one. Thanks to dear leader my AK-47 is worth 4 times what I paid for it.
keith
February 5th, 2013
7:42 pm
Brosephus dont bother going to gunbroker. You couldnt afford one. Thanks to dear leader my AK-47 is worth 4 times what I paid for it.
Thomas Heyward Jr
February 5th, 2013
7:43 pm
“That aside, here’s the most basic problem with the criticisms raised by Sirota, Greenwald and others: What is the cure?”
.
Non aggression.
.
Bookman’s conscious may contort….(hopefully he still has one after Obama)………but…..the decent people have NOT blood on their hands.
.
This Bush/Obama R&D Washington Party’s travesty is NOT in the decent Americans name.
Brosephus™
February 5th, 2013
7:43 pm
Some AK-47’s are semi-auto and some are fully-auto just like AR-15’s.
Surely (and don’t call me Shirley) you know that !
The AK-47, known in Russia as Автомат Калашникова or Avtomat Kalashnikova, was a select fire rifle built in Russia during WWII. Production of that rifle ceased in 1959. Anything built after that is a copycat or replica. Surely you know that too, right? The A in AK stood for automatic, hence the reason Keith does not own a true AK-47.
—————
Keith
If your “AK-47″ was built by Arsenal in Las Vegas with a receiver imported from Bulgaria, you have been effectively hoodwinked if you consider your rifle an AK-47. It is a replica AK-47, but it is not an AK-47. In your attempt to claim “liberals” are stupid, you fail to realize that
#1 I’m not a “liberal”.
#2 I probably know just as much, if not more, about guns, the history of guns, and where you can get guns.
So take your fake AK-47 owning ass somewhere else, as your lies might impress others, but I am quite knowledgable and you don’t impress me at all. When you get your hands on a true AK-47 that was built by the original manufacturer and designed by Mikhail Kalashnikov, come talk to me.
TBS
February 5th, 2013
7:44 pm
Apparently looking stupid is not confined to being a “liberal”
See post about St Judes as clear evidence that there are no monopolies on stupid.
Keith, that is unless you are a “liberal”
josef
February 5th, 2013
7:44 pm
Looks like the c*ck hath thrice crowed…
JamVet
February 5th, 2013
7:44 pm
I’m not sure about doomed, but I would contend that the GOP has suffered some very major wounds. Most, self inflicted.
Time will tell if they are mortal or not. But it certainly is not looking very good for them these days…
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
February 5th, 2013
7:45 pm
When you get your hands on a true AK-47 that was built by the original manufacturer and designed by Mikhail Kalashnikov, come talk to me.
We’ll have $39 flights to the moon first.
Brosephus™
February 5th, 2013
7:45 pm
Keith
Claiming your Arsenal replica is an AK-47 is just like pulling up to the Cheetah in this and telling one of the strippers you own a Ferrari.
http://www.recipeapart.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/ferrari-smart-car.jpg
keith
February 5th, 2013
7:46 pm
you would look alot better if you just admitted you were wrong instead of getting agree brosephus. now calm down there son.
Brosephus™
February 5th, 2013
7:46 pm
Kam
keith
February 5th, 2013
7:47 pm
OK so if AK-47s are illegal whats your problem? We dont need a gun ban if they are already illegal. lol which is it? you want to ban something already banned? come on son use your brain.
TBS
February 5th, 2013
7:48 pm
Bro @ 7:45
Too funny
Brosephus™
February 5th, 2013
7:48 pm
you would look alot better if you just admitted you were wrong instead of getting agree brosephus.
????
Here’s something you might be interested in buying along with knock off rifles…
http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/imagebuzz/web04/2011/1/3/17/samuel-l-jackson-teaches-english-3633-1294092443-0.jpg
keith
February 5th, 2013
7:50 pm
it would take 4 years of your welfare checks to afford the magazine that goes in my AK-47. Or to you liberal nitwits, the clip. LOL
josef
February 5th, 2013
7:51 pm
BROSEPHUS
@ 7:48
TBS
February 5th, 2013
7:51 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCtSa0exAH0
Brosephus™
February 5th, 2013
7:52 pm
OK so if AK-47s are illegal whats your problem? We dont need a gun ban if they are already illegal. lol which is it? you want to ban something already banned? come on son use your brain.
