Drone policy

[noddy]

the trophy hunting thread triggered me some delicious black humour about replacement technology for drones in regards air dropping rich clients into the afpak border region for top dollar thats donated to worthy local projects in the region.

i wonder if having a militant taliban head on your wall is less politically incorrect than a tiger or elephant.

or the other side of it.

i wonder if rich men with large gun fetishes getting butchered by the local militants would trigger any concerns on troop deaths.

[Mr. Perfect]

Guess everyone forgot the first gulf war when they would show smart bomb footage to the press and they usually had people hoot and yell with glee and then follow it up with applause. If they started showing drone footage on broadcast television it would be a sensation and probably the highest rated show on television. Since I don't follow gaming is anyone selling a drone hunter video game yet? That would be a best seller and no one wants to admit it.

Couple of differences there.

Gulf War 1 had kind of a point to it, and most of the targets were ostensibly military, the point of the whole thing was to defeat Saddam's army, which took about a week IIRC.

This drone campaign has been going on for years, accomplishes no observable political or military goals, targets we don't know who for we don't know what reason on we don't know what intelligence, and kills civilians routinely, across several different countries.

All very subjective judgements.

[Endovelico]

At the risk of offending some good and honest people in the US I can't help thinking that the US has become a very dangerous and immoral country, and American people - as long as they don't stop their murderous rulers - as accomplice to the crimes carried out by those rulers. What puzzles me is the inability of those many honest Americans in stopping what is happening.

We elect people who say they will scale it back and then they don't, or they do it so slowly that it's barely perceptible and then they leave the office to someone who is a warmonger. The last President who actually went after the war machine was Jimmy Carter and he got remembered as an incompetent buffoon by the machine that he went after.

Attack the CIA and the Iranians will hold hostages until the inauguration day of the next President.

Third-Party Presidential Debate Talks Foreign Policy
All candidates condemned military interventionism, wars of choice, and drones
by John Glaser, October 23, 2012

Four presidential candidates running in third parties and excluded from the major Republican-Democratic debates gathered in Chicago Tuesday night to partake in a debate of their own, discussing issues foreign and domestic.

The candidates included Libertarian Party nominee Gary Johnson, Green Party nominee Jill Stein, Constitution Party nominee Virgil Goode, and Justice Party nominee Rocky Anderson. The debate was moderated by former CNN host Larry King and hosted by the nonpartisan Free and Equal Elections Foundation.

Much of the debate centered on the unfair advantages and control provided to the two major parties over the election cycle. In opening statements following a question about ballot access, Justice Party’s Mr. Anderson ridiculed President Obama and Governor Mitt Romney in the last debate bragging about who would spend more on the military.

Libertarian Party nominee Gary Johnson followed up by claiming that whether Obama or Romney wins, the result will be the same. “We will still be heading towards a police state,” we will still engage in “military interventionism,” which has “created enemies that otherwise would not exist.”

Johnson went on to harshly condemn the drone war, saying it doesn’t just take out militants, but “takes out a lot of innocent civilians.” He added that “we should end the [Afghanistan] war tomorrow,” that we should “repeal the PATRIOT ACT,” and that he never would have signed the NDAA, which allows for Americans “to be arrested and detained without charge or trial.” All four candidates went on to condemn the NDAA.

The second question asked about foreign policy. Gary Johnson said defense is a fundamental power of government, but that it should be defense, “not offense.” He proposed imposing a 43 percent reduction in military spending, that we need to “get out of these countries, stop the interventions, and stop the drone strikes,” and end foreign aid, which serves primarily to ”prop up foreign dictators.”

Johnson also warned about “unintended consequences” of US foreign policy, criticizing current US efforts to aid the rebels in Syria, which he described as “jihadists,” before asking, “did we not learn anything from Afghanistan?” referring to US aid to the mujahideen in the 80s against the Soviets.

Finally, Johnson noted that the largest demonstrations in support of the United States following the 9/11 attacks occurred in Iran, and now some people in the US are advocating an unprovoked war on Iran for a nuclear weapons program it doesn’t have. He warned the US could end up killing those very same people that stood in solidarity with Americans following 9/11, and that this kind of war would generate “100 million new enemies.”

Green Party nominee Jill Stein similarly denounced a foreign policy “based on militarism,” saying it is “making us less secure.” She said we should move to cut the defense budget, “bring our troops home, and put an end to drones.” She said as president she would gather the international community to establish an international law “to permanently ban the use of drones as a method of war” and as a tool “to spy on Americans.”

Stein also condemned drones for the “blowback” they cause, pointing out that the US has often “bombed weddings and funerals.” She concluded by saying the US should have a foreign policy based on “international law and human rights.”

Virgil Goode of the Constitution Party said that although he supports “a strong defense,” he would cut defense spending and “save us billions of dollars.” Unlike the other candidates, he did not condemn specific elements of US foreign policy, but insisted that American needs to “retrench,” and condemned a policy of “policing the world.”

Justice Party nominee Rocky Anderson referenced President Dwight Eisenhower’s farewell speech in which he warned about the military industrial complex, and condemned “massive federal spending on wasteful project” in the defense sector.

Anderson said there should be “no wars of aggression,” and slammed the Iraq war as “an illegal war” based on the Nuremberg principles laid down after WWII and based on Constitutional requirements for Congress to declare war in order for the president to commit the US to hostilities.

http://news.antiwar.com/2012/10/23/thir ... gn-policy/

Pity not too many people will find it worthwhile voting for these candidates. But maybe the effort should be made first on local and state elections, and for Congress, before trying to run for President.

