1. There was a leaked memo pertaining to President Obamas
justification for killing American citizens with drones abroad. A group of
Senators also have some questions for the President on this subject. Let’s see
if the state sponsored media has any questions on this subject.
1A. President Obama is a constitutional lawyer (I am
assuming the Constitution of the United States) and a Nobel Peace Laureate.
2. A drone firing a Hellfire missile is not a sniper rifle. It
is not surgical, it is messy.
When a drone launches a Hellfire missile and that missile hits a target there
is massive destruction. Humans, both good and bad are killed. Young humans,
also referred to as children are killed during these strikes. Not to mention innocent
full grown humans, both male and female. The killed children and innocents are
known as collateral damage.
2A. President Obama wants to restrict the second amendment
rights of all law abiding Americans to “even save one child,” which none of his
proposals will do. As for saving even one child, that only pertains to children
located in the United States, killed by criminals. Not those killed in other countries under his orders. Maybe he sees the loss and
or further restriction of our rights to also be collateral damage. (micro tangent)
3. We have thousands upon thousands of convicted bad guys in
our prisons. Murderers, rapists and pedophiles, legitimate bad dudes. We have a
prison overpopulation problem. The legal system that puts these bad guys in
prison and the prison systems to house these bad guys, costs us bazillions
every year. Just to keep bad guys as pets. There is no rehabilitation occurring.
3A. The cost of an armed drone and its operation is not cheap.
It is not cheap in dollars and not cheap in the cost of ill will towards
America for reigning terror from the sky.
3B. A single round of 45 ACP to the head would solve our
prison overpopulation problem, for under a dollar each, even at an inflated government
cost. It would most likely be incredibly effective in deterring crime as well. This
idea is completely rational and most likely legal if you consider it though an
Obama legal lens.
Read or don’t read the articles I have linked below. But at
least do this for me. Ask yourself what you are and are not ok with and why,
pertaining to drone strikes and the killing of American citizens and the
killing of innocents. I am not ok with this. We have laws and rights, and even
if we didn’t this wouldn’t be legal. We know what is right and what is wrong.
This is not legal, and this is not right. I could go on and on, I shouldn’t, so
I won’t.
I think the founding fathers just shit themselves, in their
graves.
Heard the drone story this morning on NPR. As a peacenik I cannot condone violence and any soul that is taken bothers me - even the "enemy". With that said the three Americans killed thus far where with al-Qaeda in Yemen? Is their deaths any different then the death of Jimmy Lee Dykes? He wasn't tried in court for the bus drivers death or kidnapping the boy - yet he died. How many Americans are killed on the wrong side of the law in gun fights? Is it so far fetched to die siding with the forces that plot against us? In the days of front lines and battlefields - if an American citizen was fighing in the other foxhole against allied troops and he dies is that an injustice?
ReplyDeleteNow, civilian deaths are another issue. War has always had indiscriminate killing - blanket bombings, the nuclear attacks on Japan, missle strikes in Iraq and every conflict throughout history - from the first moment our ancestors picked up a rock to crush the skull of a rival tribe. It's a horrible reality of war and I want a world without such bloodshed yet I fear we will never learn.
There are some major differences to both of your points. One, the guy who shot the bus driver and kidnapped the boy and hid in the bunker for a week was extended chance after chance to give up and many steps were taken. If you apply the Obama rules, they should have just dropped a JDAM on the place, and problem solved. Bad guy dead, and kid, well collateral damage. We didn’t do that did we. Bad guy committed a crime. We gave him a week to walk out. If he would have walked out and gave himself up, we would have put him on trial, gave him representation, and if found guilty, he would have gone to jail or been executed. If we told him to walk out and he came out shooting, and he gets killed, I am fine with that. I am fine with all that. That system puts lots of bad guys away, and some good guys. It even lets some bad guys go free, but that is the cost of a fair and transparent justice system. What we did in Yemen, was say, yeah, this guy is doing bad stuff. It’s kind of hard to get into Yemen to get him, so let’s just take him out. If that is the case, why did we go in to Pakistan to get Osama? Why not just drop a bomb if we knew where he was. The cost of that operation and the difficulty, Seals could have died, and Pakistan was pissed. We went in to try to get him, to bring him to trial. It didn’t work out, so we shot him in the face, or at least that is the story the government and Hollywood tells us.
DeleteAs for killing him on a battle field, in Yemen, that would be just. He would be engaged in trying to kill Americans, either by plotting to bomb or shooting back at our guys trying to capture or kill him. Less collateral damage that way as well. Key word less.
Now for the link below, Judge N presents this way better than I can. We are a nation of laws, not men. This paper says that yes we have these laws in place that don’t let us do this, but this is how we (men) are going to interpret them, no need for the Senate or the courts, just us, and we will decide what the definition of assassination is and is not. Bill Clition did the same thing with the word sex. Like the Judge says, Big Sis at DHS says returning vets, or those who want to do away with the IRS or the Fed Res could all be considered domestic terrorist. If so, then can the Whitehouse write a white paper saying, well it’s hard to get these guys End the Fed guys up in Pennsylvania up in the woods, and yeah their kids are in the cabins with them, but trust me, they are bad, and a threat, so, send up the armed drones. No need for warrants, or judges or courts or jury’s, and the dead kids, collateral damage. The constitution, that old out dated thing, that is there only to protect a woman’s right to abort her fetus, nothing more. Not to protect you from your government rightly or wrongly killing you, without a trial or conviction or judge or jury. I will let the Judge say it for me. And please, sit through it, I know its Fox News, but it is spot on.
Thanks as always for the conversation.
http://foxnewsinsider.com/2013/02/05/judge-napolitano-doj-memo-arguing-the-government-has-the-right-to-kill-u-s-citizens-abroad-violates-principles-of-the-declaration-of-independence/