Opinion of American drone policies

[bedstuy]

It's Obama's worst policy and the reason why I am no longer a Democrat a Ron Paul Republican.

When a Greenie and a Paulite agree so strongly on something, you know whoever's on the other side is  heavily in the wrong.

lol, yeah those left-wing and paultard loons who think 9/11 was an inside job must be right

IDK where you got the 9/11 part from. We're grounded enough in reality to know that wasn't an inside job.

...or at least the Greenie is. Only speaking for myself.

What a strange world we live in, where Lief supports extra-judicial killings and calls us the extremists.

Hint: If you send robots to shoot at people who've barely heard of indoor plumbing, you are the Empire. They are the bloody Ewoks.

That's ridiculous. Drones strikes have not targeted random people.  There's no evidence of that as far as I've seen.  Members of Al Qaeda are a legitimate military target and they're far from cute, cuddly characters from Star Wars. 

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

I pick option 1 of course.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Option 2.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Extrajudicial killing should NEVER happen, period. Yes, I've no problem saying Obama disappointed me big time on "war on terror" issues.

Haven't agreed with you more! One of the fundamental liberal values is the right to a fair trial.

[Marokai Backbeat]

I don't think they should be pursued against American citizens, and they should be done dramatically less so than they are now with a great deal more caution being applied to where they're striking, but it's a significantly less intrusive policy than out and out invasions, and unlike the previous Administration's anti-terror policies, are actually really effective and, in another change of pace, terrorist groups are legitimately afraid of them. The unfortunate anti-terror realities come down somewhere in the middle on this one.

[Franzl]

I don't think they should be pursued against American citizens, and they should be done dramatically less so than they are now with a great deal more caution being applied to where they're striking, but it's a significantly less intrusive policy than out and out invasions, and unlike the previous Administration's anti-terror policies, are actually really effective and, in another change of pace, terrorist groups are legitimately afraid of them. The unfortunate anti-terror realities come down somewhere in the middle on this one.

This, basically. (Although if we're going to be doing this at all, the citizenship question doesn't really interest me much.)

[King]

I've done a lot reading on drones just because they fascinate me.  I support their continued use and development. 

The drone budget is the only part of the military that should be increased.

[Sbane]

I pick option 1 of course.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Extrajudicial killing should NEVER happen, period. Yes, I've no problem saying Obama disappointed me big time on "war on terror" issues.

Haven't agreed with you more! One of the fundamental liberal values is the right to a fair trial.

We are not talking about trials here. I have no problem with killing a confirmed terrorist leader, who is a walking command center. This is a legitimate military operation.

Of course it's preferable to capture such person, but it's not easy and sometimes trying to do it against unfavorable odds carries much greater risk for the military personnel and civilians than drone strike.

You guys are crying about trials, judicial oversight... does a soldier during the battle have to wait for a judicial decision before releasing his bullet? WTF?

[Gamecock]

When did citizenship suddenly start exempting Americans from being enemy combatants?

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

When did citizenship suddenly start exempting Americans from being enemy combatants?

Yeah, imagine this: the Netherlands troops lands with the Allies in Normandy and faces the Flemish Waffen SS division. They don't shot back, because SS guys have, after all, the same citizenship.

[Paul Kemp]

I support their limited use in war-zones to target high-level enemies based on solid intelligence to limit collateral damage.

Unfortunately, the current policy seems to be more broad than this.

[Paul Kemp]

Amen

Obama has to do with arresting Occupy protestors? That's news to me.

[DC Al Fine]

It's Obama's worst policy and the reason why I am no longer a Democrat a Ron Paul Republican.

When a Greenie and a Paulite agree so strongly on something, you know whoever's on the other side is  heavily in the wrong.

lol, yeah those left-wing and paultard loons who think 9/11 was an inside job must be right

IDK where you got the 9/11 part from. We're grounded enough in reality to know that wasn't an inside job.

...or at least the Greenie is. Only speaking for myself.

What a strange world we live in, where Lief supports extra-judicial killings and calls us the extremists.

Hint: If you send robots to shoot at people who've barely heard of indoor plumbing, you are the Empire. They are the bloody Ewoks.

That's ridiculous. Drones strikes have not targeted random people.  There's no evidence of that as far as I've seen.  Members of Al Qaeda are a legitimate military target and they're far from cute, cuddly characters from Star Wars. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Whoops, we found a Taliban leader, better shoot up every male 16 and up regardless of circumstance.

[bedstuy]

Whoops, we found a Taliban leader, better shoot up every male 16 and up regardless of circumstance.

Do you think that the US military wants to kill civilians or doesn't care about collateral damage or the risk to civilians?  They make mistakes but they don't have that cavalier attitude towards human life.  That's ridiculous. 

And if you think Al Qaeda would stop trying to kill Americans if we only comported ourselves better, you're naive. 

[AkSaber]

It's Obama's worst policy and the reason why I am no longer a Democrat a Ron Paul Republican.

Same here.

"Suspected terrorists..." Meaning you can't prove your suspect is a terrorist, but he looks like one so he must be one.

Isn't that profiling? (one of the things liberals are supposed to hate)

[King]

How in the world can someone innocent possibly be killed by this policy? How many American tourists travel to Somalia, Syria, and Mali without visas just to get away for the weekend?

It's one thing if we planned to carry out drone strikes on suspects in Germany or Brazil, but these are enemy states we are striking here.

[ZuWo]

How in the world can someone innocent possibly be killed by this policy? How many American tourists travel to Somalia, Syria, and Mali without visas just to get away for the weekend?

It's one thing if we planned to carry out drone strikes on suspects in Germany or Brazil, but these are enemy states we are striking here.

Innocent Pakistani or Yemeni civilians, maybe?

[Napoleon]

How in the world can someone innocent possibly be killed by this policy? How many American tourists travel to Somalia, Syria, and Mali without visas just to get away for the weekend?

It's one thing if we planned to carry out drone strikes on suspects in Germany or Brazil, but these are enemy states we are striking here.

Innocent Pakistani or Yemeni civilians, maybe?

Seriously! If they areenemy states, make a formal declaration of war or put your little robot in the closet until you do.

[TNF]

Option 2.

[King]

Declarations of war eliminate collateral damage?

[Napoleon]

Declarations of war eliminate collateral damage?

No, but it means you're evil is honest rather than dishonest.

[Blackacre]

It's Obama's worst policy and the reason why I am no longer a Democrat a Ron Paul Republican.

Same here.

"Suspected terrorists..." Meaning you can't prove your suspect is a terrorist, but he looks like one so he must be one.

Isn't that profiling? (one of the things liberals are supposed to hate)

Yes it is. Hense why I, as a liberal, hate it.

[Lief 🗽]

lol, identifying someone as a terrorist is very different from pulling someone over because they're black or whatever. I mean, I'm somewhat sympathetic to the anti-drone camp, but their arguments are just so mind-numbingly stupid.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Option 1, of course.