Comments on: How Obama’s drone war is backfiring Fri, 31 Jul 2015 03:37:49 +0000 hourly 1 By: 12356 Wed, 21 Mar 2012 19:36:48 +0000 “..when we kill wolves, if a few wolf pups also die, so what? Our Predators are killing foreign predators and future predators who would gladly slit the throats of any f us had they the chance. As an American I loose no sleep at all..” – courtesy :OneOfTheSheep.

– Guys, what percentage of americans think on similar lines!!! Gosh if it’s more than 1%, then we have a real sick humanity on this continent.

By: KJeroH Wed, 14 Mar 2012 15:38:33 +0000 What the writer points to as failures is more due to overall conditions in Pakistan and Yemen. The strained relations with Pakistan are more due to the constant criticism they are bombarded with for not cooperating with the war on terror, despite two leaders being overthrown for that exact reason. The current leader is not “weak” due to drone strikes, but to continued support for the US.

Further, trying to compare the executive powers President Obama has “claimed” to those of President Bush is ridiculous. Pres. Bush took so much heat because he: 1) Openly saw the Constitution as a hindrance to his ability to rule; 2) His Administration therefore sought to circumvent it at every opportunity; 3) He compromised Judicial branch by having it find ways to shred the Constitution; 4) He sought to eliminate legislative and judicial interference with any actions he may take by claiming National Security allowed him to do so; 5) Pres. Bush actively used torture; 6) He believed tapping the phones of every single American was allowed without a warrant; 7) His Administration was prepared to suspend “sections” of the Constitution without legislative or judicial oversight. Suspending any part of the Constitution is suspending the entire document because they are all co-supportive. Despite giving an oath to defend the Constitution, Pres. Bush’s Administration, arguably hijacked by Vice President Richard Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, did everything but burn it on the White House lawn.

By: txgadfly Mon, 05 Mar 2012 19:41:11 +0000 Is there any limit at all on what US Government officials can do to people?

Practically, no. If the Government would randomly select 10,000 US citizens and torture them to death on tv by the Reflecting Pool, under current practice they would be immune to prosecution. We have recreated unlimited autocratic power. The justification here is the same one always used by dictators — they can obviously do no wrong, by definition.

This is a system a reasonable person would die for? This is what we want other countries to emulate? This is the system we want to live under?

By: MohamedMalleck Mon, 05 Mar 2012 15:44:59 +0000 Among a significant portion of the intellectuals of the developing world, the phrase qualifying Obama as “Assassin-in-Chief” rather than Commander-in-Chief has morphed from a jibe to a deadly serious call of warning against the excesses of the marriage of technology with blind warmongering.

By: echobravotango Sun, 04 Mar 2012 20:21:39 +0000 My concern regarding drone strikes is that the controllers of such military actions are so removed both physically and psychologically from the bombings that it’s intellectually easier to execute these attacks. Modern military training has already increase American soldiers “willingness to kill” ratios from a low of mid-30s during WWII to 90% today. Drones are now flying “missions” over the United States. My gravest concern is it’s only a matter of time before they are used to attack a gang of suspected “drug-runners” at first & once that door is kicked-in so to speak, Americans will have to confront the true nature of our unchecked militarism and greed in our own back yards. Maybe not this year but soon very soon and the resulting chaos will not be described by euphemisms related to medicine or clever jingoistic slogans meant to dehumanize the victims because then they -the victims- will be on the same side as the media pimps who prostituted the propaganda of lies to rationalize the crimes previously relegated to foreign citizens.
It’s sad really but Americans have no one to blame but themselves. Ignorant, bloated & angry for all the wrong reasons. Addicted, distracted and divided over simple human rights such as housing, abortion and habeas corpus. Seemingly concerned, Americans look to the mid-east or Asia and ask why? I look to the US and ask why not… ?

By: GMavros Sun, 04 Mar 2012 19:24:47 +0000 AND HOW LONG BEFORE THEY OBTAIN THEIR OWN DRONES ?

By: txgadfly Sat, 03 Mar 2012 01:59:57 +0000 Unfortunately, military and intelligence related technology advances end up primarily used to spy on a country’s own citizens. Here in the USA, how difficult is it to find some type of political activist who thinks harming a fellow citizen who disagrees with him is a good idea? It is not hard at all.

For starters, operating an unmanned aircraft within the airspace of the USA without a specific, non-“John Doe” warrant should be a Federal felony. Criminal liability should rise upward through the chain of command at least three levels. There should be no limitation on how long indictment could take. If such an individual is not indicted within three years, any US human person (no corporations) should be able to file a civil suit against whoever did the offense for a minimum of the value of all accrued Federal employment benefits of each and every kind.

The least punished crime in America is a crime against the American public and the American Constitution. Time for a change!

By: Gordon2352 Fri, 02 Mar 2012 21:41:51 +0000 Actually, the “Drone War” is going quite well … for the US Military/Industrial Complex, that is.

If you want to read an absolutely fascinating article on the US Drone Warfare program, I suggest you check out this article in the Asia Times Online.

How drone war became the American Way
By Tom Engelhardt

For your convenience, here is the web page to the article: omy/NC03Dj02.html

By: slnsimhan Fri, 02 Mar 2012 18:36:22 +0000 The article by Mr.Rhodesis blatantly motivated by opposition interest along with possibly self interest sympathizing cited countries which have not acted fairly with US in the first place. It is appalling that a Pulitzer winner is turning the table on president Obama who was given the pre-election goal of eliminating all the terror sources to save our country. It is not a show of honest thinking to SHOW we are sympathizing with countries plotting subversive activities in the USA and should be humane to them to look good in history. This is clearly cooked up with election stunts, asking a Pulitzer prize winner to make twisted statements. I disagree specifically with the statement that the pre-Obama sovereignty of our country was saintly (may be before world war II)- amnesia Mr. Rhodes? Remember Vietnam, Help to Shah of Iran to cite a couple and domestically Watergate all involving US presidents’ decisions? Politics thrives on people’s memory or lack thereof. History never forgets good and bad and the final results. In any case, drones did not spring up in Obama’s time. Bush simply did not have the intelligence to use them. OUR US DEFENSE PERSONNEL MUST BE PROUD OF INVENTING DRONES THAT SAVE OUR SONS’ AND DAUGHTERS’ LIVES IN THE ARMED FORCES. CRY OUT LOUD IF WE GO INTO A NEW COUNTRY THAT IS NOT AT ODDS WITH US AND WE DEPLOY THE DRONES FOR DESTRUCTION. Already there are many ways drones can be used for peaceful purposes – by Appalledbyblurredvision.

By: Wantunbiasednew Fri, 02 Mar 2012 10:29:50 +0000 My apologies, I just read that you are one of the best political journalists in US, 2 times Pulitzer-winner.
It is not lack of your insight that forces you to write such articles. It is self-censorship called political correctness.