Drone strikes on Americans

[Undone]

Many who do end up as 'collateral damage' are at least sympathetic to the cause of the targets, if not outright supporting them through living accommodations, food or other supplies.

Even children though?

 

http://www.google.com/search?btnG=1&pws=0&q=drone+strike+kills+children

[Conga3]

But the thing is knapp, there are again two different facets to this issue. There's the issue of what's warranted "warfare," and there's a the concept of executing someone without the literal due process of law.

 

Then there's "part b" of that second point that exposes the potential of our government to greatly abuse that power.

 

So an 'American citizen' ...

 

...who travels abroad

...to take up arms against the US

...and becomes a "senior operational leader" of an organization that seeks to kill other Americans

 

Deserves "due process of law" afforded to American citizens?

 

At some point you realize he has forfeited his "rights" under the US Constitution...right?

 

It's just common sense. What these "memos" are about is putting down on paper the framework for this common sense to be carried out by government officials.

[Conga3]

Many who do end up as 'collateral damage' are at least sympathetic to the cause of the targets, if not outright supporting them through living accommodations, food or other supplies.

Even children though?

 

http://www.google.co...+kills+children

 

I believe most reasonable folks find the death of children in war to be abhorrent, and Strigori doesn't even need to qualify his remarks with any sort of statement expressing that. Reasonable folks would assume that.

[rawhide]

If Americans are in some foreign land consorting with the enemy, and a missile hits... sorry.

My problem is the somewhat shaky concept of proof of consorting with the enemy. Not to mention the . . . creative? . . . interpretation of "imminent."

 

 

Citizens of the United States are being killed by the United States government without due process and the usual suspects who cry "tyranny!" "fascism!" "extremist!" are strangely silent. IMO this is a more important issue than limiting magazine capacity . . . but apparently it doesn't push the right buttons.

Did I not lash out with a scathing retort And by the way, don't touch my guns and clips. My whole point is that the guvmint is on a slippery slope when it comes to the whole continental USA thingie. Would it have been ok to knock out McVeigh's truck with a hellfire; but also take out a soccer mom minivan with 6 children in it???? But it would have saved more lives; say you. Then why do the police have to wait until the last possible second before stopping a criminal with deadly force? Let's just let the guvmint determine who to kill; more taxes and death panels to follow You read it here first folks. slippery slope down to euthanasia.

[Undone]

So an 'American citizen' ...

 

...who travels abroad

...to take up arms against the US

...and becomes a "senior operational leader" of an organization that seeks to kill other Americans

 

Deserves "due process of law" afforded to American citizens?

 

At some point you realize he has forfeited his "rights" under the US Constitution...right?

 

It's just common sense. What these "memos" are about is putting down on paper the framework for this common sense to be carried out by government officials.

I want to first say that I generally like and agree with most of the stuff you post. You seem to understand the Liberty concept pretty well. But I digress...

 

Personally, I don't put the words American citizen in quotation marks. If they're a citizen of the United States, they deserve all of the rights afforded to them by the constitution. And since you brought up the constitution...

 

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

Tell me, then, whether or not being "deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law" isn't clear?

 

I believe most reasonable folks find the death of children in war to be abhorrent, and Strigori doesn't even need to qualify his remarks with any sort of statement expressing that. Reasonable folks would assume that.

It *is* abhorrent. And very much preventable.

 

And again, for the third time, there's another facet to this. It's the fear of this trend being abused to the nth degree that I also find disturbing. You may not.

[strigori]

It is not always preventable. The sorts of people that are targets of these kinds of strikes, are the kind of people to make sure children are around them all the time as human shields.

[walksalone]

Couldn't much of the possibility of this be negated by what I previously stated?

 

Also previously mentioned, this is happening in Afghanistan not Terre Haute Indiana.

 

Since the gulf war, I guess folks have gotten this mindset of, since we have "smart weapons", it's going to keep civilians from getting hurt and/or killed. This isn't the case. War is a horrible, inexact science that has the ability to make a bad situation a thousand times worse. Not to mention it can cause normal, intelligent people, put in extraordinary situations, to make horrible decisions that can cause men to get killed.

[Conga3]

I want to first say that I generally like and agree with most of the stuff you post. You seem to understand the Liberty concept pretty well. But I digress...

 

Personally, I don't put the words American citizen in quotation marks. If they're a citizen of the United States, they deserve all of the rights afforded to them by the constitution. And since you brought up the constitution...

