Regarding Obama's drone hit on a man never convicted of anything. Or given any due process.

[arely staircase]

Nice shot!

Fuck that dude.

FWIW - he wasn't entitled to any kind of due process unless he surrendered.

[Ohioblue22]

1. Arent All people are entitled to due process ?

[MohRokTah]

3. Nope. 100% constitutional, too.

We targeted and killed American citizens fighting for the German Army during World War II.

You do not stop to give due process to an enemy combatant on the field of battle.

[AgingAmerican]

44. Where have I heard that one before? Oh, yeah....GW Bush and company

[Demonaut]

62. those idiots were right on some things

[Octafish]

80. Like invading Iraq?

Like spying on America?

Like stealing elections?

I can't think of a single thing.

What were some of those things they got right, Demonaut?

[Demonaut]

83. increasing the funds to combat aids in africa, , closing the prince sultan airbase in Saudi Arabia

I really didn't want to go there but you forced me...thanks

[Octafish]

84. Obviously.

Great list.

[Demonaut]

85. you asked

[Octafish]

87. George W Bush may be your idea of a great American, Demonaut...

He is not mine. I abhor traitors, warmongers, and thieves.

[Demonaut]

89. lol, I never said he's a great american, I hate the fuck but I also hold no regard

for people who have completely closed minds and can't accept when they've lost an argument

[Octafish]

92. This is an argument?

You win.

As for Bush's accomplishments, they start here:

[Demonaut]

94. true, I win, thanks for conceding

[Jeffersons Ghost]

118. BTW, Obama does not order CIA drone attacks or micromanage intelligence operations like Bush and Xi

Here we have "W," "X," and perhaps "Why" there is a series of Trump-bumps at Democratic Underground... Where is the Z?

[AgingAmerican]

96. He closed the prince sultan airbase because it was named in Bin Ladens 1998 fatwa

He closed it just before invading Iraq so Al Quaeda would not interfere with his money laundering operation.

[Demonaut]

97. true

[gratuitous]

95. I hope you're not going to get all legalistic about declared wars

I mean, we have to be flexible and able to strike without warning against anyone anywhere, and if you don't like it, then you're on the side of the terrorists, and should be well advised to look at the first part of this sentence. U!S!A! U!S!A!

Please trim your ideals to fit this year's fashion, and get over that unnatural attachment you have to a quaint old document, fka the Constitution.

[arely staircase]

4. No. People arrested for crimes are. Enemies on a battlefield not so much.

If they surrender, then sure. Until then it is a fight to the death between warring sides.

[cheapdate]

32. The US Constitution applies to everyone inside the territorial boundaries of the United States.

Taliban leaders, not so much.

[scscholar]

58. Inalienable means ends at the borders...

to you?

[cheapdate]

61. The US Constitution and over 200 years of jurisprudence says, 'yes'.

It's just a fundamental part of our system of government. Everyone within the territorial boundaries of the United States is under the US Constitution and US law. That means even unlawful aliens have the right to a deportation hearing in front of a judge.

Taliban leaders and Italian film stars simply aren't subject to the same legal rights and protections. They just aren't -- as a matter of US jurisprudence and constitutional law.

What it means to me isn't super important, but in the case of Mullah Mansour, I have to say I'm very conflicted. There just isn't any other way to spin it, Mansour was a truly dark individual. Since taking over the leadership of the Taliban, he has dramatically stepped up attacks on civilians. He's killed and maimed a lot of innocent people, deliberately and spectacularly, over the past 2 years.

[NutmegYankee]

65. Soldiers on a battlefield.

[msanthrope]

73. He was given due process. What that process was, however, was a drone strike. Nt

[Recursion]

117. No. People actively in arms in a combat zone are usually just killed. Same with pirates.

A whole lot of pirates who were US citizens were just straight-up killed by the US Navy.

[MohRokTah]

2. BINGO!

No need for due process in a war zone.

[rug]

5. When did Pakistan become a war zone?

[arely staircase]

6. The tribal/boarder region? As far back as anyone can remember

[rug]

8. I remember. There is a border and Pakistan is a US ally. The drone landed inside a ally's territory.

When was war declared?

[arely staircase]

16. The US drone strikes are not against our ally (such as they are)

They are against enemies of that ally. Sure that ally makes a complaint about sovereignty every now and then for their domestic audiences.

