Skip to main content

View Diary: Memo explains administration's legal rationale behind targeted killings. Senate critics not soothed (543 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  There's one part (7+ / 0-)

    of Glenn Greenwald's response that I agree with. Its where he discussed the "global battlefield."

    That theory is both radical and dangerous because a president's powers are basically omnipotent on a "battlefield". There, state power is shielded from law, from courts, from constitutional guarantees, from all forms of accountability: anyone on a battlefield can be killed or imprisoned without charges. Thus, to posit the world as a battlefield is, by definition, to create an imperial, omnipotent presidency.
    That is exactly the case the Obama administration is making both in this document and in Holder's remarks last March.

    Progressives miss the point if they simply argue this one as a domestic civil liberties issue. We are re-defining what "war" means. And to be relevant - we need to engage in THAT conversation.

    Almost everything you do will seem insignificant, but it is important that you do it. - Mahatma Gandhi

    by NLinStPaul on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:18:15 AM PST

    •  if it's any consolation (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      the fact that America's military dominance has made open conflict an automatic loss has redefined what war means.  Our enemies (and our the enemies of our allies) aren't any less determined so they have, out of necessity, evolved new ways of fighting.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site