 

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

Tell me, then, whether or not being "deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law" isn't clear?

 

I believe most reasonable folks find the death of children in war to be abhorrent, and Strigori doesn't even need to qualify his remarks with any sort of statement expressing that. Reasonable folks would assume that.

It *is* abhorrent. And very much preventable.

 

And again, for the third time, there's another facet to this. It's the fear of this trend being abused to the nth degree that I also find disturbing. You may not.

 

I put 'American Citizen' in quotes on purpose because I don't believe they should be considered as such in these circumstances. Citizenship in the US is a sacred thing. I take that very seriously. But citizenship is not a permanent attribute of everyone who is born into it naturally or acquires it through immigration. You can renounce your citizenship.

 

Now there are a few diplomatic steps you have to take to make it official in the eyes of the US, but that can take a couple months. Paper needs to be pushed and all that...but it requires you to leave the country and go through a renouncement ceremony all the while being explained how serious of a deal this is and the consequences of your actions.

 

Me point is, an American can choose to stop being a US Citizen.

 

To speed things up...all you need to do (in my opinion - and it seems this is the working theory of our government) is join our enemy and take up arms against us.

 

Now whether this is legit - is debatable....but that's where I'm at with it and why I don't mind Obama drone bombing 'Americans' overseas that have taken up a 'senior operational leadership' positions within the ranks of our enemies.

 

====

 

Also, I have incredible faith in the US military. If an 'American' is getting drone bombed somewhere in the mountains of Pakistan, I have a lot of faith that the decision to do so was weighed carefully by highly capable folks who understand the consequences of their actions.

 

That's also why I'm really not afraid of the 'slippery slope' effect catching hold of this and all of the sudden:

 

they're on the Jersey Turnpike and suddenly their Honda Civic is reduced to flaming wreckage as they commute home from work.

 

Part of that is this whole Justice Department memo thing the article is about. It's part of the process of capable people trying to determine the right and morale course of action with regards to our laws, Constitution, and the responsibility the US Government/President has to keep it's citizens safe from foreign enemies.

 

Just because Hollywood likes to envision the future of our society sliding into some extreme immoral abyss... the exact opposite is actually happening...but that's a whole other thread.

[BIGREDIOWAN]

Extremely scary stuff................I read that article this morning and was like WTF!?!?

[JJ Husker]

Good discussion fellas. Lots of good points raised and angles explored. Thanks for the OP carl. Good topic.

[Undone]

Just because Hollywood likes to envision the future of our society sliding into some extreme immoral abyss... the exact opposite is actually happening...but that's a whole other thread.

Extreme immoral abyss. Yes, I'd say that definitely deserves a completely different thread.

 

But again, for practically the fifth time, what we're talking about here is abuse of the 5th amendment. If you don't interpret it that way, I get it. But it seems to me that a strong case can be made that these drone strikes *are* a 5th amendment violation, because there's literally no due process whatsoever.

 

It's interesting how people play the constitution card when it works in their favor. But who cares about those poor bumpkins getting the sh!t blown out of them, right? Because we're Americans, and they're not. If that's not the definition of a slippery slope, I don't know what is.

[Conga3]

Just because Hollywood likes to envision the future of our society sliding into some extreme immoral abyss... the exact opposite is actually happening...but that's a whole other thread.

Extreme immoral abyss. Yes, I'd say that definitely deserves a completely different thread.

 

But again, for practically the fifth time, what we're talking about here is abuse of the 5th amendment. If you don't interpret it that way, I get it. But it seems to me that a strong case can be made that these drone strikes *are* a 5th amendment violation, because there's literally no due process whatsoever.

 

It's interesting how people play the constitution card when it works in their favor. But who cares about those poor bumpkins getting the sh!t blown out of them, right? Because we're Americans, and they're not. If that's not the definition of a slippery slope, I don't know what is.

 

I don't much like the idea of a senior Taliban leader being protected by the US Constitution...

 

...cause that's what we're talking about.

[Chaddyboxer]

Welcome to your Police State.........

This is all I will add to the thread. = )

[Undone]

Conga, it must be nice to live in that bubble of yours where you trust your government to do the right thing.

 

I don't. But that's just me.

[Conga3]

Welcome to your Police State.........

This is all I will add to the thread. = )

LOL, and the thread comes full circle with....

 

I find the government wanting to disarm the people far more concerning (and "police state"-like) than the Obama Justice Department drone bombing 'American' Taliban leaders in Afghanistan/Pakistan...