Skip to main content

View Diary: Why President Obama's drone assassination program must be made accountable (162 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I believe that's a feature. (0+ / 0-)

    I think we can all agree that reducing the risk to fighting men and women is a good thing.

    •  how about, it's a double-edged sword? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      George3, joanneleon

      surely you wouldn't mind admitting that the deployment of technology that lowers the political costs of using lethal force has its potential downside, too?  the key would seem to be how well the use of the tool is controlled.

      i'm part of the 99% - america's largest minority

      by joe shikspack on Mon Nov 26, 2012 at 07:38:30 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  No, I don't admit it. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        TheLizardKing, sviscusi

        I think it's a silly assertion that has no basis in fact whatsoever, and I think it takes a measure of callousness to purposely buy increased risk to those who serve on the theory that it will prevent conflict.

        •  then i think that you fail the "reasonable person" (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          George3, joanneleon


          thanks for playing.

          i'm part of the 99% - america's largest minority

          by joe shikspack on Mon Nov 26, 2012 at 07:48:09 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Reasonable people deal in facts. (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Jeff Simpson, lcj98, TheLizardKing

            Not mealy mouthed appeals to the abstract.

            •  Wow (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              joe shikspack, ffour

              How many more times are you going to use terms like "mealy mouthed" and other demeaning insults while providing no information or opinion of substance?

              You know what's funny?  Over the weekend I saw some other fierce defenders like yourself pummeling another user with HRs for much milder insults.   Yet today, none of them are HRing you for the same kind of behavior.  How curious!    Some people are even rec'ing your trollish insulting comments and just yesterday they were so offended by the same kind of thing!  Must just be their mercurial nature. Moody lot, they are.  That must be it.

              And besides all of that, I haven't seen you make one salient point in this whole diary, Pete Cortez.

              What do you think would be a good legal framework for the drone assassination program, Pete Cortez?  In detail, please. No mealy mouthed replies now.  Fair is fair.  What is your framework?

              "Justice is a commodity"

              by joanneleon on Mon Nov 26, 2012 at 09:48:42 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  The same legal framework for any act of war. (0+ / 0-)

                Why is that so hard for you to understand?

                •  Oh I see (0+ / 0-)

                  your techniques.  

                  For male diarists and commenters, you demean their masculinity.  For female diarists and commenters, you demean their intelligence.


                  When is an act of war legal?

                  "Justice is a commodity"

                  by joanneleon on Mon Nov 26, 2012 at 09:57:57 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  The legal framework requires a few things you seem (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  joe shikspack

                  to be missing.

                  1. Justifiable cause as determined by the UN Security Council.

                  2. The failure of diplomacy.

                  3. A formal declaration of war.

                  4. The act of repulsing an invasion.

                  5. Respect for and acceptance of the Geneva accords.

                  None of these are present in Yemen or Somalia or Iraq or Afghanistan. And the use of drones against civilian populations is forbidden. And if you are the aggressor nation you are responsible for security and the rebuilding of the country you invaded. Whether you like it or not.

            •  What facts have you ever put forward Pete? (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              joe shikspack

              All you seem to do is engage in character assassination. It will not be so abstract when we get attacked again now will it?

        •  This is all nonsense... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          joe shikspack, rlochow

          The fact is, there is no overall decrease in risk to human life, even if the deployers of drones are less exposed to risk.

          What people like you revealingly forget is the drones are putting all Americans at significantly increased risk of retaliation from the hatred against us caused by our drone terrorism.

          "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

          by ZhenRen on Mon Nov 26, 2012 at 09:54:12 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  The trouble with that is that if you overdo it, (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      joanneleon, joe shikspack

      as I think they've been doing, you create a situation where the lives of our fighting forces are threatened again, because the rest of the world begins to see them, with some justification, as representative of a threat which itself must be addressed, possibly with violence.  When you're a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail, right?  And when the hammer that you are gets big and frightening enough, it's only a matter of time before people start thinking of YOU as the bigger threat.  

      This is not the path to an effective national security.  But I'm afraid that the GWOTers, in their arrogance, think that it is -- that we're safest when the whole world is petrified of us.  

    •  The life of a noncombatant is worth more than the (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      joe shikspack

      life of a combatant. Or do you believe that rules should not apply in warfare. You would not have a problem with Iranian drones killing people in the US. Or Iraqi. Or Russian. This putrid American Exceptional ism must stop. Or someone will stop it for us.

      Or are you OK with other countries torturing Americans. Because that is what it is coming to. Your attitude and the attitudes of those who think like you put this country in danger of another attack.

      If lowering the risk to American military personnel comes at the cost of increasing the risk to innocent civilians then it is not a deal worth making. Do you think the military heroes of US history would have approved of this strategy? Or the founding fathers? What honor is there in killing people via remote control in an air conditioned cubicle? Yet it is that sense of honor that stops soldiers from committing war crimes.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site