In the news these days, is the level of concern, approval and outright consternation with regard drone strikes not only against terrorists or combatants who are foreign nationals, but American citizens.
Recently, the debate has heated up with the revelation that Americans can be killed by drones (unmanned fighter aircrafts), even those suspected of being terrorists and a threat to American security, the most noted, Anwar Al-Awlaki.
John Brennan, who has been tapped by Obama to become the next head of the CIA, stated that drone strikes are a “last resort”. Are they?
But [not so] strange as it seems, those who were so intently against the drone strikes (strictly to non-Americans) as tantamount to “War Crimes”, see silent and mute.
On that note, it does beg the question, “would those who are suddenly pro-drone, be so, if this were a Republican president”? Like it or not, this inconsistency of urgency speaks to a disturbing reality that too many people base their views and positions, not on principle, but personality, something that this writer has incessantly maintained, since January 21, 2009.
But in all, we should fairly assess the issue from a number of perspectives. Have Americans who have decided to join other countries in engaging warfare, forfeited their citizenships, thus consideration of due process? Would it be preferable to have soldiers directly engage the combatants? Given the number of innocents who have been killed, should the program be dropped, altogether?
Hillary is gone. “Ding, Dong …”? How about John Kerry? He’s now the SOS. We dodged a big bullet with Susan Rice, but will Kerry make us beg to bring her back?
Tune in to Critical Discourse, and engage in stimulating and hearty discussion.
Sorry we couldn't complete your registration. Please try again.
Please enter your email to finish creating your account.
Receive a personalized list of podcasts based on your preferences.