[tazkcmo]

27. Then you're fine with it.

So, if Pakistan droned a person deemed their enemy on the border of Missouri and Kansas you'd be o.k. with that? Maybe send a strongly worded letter for your domestic audience?

[msanthrope]

74. You have a problem with the UN designating this guy a terrorist and sanctioning him?

The day the US harbors a man on the 1267 list, the rest of the world is free to drone strike at will.

[arely staircase]

86. If Missouri and Kansas were lawless hotbeds of terrorism against the United States

and we weren't capable of killing said terrorists and the rule of law here was comparable to the tribal regions of Pakistan and Afghanistan, I would be all for it.

[cpwm17]

93. We have a bunch of US politicians responsible for the World's worst crime this century,

the Iraq War. The US is a target rich environment. We also have many more powerful people in the US responsible for a number of other serious crimes around the World. These powerful criminals are above the law, and will never be brought to justice.

When do you want the drone attacks on these Americans to start? Or are drones just reserved for brown people in third-world countries that US politicians don't like?

[arely staircase]

98. Well I suppose they could try. But since they can't you really have no point. nt

[Albertoo]

30. That legalism will apply once Pakistan has effective control over its NW tribal areas

Not the case for now. So little so that the Pakistani government has regular gunfights with Muslim radicals in its NW provinces. And the curriculum at the de facto public education system in the NW provinces, the madrasas, is rabidly anti-American, anti-infidels in general.
Those provinces really have zero wish to be US allies.

[rug]

38. National sovereignty is not a "legalism".

It's really not for you to determine when international law applies or is ignored.

[Albertoo]

51. Pakistan does not have national sovereignty over its NW provinces

It told you so above, but you appear to have voluntary blind spots.

[rug]

53. Who's "It"?

And you're confusing control with sovereignty.

[Albertoo]

55. There is no sovereignty without control

In practical terms, that is.
But you might prefer etheral ideals over reality

[rug]

64. Tell that to Jefferson Davis.

But you might prefer wishful thinking to history.

[Albertoo]

66. Are you comparing the Pakistani NW territories to the Confederate States?

If so, it's not altogether clear what point you're trying to make.
Some convoluted search for an escape from the corner you had painted yourself into?

And your 'wishful thinking' jibe has no relevance to the discussion stances we had.
If someone was closer to abstractions than reality, it was you, as I mentioned earlier.

[rug]

67. Those that think an insurrection negates sovereignty likely think the CSA was legit.

You should spend less time attempting inept analogies about paint and more time reading history.

[Albertoo]

68. You are blurring the issues and misrepresenting what I said

As I have every reason to think you're doing it consciously, I am not interested in going further with someone who is just listening to the echoes of his brilliant sophistry.

I will simply restate that I doubt the central Pakistan government has much sway in the NW provinces whose economy is reliant on the cuture of opium and contraband and where the federal security forces are constantly under threat of homegrown jihadists.

But feel free to go back to calling me a supporter of slavery, Stonewall Jackson and count Dracula if it makes you feel good.

[rug]

69. I'm stating precisely when you implied.

"I am not interested in going further with someone who is just listening to the echoes of his brilliant sophistry. "

Boo hoo.

[Albertoo]

70. Exactly not. You are misrepresenting on purpose what I wrote => end of dicussion

[rug]

72. Misrepresent you? I quoted you.

[Albertoo]

75. No, Jefferson Davis was not a quote. Not even an interesting parallel.

Stop your cheap High School debating tricks. End of discussion. Thank you.

[msanthrope]

76. The person in question was designated a terrorist and sanctioned by the UN in 2001. Apparently, he

learned little in the intervening 15 years. Nor did he challenge his designation. I'm sorry he did not avail himself of the legal process, but oh, well.

[guillaumeb]

120. How dare you bring up legalities when the people are celebrating

another glorious killing of an un-convicted person?

[MohRokTah]

7. September 11, 2001. eom

[rug]

10. Did you forget a noun and a verb?

[MohRokTah]

12. Did you forget that an attack on the United States was masterminded from

the Afghanistan/Pakistan border region?

I'll grant you, Iraq was a load of bullshit as it had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11, but there were and still are groups in Afghanistan and Pakistan that were involved in that attack.

I 100% supported and continue to support the military and intelligence efforts in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

As the most liberal president in history stated years before being elected, "I'm not against all wars, I'm just against stupid wars."