Huh? I think Capt. Picard and Capt. Kirk both just pissed themselves at watching how fast your warp drive moves your goalposts. Where did the gun ban idea come from? Who mentioned a gun ban? Why are you trying to change the subject from your replica guns?
keith
February 5th, 2013
7:52 pm
Why is it so difficult for leftwing loons to admit they are wrong? When they get busted for being stupid they go into a rage. Much easier for brosephus to just apologize, admit he was in error and move on.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
February 5th, 2013
7:53 pm
It was just the other day while I was standing in line at Whole Foods behind this huge __________ lady with three shopping carts filled with AK-47 magazines and she was paying for them with (gasp!) food stamps.
Oscar
February 5th, 2013
7:54 pm
Ak-47 semi v. 12 guage semi shotgun inside a dwelling? What are the odds?
keith
February 5th, 2013
7:54 pm
your idiot leader has been talking about bans. Where have you been? Jeez. Get out from under your rock more. Educate yourself son.
Brosephus™
February 5th, 2013
7:54 pm
it would take 4 years of your welfare checks to afford the magazine that goes in my AK-47.
Your gun must be one real cheap POS then. I don’t get welfare checks, so any gun that shoots with a magazine that doesn’t cost anything is either imaginary or a POS. If you’re really that bad off for a gun, I know where you can buy a few.
TBS
February 5th, 2013
7:54 pm
Bro
His Folex he bought in Chinatown is real as well…………….
keith
February 5th, 2013
7:55 pm
Ak-47 semi v. 12 guage semi shotgun inside a dwelling? What are the odds?
I have a Benelli M-4 too. Im sure the idiots will want to ban it too.
Thomas Heyward Jr
February 5th, 2013
7:56 pm
The Bookmans of the world are fine with state assascination.
To them……..it is God smoting.
.
It will not be long until men like Jimmy Stewart…………………are declared Al-Queda…….or whatever de jour enemy of the State.
.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/131886.html
josef
February 5th, 2013
7:57 pm
BROSEPHUS
Since both his magazine and your welfare checks are the product of a fevered imagination, I’d say its a moot point…
And is it just me, or does Keith sound like Reporter’s b*stid offspring?
keith
February 5th, 2013
7:57 pm
Your gun must be one real cheap POS then. I don’t get welfare checks, so any gun that shoots with a magazine that doesn’t cost anything is either imaginary or a POS. If you’re really that bad off for a gun, I know where you can buy a few.
Then you should go to a few of those places and let them educate you on firearms. Im getting tired of it.
Brosephus™
February 5th, 2013
7:58 pm
your idiot leader has been talking about bans.
What??? I don’t see a poster here named “idiot leader”. Care to show where the post talking about bans originated? Geez, you would think that such a learned conservative as yourself would be able to stick to one topic instead of posting like a caffeine injected squirrel on the keyboard.
TaxPayer
February 5th, 2013
7:59 pm
The blog has itself a real entertainer in keith.
Oscar
February 5th, 2013
7:59 pm
More money for research and education on mental health issues. And ban guns that can fire more than thirty rounds without a reload
Brosephus™
February 5th, 2013
7:59 pm
TBS
I figured him to be one wearing an Infecta.
—————
And is it just me, or does Keith sound like Reporter’s b*stid offspring?
You change b*stid to spastic and I’m with you 100% there bro.
moonbat betty
February 5th, 2013
8:00 pm
Git r done.
now that obama is faced with the tough questions, he does the right thing.
I don’t care if the liberal whiners agree now.
At least they admit their mistakes.
Oscar
February 5th, 2013
8:00 pm
Or ban guns that fire more than 20 rounds without a reload
Soothsayer
February 5th, 2013
8:00 pm
I don’t know about the rest of you but my AK-47 keeps me warm in bed at night. Or is it the other way around?
I cain’t imagine how this here Keith feller done took over the blog with all this here AK-47 talk. Seems like a “tea party” in a tea pot to me. But then again, what do I know.
As far as the original topic is concerned, I’m all in favor of “dronin’” them terrists to death. Just like I make a reg’lar practice of stomping on ain’t hills ’til all them ain’ts go away.
‘Course, the last time I tried it, it didn’t turn out so well.
keith
February 5th, 2013
8:01 pm
Actually Arsenal is one of the finest AK-47s in the world. If you knew anything about firearms you would know that instead of needing me to enlighten you. http://www.ar15.com has a forum dedicated to AK-47s as well. You really could learn alot from them’
http://www.ar15.com/forums/b/4_AK_47.html
Go there and learn. I will give you a test in the morning.
