Drones in the Press .. again.

Discussion in 'The Study' started by K-man, Feb 6, 2013.

  1. ballen0351

    ballen0351 Sr. Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2010
    Messages:
    10,331
    Likes Received:
    953
    Trophy Points:
    263
    So as long as the govt classifys you as a wack job. Its OK to blow them up without attempting due process. Got it. We should have tried that at Waco could have kept from loosing 4 ATF agents.
     
  2. Tez3

    Tez3 Sr. Grandmaster

    • Supporting Member
    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2006
    Messages:
    27,035
    Likes Received:
    4,449
    Trophy Points:
    308
    Location:
    England
    You're right, it could be the thin end of the wedge, history has taught us that. Setting a precedent for killing your citizens without any of the usual legalities being gone through means that next time it's easier and the time after that no one is thinking it's wrong. Then you get someone in charge who doesn't like certain groups or minorites so putting them out of the way has become so much easier and may be, not this time or the next or even the ten times after that, it could be you they've decided are a danger to the state.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. ballen0351

    ballen0351 Sr. Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2010
    Messages:
    10,331
    Likes Received:
    953
    Trophy Points:
    263
    Right. This time it was a terriorist so its ok. Next time its a serial killer so its ok next time its only a child molester so its ok. Until it becomes they voted against me they are an enemy of the state take them out.
     
  4. WC_lun

    WC_lun Senior Master

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2010
    Messages:
    2,760
    Likes Received:
    82
    Trophy Points:
    108
    Location:
    Kansas City MO
    I still canot come to a conclusion for myself on this. I am extremely uncomfortable with killing American citizens without due process. I'm also a bit uncomfortable with even assasinating foriegn nationals. Both set precedence that would very easily be abused. I'm also very uncomfortable with the minimal oversight of the drone program and what qualifies a person to be on that list of soon to be dead men. On the other hand, Al Quida and the US are at war. True it isn't a conventional war, but it is war just the same. If a US citizens had fought for the Nazi's in WWII (and there were some that did) would you expect them to not be shot at by the US military?

    I have to wonder, are lives truly being saved by these drone strikes or are we oursleves now waging a type of war of terror on the terrorist? Ironic f true, but disturbing as well.
     
  5. ballen0351

    ballen0351 Sr. Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2010
    Messages:
    10,331
    Likes Received:
    953
    Trophy Points:
    263
    We have not even touched on the question of :
    are even allowd use the military against US Citizens?
    They can't within our border but does that protection go beyond the US borders? Apparently not according to the current administration.
     
  6. James Kovacich

    James Kovacich Senior Master

    • LifeTime Supporting Member
    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2002
    Messages:
    2,900
    Likes Received:
    49
    Trophy Points:
    123
    Location:
    San Jose, Ca.
    This Admisistration is following the same exectutive order priviledges of the previous administration. The 2 differances, an "American" terrorist has been killed and the use of drones has been stepped up withe the current admisitration. But in the end the same executive priviledges. It is actually a compliment to the previous administration to follow it's lead and expand on it. Like it or not, bad guys need to be stopped and sometimes it means death.

    Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2
     
  7. ballen0351

    ballen0351 Sr. Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2010
    Messages:
    10,331
    Likes Received:
    953
    Trophy Points:
    263
    Yep and when this president expands the power and then the next president expands it a little farther and then the next and the next. Its OK as long as its your side doing the expanding. Would you feel OK giving Chaney the power to kill Americans without due process? Hell he was destroyed for dumping a little water on peoples faces.
     
  8. geezer

    geezer Grandmaster

    • MartialTalk Mentor
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2007
    Messages:
    6,455
    Likes Received:
    2,442
    Trophy Points:
    263
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    Perhaps this should be the standard we apply in the case of these drone strikes as well. The sticky question would then become what is "imminent danger". If we entrust our President with ultimate authority on such matters, and anybody, citizens included, can be assassinated on the premise that they are deemed (by the administration) to be a threat, we establish a dangerous precedent. While I actually tend to believe that historically, most Presidents (from all parties) have acted in good (if sometimes misguided) faith, I am also certain that we need checks and balances, and strict limits on executive power to insure that we don't end up on the road to becoming an authoritarian state.

    ...sometimes we have to risk letting the bad guy get away, and even risk losing more innocent lives to protect ourselves from an even greater threat to our freedom, namely the threat of living under dictatorship. If you think this is far fetched, I'd say just glance at a history book or look around the world today. The first steps towards authoritarianism won't be confiscating your guns, but using fear of some domestic or external threat to confiscate your common sense and along with it your civil rights!
     
  9. ballen0351

    ballen0351 Sr. Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2010
    Messages:
    10,331
    Likes Received:
    953
    Trophy Points:
    263
    For the fleeing felon rule to be applied you need to be actually trying to catch him. I can't just sit outside a bad guys house with a sniper rifle and as soon as I see him blow his head off.
     
  10. K-man

    K-man Grandmaster

    • MartialTalk Mentor
    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Messages:
    6,193
    Likes Received:
    1,221
    Trophy Points:
    248
    Location:
    Australia
    Before I start on al-Qaeda lets look at 'Nazis'. The war wasn't fought against 'Nazis' per se. It was fought against Germany. Most Germans were not Nazi, although the country was ruled by the Nazi party backed by the Waffen SS.

    Al-Qaeda is a terrorist organisation. To define the attempt to eradicate such a group as 'War', to me, defies logic. You can have a war between countries or a civil war between opposing parties within a country. 'War on Terror' is an excuse to do what in other times you would not do but you can get away with because the country in which you are waging your 'war' is powerless to stop you.

    Let's have an 'hypothetical'. A 'radical' freedom group springs up in China. They create a bit of mayhem, destroy some infrastructure and kill a few Chinese officials. They seek support world wide and find support in the US. They are under intense heat in China so the leaders escape to the US and set up their headquarters in Manhatten. The Chinese Government does what it can to get the US Government to turn over these radicals, to cut off funds, impose sanctions, etc. Nothing is working. So the Chinese declare a 'War on Terror' and put a rocket into the building in Manhatten that houses the 'terrorists'. A number of US citizens are also killed but, in the scheme of things, that is 'collateral damage' and some loss of innocent life must be expected.

    Now I leave the rest of the story up to you but the thread could be ..

    i) The Americans shrug their shoulders and say too bad. That's the way things are in the world.
    ii) The Americans respond by declaring war on China for violating their sovereignty.
    iii) Something in between.

    :asian:
     
  11. ballen0351

    ballen0351 Sr. Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2010
    Messages:
    10,331
    Likes Received:
    953
    Trophy Points:
    263
    The only thing i think is the US has approval to use drones in Yemen and Pakistan May not have public approval but I'd bet there is a " hey were going to blow this up and later we will give you this that and this. " Wink wink nod nod. We will let you condemned the attacks publicly
     
  12. K-man

    K-man Grandmaster

    • MartialTalk Mentor
    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Messages:
    6,193
    Likes Received:
    1,221
    Trophy Points:
    248
    Location:
    Australia
    I'm sure you're right. And the 'give you later' is all part of Bill's 'charitable' foreign aid. ;)123
     

Share This Page