[rug]

14. Did you forget more than 26,000 Afghan civilians have been killed and nearly 30,000 wounded?

Or do you just not give a shit?

This isn't counting Pakistan, which the drones are now targeting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_in_the_war_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80%93present)

[MohRokTah]

15. That's a reality of war.

It happens.

I will not be discouraged from supporting a just war over collateral damage.

[rug]

17. "I will not be discouraged from supporting a just war over collateral damage."

The difference between a just war and jihad is where you're standing.

What do you think they call the dead of the WTC?

[MohRokTah]

22. I disagree completely withyour assessment.

This is the reality of the world we live within. We are a nation. There are others that will attack our nation. My nation first, everybody else second.

End of discussion.

[rug]

23. Uber Alles.

“There is no flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people.”
― Howard Zinn

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

26. You invoke September 11th...

....were you there?

I sure as hell hope so.

[tazkcmo]

28. You can find a recruiter easily.

Good luck in your new career defending your nation. I thank you for your service.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

33. "You can find a recruiter..."

Thank you...

....for calling out hypocrisy.

[tazkcmo]

39. No problem.

Chicken Hawks and long distance warriors. Ick.

[MohRokTah]

43. I already served decades ago.

I'm too old for them to take me back.

[arely staircase]

130. Good luck with your new career arresting the Taliban.

See. That works both ways.

[Albertoo]

31. Some people want to prove their selflessness by placing other nations first

Gives them some kind of warm, fuzzy feeling. Chomsky comes to mind.

[tazkcmo]

37. And others

Want to place their countries' principles and laws first. Myself and several old Army friends come to mind.

[Albertoo]

54. Do you not count self defense among useful principles?

If not, you probably should contemplate a different line of business

[AgingAmerican]

47. So the attack on Afghanistan by Bush was just to you?

Even though it was Saudi Arabia who attacked us? lol

[arely staircase]

126. To the extent Saudis were involved, they ran it (from the Berlin cell to the choice of targets

from Afghanistan and with the protection of the then Taliban government. Where Bush fucked up was (besides the unbelievable cock up that was The Battle of Torah Bora) was withdrawing so much of our military and intelligence resources and assets out of that country to launch an attack on Iraq, which really didn't have anything to do with 9/11.

[rjsquirrel]

34. +1

Fuck the Taliban.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

35. I know exactly how to do that....

....but it involves me taking you to a recruiting office.

Still interested?

[rjsquirrel]

36. So self righteous

My brother served in AF-Pak d-bag.

And I'm almost 60.

[tazkcmo]

41. Good on your brother.

At least he walked the walk and didn't just talk the talk.

[rjsquirrel]

42. I don't usually believe people who play soldier online

My family sacrificed. I live blocks from the WTC and did on 9/11 too. I have every right to my opinion.

My bro is career by the way. He didn't "walk the walk" he did his job. Serving in the military doesn't make you uniquely entitled to an opinion on war either.

Not that I believe you served in theater.

[tazkcmo]

45. I don't care what you think

or believe about me. Never have and never will. Yes, you do have every right to your opinion as does every other person in this world and yes, your family has sacrificed as has mine even if you think I'm a poser. As for serving not making one "uniquely entitled to an opinion on war" I also agree but we've covered that already. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. And I'm entitled to disagree and post that disagreement and my opinion on a discussion board.

Believe what you want. I don't care.

[rjsquirrel]

48. Good for you "soldier"

You sure do talk tough.

No real solder I know thinks civilians aren't entitled to a political opinion. Most in fact think that is what they are defending.

I'm allowed to hate the Taliban without personally taking up arms. And oh, yeah, those drones are operated out of a base in Florida. No soldiers in theater were involved in this operation. So your blustery tough guy talk about signing up before expressing an opinion is amusing. Sure I'd be happy to sit at a monitor and blow terrorist leaders up. If I weren't 60 with the hand/eye coordination to match I'd be happy to do it.

[AgingAmerican]

46. You sound like Rudy Gulliani

[Kelvin Mace]

9. So, that is the standard of proof for an execution now?

And what about any innocent people that are in the vicinity? I guess fuck them too?

It's all cool until a Cheney-type gets in and decides some people right here need to die without trial.

