Drone strikes on americans 'legal'

#1
volmaverick

volmaverick

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2012
Messages
6,015
Likes
14
#1
Justice Department memo reveals legal case for drone strikes on Americans

A confidential Justice Department memo concludes that the U.S. government can order the killing of American citizens if they are believed to be “senior operational leaders” of al-Qaida or “an associated force” -- even if there is no intelligence indicating they are engaged in an active plot to attack the U.S.

EXCLUSIVE: Justice Department memo reveals legal case for drone strikes on Americans - Open Channel

Wait, we can assassinate Americans because someone in the Administration says they are a terrorist, but we are supposed to arrest and give Arab terrorists all the the rights of a U.S. citizen? I knew the left was NUTS, but now they don’t even try to hide it?


And just think Liberals went nuts when Bush wanted to listen to one side of international phone calls to known terrorists.
 
#6
#6
Burhead said:
We shouldn't be drone striking anyone for that matter.
Click to expand...

If we had drones in 1943 would u have supported them in taking out Hitler and the TOP Nazis?

Just think how many American lives that would have saved
 
#7
#7
volmaverick said:
If we had drones in 1943 would u have supported them in taking out Hitler and the TOP Nazis?

Just think how many American lives that would have saved
Click to expand...

This was before the hippy movement and widespread wussification...therefore it isn't relevant..... Per libtards
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#8
#8
volmaverick said:
If we had drones in 1943 would u have supported them in taking out Hitler and the TOP Nazis?

Just think how many American lives that would have saved
Click to expand...

We had bombers...didn't we?

Drones wouldn't have made a difference against his bomb shelters.
 
#11
#11
PKT_VOL said:
Yeah, because this is strictly a "left" position.
Click to expand...

I don't think that's the point.

I think the point is that the staunchest supporters of Obama are the same ones who shat all over Bush for supporting things like waterboarding and phone tapping and whatnot, yet are sitting here complacently watching as Obama expands the Patriot Act and lets things like this become "legal". Then a lot of those people try to pass it off by implying it's something both sides do (which is true) when they weren't using the same excuses under Bush.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#12
#12
But but I thought drones were for our "saftey" and to protect us from the big bad evil men that hide in caves in Afghanistan..

Fooled again, wake up people.

Thank you NDAA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#13
#13
I fear the US govt more than any supposed terrorist in a cave somewhere. The opening of this door leads to nothing but bad for all American citizens. Kinda like the NDAA, the current admin may not use all the provisions included but you can bet your ass that a future one will

also wish the OP had included the part about the ACLU going after the docs. The rights favorite excuse may actually help them. Of course they'll never admit it
 
#15
#15
volmaverick said:
Justice Department memo reveals legal case for drone strikes on Americans

A confidential Justice Department memo concludes that the U.S. government can order the killing of American citizens if they are believed to be “senior operational leaders” of al-Qaida or “an associated force” -- even if there is no intelligence indicating they are engaged in an active plot to attack the U.S.

EXCLUSIVE: Justice Department memo reveals legal case for drone strikes on Americans - Open Channel

Wait, we can assassinate Americans because someone in the Administration says they are a terrorist, but we are supposed to arrest and give Arab terrorists all the the rights of a U.S. citizen? I knew the left was NUTS, but now they don’t even try to hide it?


And just think Liberals went nuts when Bush wanted to listen to one side of international phone calls to known terrorists.
Click to expand...

Once again, I'm missing the issue. This sets up a framework for making a targeting decision against high ranking AQ leaders. Our challenge has always been what to do if we encounter an American among the AQ. We've gone out of our way in the past to ensure that an US citizens found among the enemy is treated differently than the enemy. Consequently it is in the interest of AQ to recruit American Muslims and have them hang out near the senior leaders as a form of self defense. This paper allows the targeting of those individuals under 3 conditions: there is an imminent threat; capture is not feasible and the attack is done in accordance with the law of warfare.

The use of force against AQ was approved by Congress during the Bush years, so this is simply a continuation of and clarification of that authority.

Again, not sure I see the need for outrage.
 
#16
#16
utvolpj said:
I fear the US govt more than any supposed terrorist in a cave somewhere. The opening of this door leads to nothing but bad for all American citizens. Kinda like the NDAA, the current admin may not use all the provisions included but you can bet your ass that a future one will

also wish the OP had included the part about the ACLU going after the docs. The rights favorite excuse may actually help them. Of course they'll never admit it
Click to expand...

I disagree with the first part. The finding explicitly states these are operations on foreign soil under the current authority to use force against AQ. I share your concerns about the NDAA and other anti-freedom measures, but don't think this particular paper applies.
 
#17
#17
The target doesn't need to be an immediate threat. The target doesn't even need to be in the process of working on a plot. They just need to have pissed off an “informed, high-level” official of the U.S. government
 
#18
#18
I agree this is alarming. I have no problem taking out terrorists wherever they are, especially if they are in this country. The alarming part is in identifying targets.
 
#19
#19
YorkVol said:
I disagree with the first part. The finding explicitly states these are operations on foreign soil under the current authority to use force against AQ. I share your concerns about the NDAA and other anti-freedom measures, but don't think this particular paper applies.
Click to expand...

any American stepping out of the good ol US of A (and I would not be surprised if that isn't even a strict requirement) can now be targeted under these rules. Only reason needed is that they are a member of AQ, could be a threat at some time and a capture mission is risky.
 
#20
#20
utvolpj said:
any American stepping out of the good ol US of A (and I would not be surprised if that isn't even a strict requirement) can now be targeted under these rules. Only reason needed is that they are a member of AQ, could be a threat at some time and a capture mission is risky.
Click to expand...

So you are okay with the idea that an American hanging around AQs top leaders would give them defacto immunity from attack?
 
#21
#21
YorkVol said:
So you are okay with the idea that an American hanging around AQs top leaders would give them defacto immunity from attack?
Click to expand...

if he's not the immediate target. But then again I have an issue with drone strikes killing innocents when it appears our govt doesn't care about that either. Simple association should not make a US citizen a target for assassination by the US govt

if they're going to do it then kill the one you're after. If you can't do it without collateral damage then pick another time
 
#22
#22
Carl Pickens said:
This was before the hippy movement and widespread wussification...therefore it isn't relevant..... Per libtards
Click to expand...

So it is "wussification" for standing against illegal acts?

volmaverick said:
If we had drones in 1943 would u have supported them in taking out Hitler and the TOP Nazis?

Just think how many American lives that would have saved
Click to expand...

Different set of circumstances, we were in a state of declared war with Germany. We are not in a declared war with Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, etc etc.
 
#23
#23
And people thought W was destroying civil rights...

EXCLUSIVE: Justice Department memo reveals legal case for drone strikes on Americans - Open Channel

A confidential Justice Department memo concludes that the U.S. government can order the killing of American citizens if they are believed to be “senior operational leaders” of al-Qaida or “an associated force” -- even if there is no intelligence indicating they are engaged in an active plot to attack the U.S.
Click to expand...

another article about it

Someone Just Leaked Obama's Rules for Assassinating American Citizens - Hit & Run : Reason.com
 
#24
#24
Will be interesting to see how the daily press conf goes and how Jay Carney will spin this.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top