James
February 5th, 2013
8:02 pm
Let’s see if we can follow Jay’s logic.
It was wrong to water board foreign terrorist to obtain intell.
However it is OK to kill Americans who are suspected of terrorism.
Oscar
February 5th, 2013
8:02 pm
Admitting mistakes is a sign of weakness , Real men get angry and change the subject.
Brosephus™
February 5th, 2013
8:03 pm
Then you should go to a few of those places and let them educate you on firearms. Im getting tired of it.
You haven’t educated me on jack sh*t. I’ve probably shot more rounds in the past year than you have shot in your entire life. I work in law enforcement dumbass, and I have to qualify 4 times a year. Because of my position, I have to qualify with handgun, shotgun, and rifle. Not only that, I’ve been put on assignment with different agencies based solely on my marksmanship skills.
Keep dreaming that you’re educating me on anything. You might wanna worry about educating yourself first. Anybody that claims to own an AK-47 and don’t even know the history of that rifle likely didn’t graduate high school. Then again, comparing you to a high school dropout is demeaning to the dropout.
keith
February 5th, 2013
8:04 pm
Let’s see if we can follow Jay’s logic.
It was wrong to water board foreign terrorist to obtain intell.
However it is OK to kill Americans who are suspected of terrorism.
They dont even have to be suspected of terrorism. Just affiliated with someone who is. And who decides what affiliation means? dear leader zero
Brosephus™
February 5th, 2013
8:04 pm
Oscar
Oscar
February 5th, 2013
8:04 pm
Drones provide instant death without pain or other harmful side effects. No torture involved.
keith
February 5th, 2013
8:05 pm
You haven’t educated me on jack sh*t. I’ve probably shot more rounds in the past year than you have shot in your entire life. I work in law enforcement dumbass, and I have to qualify 4 times a year. Because of my position, I have to qualify with handgun, shotgun, and rifle. Not only that, I’ve been put on assignment with different agencies based solely on my marksmanship skills.
Keep dreaming that you’re educating me on anything. You might wanna worry about educating yourself first. Anybody that claims to own an AK-47 and don’t even know the history of that rifle likely didn’t graduate high school. Then again, comparing you to a high school dropout is demeaning to the dropout.
the above is an irate rant. Anyone that allows posters on here to get to them like this is in need of a real life. LOL I was simply trying to help the boy, not upset him.
Moderate Line
February 5th, 2013
8:06 pm
From the ACLU:
The Obama administration apparently continues to think that they have legal authority under [the post-9/11 authorization for use of military force]. Personally, I think and have been writing, that it is questionable, because that authorization allows use of force against the people who committed or planned or harbored those who committed or planned 9/11, and so 11 years later, it’s not at all clear that the drone strikes against you know, people in Pakistan or Yemen or Somalia, young men who were in their 20s, who twelve years ago might have been 8 or 9 years old, were in fact part of the same organization that planned 9/11. So, the Obama administration continues to say that they have that authority under congressional authorization, but I think it’s a fair question as to whether they really do. What we’re really seeing…[is] growing international outrage about whether drone strikes are lawful under international law. Are they infringing on the sovereignty of other countries when we drop drones in other countries? Do they violate principles of international human rights law to kill a particular individual?
+++++
Rightwing troll
February 5th, 2013
8:07 pm
I say if you slither off to the mid-east and plot against your country openly, you deserve what u get. I’d rather listen to liberals and conservatives whine than see Amercan soldiers die. Treason is treason and if you make threats, we have to assume you intend to follow thru with them. Kinda like you don’t point a gun at someone, unless you intend to use it.
комиссар (Occupation)
February 5th, 2013
8:07 pm
What’s striking about Jay Bookman’s post title is not that it’s right or wrong, but the way he flatly assumes that Obama has to be either “right” or “wrong” about the justification for his drones program, with no other possibility for anything in between.
It would evidently take quite a lot for Jay to say something that doesn’t neatly fall into either category, such as for example, that, say, the drone program puts us into murky ethical waters where maybe it’s going to be even harder to judge what course of action and what policy is right and what is wrong. Maybe we will have to do things in the name of security that will compromise us ethically as a nation. But to take such steps doesn’t mean that one is necessarily ‘right’ or ‘wrong’. But it may mean that we are in a very gray area, ethically speaking.