[Separation]

113. Innocent people in the area?

LOL thats rich. It was a lonesome road in the lawless border crossing area of Pakistan and Iran. It was him and two others in the car with him. This didnt happen downtown Karachi, nor has it ever. The people in the car with him are in no way innocent

[Journeyman]

11. And the tall Arab recycler and all his buddies are still dead . . .

he was the very first of what increasingly appears to be a very long, probably interminable list.

http://www.thenation.com/article/166124/brief-history-drones#

The Nation: A Brief History of Drones (February 27, 2012)


I think often of the Freeway Blogger's iconic poster, with the silhouette of the hooded man in Abu Ghraib with the electrodes attached to his genitals, and the accompanying message:

"If this was our policy, we're losing a hell of a lot more than just a war."

[Rex]

13. Now you got me all curious, how do you surrender to a drone?

[ChisolmTrailDem]

18. How do you surrender to an incoming missile? Or Fat Boy? nt

[Rex]

19. Somehow I don't think putting your hands up to surrender will work. nt

nt

[arely staircase]

24. I don't know. Contact the US government and offer your surrender. NT

[Kaleva]

52. Same way you surrender to a firing squad.

[Hydra]

20. So are you volunteering to be the next drone hit? n/t

[tabasco]

21. Good work, Droney!

Couldn't have happened to a nicer guy.

[Old Union Guy]

25. The United States is in a state of *permanent* war against the whole world.

Winning is never on the agenda.

The "war aim" is to keep it going, and profitable.

I wonder if Trump is elected, will Democrats be anti-war again?

[tazkcmo]

29. Democrats always have been.

Not so much for the DLC/Third Wayers though.

[felix_numinous]

40. With a Trump et all this close to the WH

this is the reason that a policy of remote machine hits should not be in place anywhere. Do we need a reminder.

[Ohioblue22]

49. Wow I thought this was a rehash of when potus droned the son of the American

[msanthrope]

78. Well, when you make the 1267 list.....unfortunately Anwar's son was with a member of that list,

target of the drone strike.

[DesMoinesDem]

90. Jesus, you have no clue what you are talking about.

That isn't an assassination list. You think the US is assassinating people based on a UN list? And that excuse that Abdulrahman just happened to be with someone else that they were targeting is bs.

It never surprises me that all the people on this site that just love killing and war are all big Hillary supporters.

[The Straight Story]

50. Options: Let a terrorist organization leader kill more people or stop him. Solution to some?

let em keep killing until some cops fly over there and arrest him.

At some point there is a trust issue.

[TeddyR]

56. Yep

This guy led a group that harbored bin Laden and thinks it is ok to throw acid in the faces of young girls for the crime of going to school. They aren't any different from the terrorists who attacked Paris or Belgium. So yeah, fuck them.

[The_Casual_Observer]

57. Don't forget that Uncle Sam is still at war

there. It never ended, and may never end.

It's open season on any of those guys as far as this government is concerned.

[arcane1]

102. Bush said it won't end in our lifetime, and Obama is helping assure that n/t

[The_Casual_Observer]

103. I guess that's about the only thing that bush

Has been right about.
He and his stupid buddies saw to the destabilization of the entire region, but its ok because god was on their side. Their god is better than their god.
I think he read that someplace about Christ his savior in one of his Shakespeares.

[bjo59]

59. Thanks for reminding me that I live in a country full of belligerent couch potatoes who love

cheering on the killing from the comfort of their barcaloungers.

[GOLGO 13]

60. Drone hits are the best hits

We take them out & we loose none.

[DesMoinesDem]

63. Surrender? What was he charged with?

[msanthrope]

71. The UN charged him in 2001 with sanctions for his Taliban activities. Apparently, he didn't learn.

[DesMoinesDem]

88. "Charged with sanctions"

LOL. Sanctions is not a crime.
He didn't surrender to the US because he was never charged with a crime, so there was nothing to surrender for.

[beachbum bob]

77. war is hell..

[Octafish]

79. Murder by the State is still murder.

And cheering the death of an innocent human being is immoral.

Gen. Smedley Butler pegged it:

"War is a racket."

[msanthrope]

81. Innocent? The UN made a mistake with the 1267 designation? Nt

[Octafish]

82. Is that the UN we have to bug?

You know, to know how best to get them to go along UN?

[ronnie624]

91. Does 1267 allow for extrajudicial executions and 'collateral damage'?

You either embrace the principle of due process or you don't.

[arely staircase]

99. Short this guy surrendering and being put on trial

exactly how would you go about administering due process in this case?

