Drones - its a method - who cares?
If its illegal and/or morally wrong to kill someone - then its illegal and/or morally wrong to kil them. It doesn't matter how they were killed, does it?
On the other hand - if its legal and/or morally right to kill someone - such as legitimate military targets - then why is it wrong to use a method which places U.S. servicemen at a minimal risk?
Seems to me that the same folks who were fine with us setting Baghdad on fire using smart bombs and - at the same time - placing U.S. pilots at risk - are against using unmanned aircraft to conduct more surgical strikes of military targets. Do you guys want U.S. servicemen to die, or do you just hate Obama?
As usual the left wing engages in hyperbole and Reductio ad absurdum. No one was fine with setting Baghdad on fire because we didn't set Baghdad on fire. The war was quick and done with minimum loss of civilian life. Granted that is not the liberal story line but that does not make it untrue.
What apparently is the liberal's good idea is to kill as many as possible and let God sort them out. The only thing surgical about drone strikes is there usually is only one missile fired. One that is until the responders arrive then we send them a little something something. Did you know we were doing that? Attacking not only the target but the first responders? If you say no it is funny because it is in the Huffington Post.
Now your premise starts out with, is it legal. What makes it legal to kill Americans in Yemen and Pakistan? Both are sovereign nations that are supposedly our allies. What if the Arabs, or anyone else, had the ability to launch a predatory drone hellfire missile. What if they knew of a five star general having coffee in a coffee shop in Washington. They do a surgical strike and take out the general and 10 others who were in the facinity, would you say that was just a legal act of war?
What if they took out an American having lunch with his cousin who none of were terrorist? Obama did it. What if we killed an innocent civilian who was targeted by someone just to collect the reward? Obama did it.
The Legality of War: Pakistani Court Rules CIA Drone Strikes Constitute a War Crime
Now the howls from the left about GWB being a war criminal for water boarding, how about now, an ally country, IN COURT, has declared what Obama is doing to be a war crime. How about you?
Here is more, read don't be a low information voter:
Obama terror drones: CIA tactics in Pakistan include targeting rescuers and funerals
But research by the Bureau has found that since Obama took office three years ago, between 282 and 535 civilians have been credibly reported as killed including more than 60 children. A three month investigation including eye witness reports has found evidence that at least 50 civilians were killed in follow-up strikes when they had gone to help victims. More than 20 civilians have also been attacked in deliberate strikes on funerals and mourners. The tactics have been condemned by leading legal experts.
Although the drone attacks were started under the Bush administration in 2004, they have been stepped up enormously under Obama.
There have been 260 attacks by unmanned Predators or Reapers in Pakistan by Obamas administration averaging one every four days. Because the attacks are carried out by the CIA, no information is given on the numbers killed.
