President Obama’s nomination of John Brennan to lead the CIA signals that drone strikes will continue to be an important part of the CIA’s mission. Brennan began advising President Obama on the use of unmanned aerial vehicles after being named his counterterrorism adviser in 2009. Brennan’s nomination raises anew the controversies surrounding the targeted killings and the deliberate lack of institutional oversight of these methods.
Last fall, the Obama administration was reportedly hard at work codifying its rules for assassination by drone. Organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union had been pressing for such an effort, and it appeared that the administration was at last receptive to their arguments. However, the rules that administration officials were so busily drafting were meant for Mitt Romney, in case he won the election. Rather than leave the decision-making in the hands of a new president, Obama officials had suddenly become aware of the dangers of letting a single, in this case Republican, person make life-or-death decisions.
Comments
Funny how they were concerned with a republican having control over drone strikes but President Obama has a kill list. No mention of the thousands of innocent people, including children killed every year by drone strikes, of course not, that's only when we have a republican in the white house. The times square bomber, when asked why he would try to blow up women and children his answer was, your drones are killing our children everyday.
It is amazing. A president who wanted to criminalize the tatics of his predessessor is now the world's leading assassin. He wanted to bring charges against CIA officials who administered water boarding; yet can wipe out scores of innocent people who happen to be near the target of his killing.
Spot on! Obama and his MoveOn supporters are complete hypocrites. George W. is supposedly a war criminal because a few terrorists were given rough treatment. Obama, on the other hand, has escalated drone strikes with LOTS of "collateral damage." But Obama received the Nobel Peace Prize so I guess he is free to use drones. George Orwell must be spinning in his grave.
Hyperbole much? Apparently both of these scholars want us to retire our entire complement of bombers, cruise missiles, long-range artillery, etc, because "scores of innocent people happen to be near". Thet would would also criticize the President because Seal Team Six "executed" OBL. We are at war, and innocents will be killed. BTW, these same two savants will demand that they have personal access to assault weapons and high capacity clips, because of their "constitutional rights". Hypocrites!
"Richmond" you and "migh" crack me up as do all the zealots. When GW was killing thousands of innocents it's okay. A Dem does it he's an assassin. Now I happen to think the 1st Iraq war was okay, the 2nd not so much. I approve of Bush's use of drones as I do Obama's. I liked the Heritage foundations idea for mandatory health insurance and I liked Obama's. But you all split the difference by party as if one party somehow represented one view of America and the other represented a different view. The fact is they both reprsent the same thing. Neither wants to end "free enterprise" or make America "socialist" on the Dem. side or "fascist" on the right side.
Policies are policies and they are not monolithic. If a Repub. had the nerve to support rational gun laws Repubs. would go along. Perhaps you would be better served by asking the question, Is the policy a good one? Not who institutes the policy. I for one do not like the extension of American power, however it is sometimes necessary. I prefer to see it carried out in limited fashion as is being done now as opposed to massive use of American troops. So it's a good policy regardless of who does it.
atturk, If bush was using the drones like Obama is, the press would be bashing him beyond belief, not a word from them now. Are you referring to War when saying Bush killed thousands? He certainly didn't do it with drones nor did he have a personal kill list.
al Qaeda, the Taliban, even the various drug gangs and cartels, have declared war on the USA in act if not in declaration. Loss of innocent life is deplorable, but not nearly as cowardly as using families, women, and children and the elderly as human shields. The alternative is all-out war, and the greater loss of innocent life that comes with it, and these terrorist and criminal groups have given us permission to respond by their own actions. Let Faisal Shahzad, Tarek Mehanna, and Mahmoud Ahmadinajad think about that as they engage in sanctimonious posturing and plotting.
This comment has been removed.
This comment has been removed.