[ronnie624]

105. Short of any suspect surrendering, how would due process be administered?

Just declare perpetual global war, and you don't have to worry about any of that nonsense.

[arely staircase]

108. Well the person in question was much more than a "suspect"

He was a member of a group waging asymmetrical war against the United States. He is entitled to no more due process than German machine gunners at the Normandy beachhead. They weren't arrested they were killed or taken prisoner.

[ronnie624]

110. He was someone accused of a crime.

Your analogy is nonsense.

[arely staircase]

112. His status as an accused criminal does not erase his status as an enemy soldier

engaged in war with the US.

[ronnie624]

115. The GWOT is a pretext.

The US is not at war. Terrorism is a crime.

[arely staircase]

123. The US is at war with a loose collection of jihadis who operate in various countries.

And just because a legitimate military target gets indicted doesn't mean he is no longer a legit. target. It just means arrest and prosecution are added to the list of consequences for the poor choice of rising through the ranks of the Taliban.

[Separation]

116. Here is what I dont get.

This was a sanctioned hit by Pakistan's military or intelligence agency, I would bet your next paycheck on it.

Here are some facts, this guy was a known member of the Taliban. He was not in hiding as Pakistans intelligence and military were in talks with him and other warlords to try and get some peace going on out in that region. He was a holdout to that peace process and it was pissing of the Pakistan intelligence community. So here he comes across the border, and gets zapped.

How did we come across this intel? Either some other warlord sold him out, or more than likely the Pakistan intelligence knew his movements and knew when he was going to cross the border with Iran.

If the people of Pakistan knew how much Pakistan cooperates with the United States it wouldn't be effigies of Bush, Obama, and American flags being burned in the streets.

[frankieallen]

100. The planet is better off when people like this are removed from society.

[Marr]

107. "People like this" is easily redefined. /nt

[GoneFishin]

101. You are a right wing extremist ignorant fuck. Voting for Trump I presume. nt

[guillaumeb]

104. What about 16 year old Abdel Rahman al-Awlaki?

He was another victim of the President's illegal drone killings.

What a disgusting, inhumane post.

[arely staircase]

109. Victim of really bad parenting. nt

[guillaumeb]

119. Would ou be as callous and ignorant if it was your son?

This type of comment really typifies the ugly American that much of the world sees when the US war machine kills innocent people in service to empire while Americans endlessly mourn the fall of the two towers.

[arely staircase]

122. I wouldn't take my kids to a terrorist camp or meeting.

That is about as bad as parent as one can be. I mean shit, look what happenef.

[guillaumeb]

124. al-Awlaki's 16 year old son was in Yemen when he was killed.

The US is not at war with Yemen, at least not officially, but civilians are killed there. The US is also not at war with Pakistan. Many civilians have been killed there also. Perhaps you blame the Pakistanis for living in Pakistan? But the US never follows laws and treaties that it considers to be inconvenient to the pursuit of empire and world control.

Assuming that you have not seen it, I would recommend Greenwald's "Unmaned:America's Drone wars" for a slightly different view.

[arely staircase]

125. No we are not at war with Yemen. We did unburden Yemen of the unwanted

presence of al-alwlaki. That he brought his son along with him to Outward Bound AL Quaeda camp is on him.

[guillaumeb]

127. And if Yemen had "unburdened" the US of Dick Cheney and George Bush

would you have agreed with that action also?

Or do you subscribe to the double standard theory wherein the US reserves to itself alone the right to interfere in the affairs of other nations?

[arely staircase]

128. When they do I will voice my opinion. Until then I will stick to reality. NT

[Marr]

106. Disgusting. The tent is too damned big if it's got room for fascist, sycophantic shit like this.

I'm no pacifist, and I might even be convinced of the worthiness of programs like this, given a lucid, honest argument.

But this slavering cheer for swaggering, law-skirting violence is fucking repulsive. It's something I'd expect from lunatic, extreme right-wingers.

[TheKentuckian]

111. The big part of the tent stretches only on the right.

[guillaumeb]

121. Agreed. But the lynch mob is not ready to listen because

they have convicted and passed sentence without a trial.

[Demsrule86]

114. Yeah He got the head of the Taliaban...good for Obama

He has done much to stop the bad guys.

[ileus]

129. If Mr. Obama does it, no matter what "it" may be we should support him.