But we Americans don’t do ‘gray’ very well, do we? Maybe that’s part of the issue.
Oscar
February 5th, 2013
8:07 pm
Some things – policies – orders – should not be put in writing.
If you are caught, the agency will disavow any knowlege of your mission
keith
February 5th, 2013
8:08 pm
Drones provide instant death without pain or other harmful side effects. No torture involved
Before zero decides to kill American citizens without a trial or verdict of guilt he would need to amend the Constitution. You do know about the Constitution dont you? That little thing known as the law of the land. So if zero goes thru with his plans without amending the Constitution he is no better than the people he wants to kill.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
February 5th, 2013
8:09 pm
U.S. Rep. Paul Broun, an Athens Republican, is the first out of the gate in the race to succeed retiring U.S. Sen. Saxby Chambliss.
We’re doomed I tell ya!
JohnnyReb
February 5th, 2013
8:10 pm
In no case is it OK for our Country to take the life of a US Citizen without due process.
It is too slippery a slope.
The Obama decision is truly unbelieveable. His administration wanted to give combatants the same court and due process privileges as US Citizens by trying their case in US Court. That was shut down. Now they want to kill US Citizens without due process. It must also be shut down.
Doggone/GA
February 5th, 2013
8:10 pm
“I cain’t imagine how this here Keith feller done took over the blog with all this here AK-47 talk.”
I think he’s an alumni of the “Wow” school of blogging
Thomas Heyward Jr
February 5th, 2013
8:10 pm
For more comic relief, one only has to wait until Jeb Bush ascends the throne in 2016.
.
They’ll plug Cheney back up………………and give him “drone rights”.
.
I can hear Bookman’s and Mathews’ howls now.
.
lol
Oscar
February 5th, 2013
8:11 pm
Ignoring the constitution worked for Lincoln.
....seriously damage the security of this country???
February 5th, 2013
8:11 pm
and where is the same concern about enforcing our immigration laws and securing our borders????
crickets…..
keith
February 5th, 2013
8:11 pm
U.S. Rep. Paul Broun, an Athens Republican, is the first out of the gate in the race to succeed retiring U.S. Sen. Saxby Chambliss.
We’re doomed I tell ya!
i hope democrats run thurbert baker. hes a guaranteed loser.
Paul
February 5th, 2013
8:12 pm
Jay
If you want to convince some Senators that we really should have universal background checks and mental health checks before someone can buy a gun, just forward them this thread.
Oscar
February 5th, 2013
8:12 pm
I thoutht killing people when necessary was what the CIA did. With guns, knives. whatever. So now they are using drones.
keith
February 5th, 2013
8:12 pm
Ignoring the constitution worked for Lincoln.
Did it? I didnt think things ended very well for him.
Brosephus™
February 5th, 2013
8:13 pm
Actually Arsenal is one of the finest AK-47s in the world. If you knew anything about firearms you would know that instead of needing me to enlighten you.
Watch this, I can post links from pro-gun sites too. Even better than that, they actually know the difference between your faux AK and the true AK.
http://thefiringline.com/forums/archive/index.php?t-391780.html
Then, there’s this listing for an “AK47 Rifle For Sale Original Russian Red Style” where, when you actually read the fine print in the description, it says: “AKM 47 Russian Red Style Rifle, AK RRS 762 x 39 semi auto,these are beautiful AK 47 rifles designed to closley resemble the original Russian Red Style rifles.”
http://www.gunsamerica.com/907209472/AK47+Rifle+For+Sale+Original+Russian+Red+Style.htm
“
Oscar
February 5th, 2013
8:13 pm
thought
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
February 5th, 2013
8:13 pm
JAY
So we trusted Bush when weapons of mass destruction were in Iraq. Why should we trust this guy that evidence exists to justify and evidence exists that we actually got a bad guy?
This is BS..Also, that mouthpiece Carney was referring to irrefutable evidence that Al Queda is constantly plotting to attack us..how do we know? What constitutes and attack?
Finally that rube Carney also suggested that in the “event of war”..to justify these powers…did we declare war on a handful of cowards?
In Pakistan, we kill 49 innocents to every 1 bad guy we get. What do you suppose that number is in the other nations over there?
This is an atrocious power to offer that offers no accountability to us to justify killings..Why can’t they advertise the number of innocents killed by each strike?
JohnnyReb
February 5th, 2013
8:13 pm
I could write a book on this – before the electionl, Obama wanted citizens to believe Al Qaeda was all but wiped off the map.
