February 07, 2013

Just to be clear ...

... I actually agree with Boss Obama's drone strikes against al Qaeda (and whatever other radical Islamist terror groups), even if they include American citizens. Why should it matter what your current citizenship is if you freely decide to join a bunch of illegal combatants in order to do violence to innocent people? It shouldn't, in my opinion (and in that of many others, too).

The issue is the brazen, unadulterated hypocrisy of the mainstream media and the Left as a whole on this matter. When the previous administration went to great lengths to justify how they waged the war on radical Islamists, it was pilloried on a daily basis by the MSM, and "progressives" staged "peace" marches and complained hourly about human rights abuses.

Now, we see this: New York Times and Washington Post Knew About Secret Drone Base In Saudi Arabia and Agreed Not to Report It. And this. And this -- the NYT puts the story on page eleven. And this. The liberal Kirsten Powers nails it: "They're clearly hypocrites. They clearly don't really care about human rights. They only care if it helps them politically."

Meanwhile, locally, our Local Gaggle of Moonbat Bloggers -- who bitched and moaned daily when George W. Bush was offering legal opinions much less controversial than Boss Obama's -- is now concentrating on the great import of stuff like Chris Christie's weight, Karl Rove and GOP infighting, and Fox News ditching Dick Morris.

Posted by Hube at February 7, 2013 11:10 AM | TrackBack

Comments  (We reserve the right to edit and/or delete any comments. If your comment is blocked or won't post, e-mail us and we'll post it for you.)

Hmm...I have to be the loyal opposition here. I need more than the President's say so that this person is a terrorist. I do agree that Al Qaeda has given up their right to be afforded the laws of war. That said, we do need some sort of mechanism, legal or otherwise to make a compelling case that someone is a threat and/or part of a terrorist group like Al Qaeda before snuffing them. I have a hard time thinking that a 16 year old boy is such a grave threat to us that he needed to be killed by a drone strike. It would be a different matter if he was killed because he was next to his father who was a known terrorist leader.

Posted by: Duffy at February 7, 2013 01:16 PM

Yeah, but isn't this a simplification of what actually occurs? IOW, the prez would give the final order based on what is given to him by the intel agencies, advisers, etc., correct?

Posted by: Hube at February 7, 2013 01:42 PM

I don't know and that's what I see as the problem. I need to know there's a process and one that isn't just a bunch of people who would ordinarily agree with each other. It has to be adversarial. Someone along the chain has to be trying to poke holes in the case. Otherwise I could see this being not just overused but outright abused.

Posted by: Duffy at February 7, 2013 01:45 PM

This is one of the admittedly few cases where I agree with him, too. I don't care if they take out terrorists, even if they're American citizens.

That said, the hypocrisy from the left is overwhelming. If this were Bush, they'd be screaming bloody murder.

Posted by: Carl at February 7, 2013 02:15 PM

Post a comment









Remember personal info?