Now, they want citizen approval of killing US Citizens who are members of Al Qaeda without due process.
When will responsible people on the Left wake up and realize just who they support. He continuously overreaches authority. Ignores enforcement of laws to which he does not agree. And now wants to be judge and jury.
Oscar
February 5th, 2013
8:14 pm
Lincoln’s side won the war . He was willing to give his life for that.
TaxPayer
February 5th, 2013
8:14 pm
keith,
Do yourself a favor and get your water tested. Start with lead, mercury, PCB, benzene…
keith
February 5th, 2013
8:15 pm
I thoutht killing people when necessary was what the CIA did. With guns, knives. whatever. So now they are using drones
you need to borrow brocephus’ dictionary. We are now referring to American citizens with CONSTITUTIONALLY protected right. If you give obama this then when theres a GOP President, and there will be one, you will be sorry.
keith
February 5th, 2013
8:16 pm
Lincoln was a great REPUBLICAN President. Democrats will NEVER have his equal.
Oscar
February 5th, 2013
8:16 pm
Johnny – after the election, the cia showed him a new map. thnings do hange
TaxPayer
February 5th, 2013
8:16 pm
Now, they want citizen approval of killing US Citizens who are members of Al Qaeda without due process.
Hardly. I heard that our drones have recognition software preventing them from firing on any US citizen-terrorist that has not been informed of his 2nd amendment rights.
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
February 5th, 2013
8:16 pm
US Citizens are no different IMO than innocent civilians of other nations. Just like other meaningless fights we’ve engaged, we will leave the area with geometrically more US hatred than before we arrived….getting to be a common thread..
Great strategy..if we find one guy who allegedly conspires to hurt americans, it is ok to kill 50 innocents in the process as long as one american life is saved…
Oscar
February 5th, 2013
8:17 pm
Bro = see what I mean. See Keith at8:16
Brosephus™
February 5th, 2013
8:18 pm
keith
You haven’t upset me at all. Seems that one has to speak to you as though they’re scolding a child in order for something to penetrate that cinder block of a skull that you have.
http://cheaperthandirt.com/blog/?p=465
Manufacture
Let’s face it, the days of importing a complete, functioning AK-47 into the US are over. Those days ended on March 14, 1989 when President G. H.W. Bush created an Executive Order banning the import of 43 different semi-automatic rifles. This is where the term “pre-ban” started and is still in use almost 20 years later. If you want one of these pre-ban rifles, by all means get one. The thing to keep in mind is they cost-a-plenty. We are talking in the realm of $1,000 to $2,000 or higher for rare variants. That’s great if you have the money. You can be assured of getting a quality rifle if you buy a Norinco, Polytech, Valmet, Maadi, Hungarian, Bulgarian, Yugoslavian, or any other pre-ban, imported AK- 47. You may find yourself owning a rifle so nice that you will be afraid to shoot it! Especially one that is still new in box (NIB). Don’t be afraid to shoot it unless you just want to keep it for posterity’s sake or as an investment which is sure to appeciate in value. But that is not what this article is focusing on, we are looking at buying a shooter.
If you read further on, they explain how people, such as yourself, get your AK by importing parts that have been altered to get by US laws. In essence, your AK is a piecemeal knock off rifle. As I stated almost an hour ago, unless your gun is pre-ban, you have a knock off.
Now, I have to go and give my own child a bath. I’ve spent more than enough time with someone else’s child.
Catch y’all later…
keith
February 5th, 2013
8:18 pm
brocephus you are an angry young man. take your meds and go to bed. i dont want you to harm yourself over this petty stuff. please calm down son.
Oscar
February 5th, 2013
8:18 pm
Seems like it is still an argument betweem those who like the President and those who do not.
Brosephus™
February 5th, 2013
8:19 pm
Oscar
Yep!!!! I completely understand what you said, and you will not get an attempt from me to argue that you’re wrong.
Soothsayer
February 5th, 2013
8:19 pm
O o o o o h K
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
February 5th, 2013
8:20 pm
For all the Bush bashing, BO is following Bush’s tactics pretty close to the letter…perhaps he learned some things that changed his mind?
Given his arrogance, it must be very difficult to tacitly admit that Bush and Cheney actually had some great ideas..
keith
February 5th, 2013
8:21 pm
i so love it when liberals try to enlist other liberals to join their side in a debate.