[Parodite]

If drones are so inaccurate and killing so many innocent civilians it is simply immoral to use them. What else is there?

it doesn't seem so ambiguous to me either, i suspect its rhaps english as second language dutch translation, changing "if" to "when" would perhaps help.

(says the guy who has english as a second language when its his first language)

Suppose indeed the "When" would have cleared it. The "If" was meant more like "If it is true that drones are so inaccurate..." etc. after which I asked for data/statistics.

[monster_gardener]

If drones are so inaccurate and killing so many innocent civilians it is simply immoral to use them. What else is there?

it doesn't seem so ambiguous to me either, i suspect its rhaps english as second language dutch translation, changing "if" to "when" would perhaps help.

(says the guy who has english as a second language when its his first language)

Suppose indeed the "When" would have cleared it. The "If" was meant more like "If it is true that drones are so inaccurate..." etc. after which I asked for data/statistics.

Thank you VERY MUCH for your posts, Rhapsody/Parodite & Noddy.

You may be right but I'm not so sure that it would have mattered.....

IMVHO Ibrahim simply had a Big Bad Breivik Bumble Bee* in his Bonnet to Bash Both Parodite & Milo at the same time........

He did that in another thread yesterday and probably just couldn't help himself when he ASSumed he had another opportunity.....

*Probably it was a Drone Bee .....

[Parodite]

IMVHO Ibrahim simply had a Big Bad Breivik Bumble Bee* in his Bonnet to Bash Both Parodite & Milo at the same time........

He did that in another thread yesterday and probably just couldn't help himself when he ASSumed he had another opportunity.....

*Probably it was a Drone Bee .....

Haha indeed MG.

[Taboo]

If it is true that 2%, or even 20% of the deaths are the actual people being sought, that is a terrible indictment of current US policy. Especially as these attacks are carried out with little or no civilian oversight, no trial, no appeal, nothing.

However, I am always wary of taking "aggrieved husbands and fathers" stories at face value. The US is facing hostiles in the tribal region, and they understand perfectly well that by portraying strikes as a weapon that kills almost exclusively civilians, they are scoring political points against the Americans, making it more difficult to continue the attacks.

As to Enki going all Ned Stark and arguing that Americans should go send in the Marines in every time, I don't think the argument holds water. There is no reason to think that sending a few hundred heavily armed grunts who are trained to saturate targets with bullets and who rely heavily on calling in airstrikes would result in fewer civilian casualties, while significantly increasing US casualties.

Bombing a car on an isolated road that is returning from installing a roadside bomb -- perfectly ok.
Bombing a funeral of a militant leader attended by hundreds of men, women and children -- absolutely not ok.

[Enki]

Terrorists are Pirates. We have dealt with piracy for eons. It is a sustained intelligence and enforcement matter, not a war without end.

[Taboo]

Terrorists are Pirates. We have dealt with piracy for eons. It is a sustained intelligence and enforcement matter, not a war without end.

Well, since you just admitted that we have had to deal with piracy "for eons", it does kinda sound like a war without end. The Caribbean was pirate-infested for over 2 centuries. Drones armed with torpedoes, in fact, seem like a great way to put and end to pirates off Somalia's coast.

Hopefully, there are fewer weddings at sea to accidentally hit...

[Hoosiernorm]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ ... video.html

[Hoosiernorm]

Hopefully, there are fewer weddings at sea to accidentally hit...

Allah Don't Surf

[Jnalum Persicum]

.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ ... video.html

.

Very bad .. very bad

justifies others, other powers do same

Think of nuclear bomb dropped on Japan

@ that time, nobody had it, and nobody could do it

but now, most nations can do it

and see what a difficulty west is in now re nuclear bomb

pretty much any nation having nuclear bomb can do anything without being afraid

Drones are low tech, easy and low cost to built .. come in many size

Sky the limit for what evil intentions they could be used

in few yrs, this could be much bigger headache than Nuclear stuff (radioactive stuff much easier to detect, and comes always with signature (finger print), not so drone)

As said, stupid idea, you feel good for a few yrs, later you pay throw the nose

Basically, now, America, officially, kills political opponents, worldwide .. well .. others could do same .. it becomes legit .. this stupid idea started with Zionist killing Palestinians political leaders .. and ? ?


.

[monster_gardener]

Terrorists are Pirates. We have dealt with piracy for eons. It is a sustained intelligence and enforcement matter, not a war without end.

Well, since you just admitted that we have had to deal with piracy "for eons", it does kinda sound like a war without end. The Caribbean was pirate-infested for over 2 centuries. Drones armed with torpedoes, in fact, seem like a great way to put and end to pirates off Somalia's coast.

Hopefully, there are fewer weddings at sea to accidentally hit...

Thank you VERY Much for your post, Taboo.

Agreed but.......

IIRC aren't Ship Captains authorized to officiate at wedding???????????

And if so does that apply to Pirate Ship Captains.....

Could Captain Hook marry Princess Ariel to Prince Eric

Would it apply to gay marriages enabling Somal pirates blown out of the water by a drone to claim that they were just celebrating a gay marriage at sea

[Jnalum Persicum]

.


and


killing political opponents on pretext they planing this and that

can be WAR CRIME


UK support for US drones in Pakistan may be war crime, court is told

.

British government's support for US drone operations over Pakistan may involve acts of assisting murder or even war crimes, the high court heard on Tuesday.

.

.

[monster_gardener]

.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ ... video.html

.

Very bad .. very bad

justifies others, other powers do same

Think of nuclear bomb dropped on Japan

@ that time, nobody had it, and nobody could do it

but now, most nations can do it

and see what a difficulty west is in now re nuclear bomb

pretty much any nation having nuclear bomb can do anything without being afraid

Drones are low tech, easy and low cost to built .. come in many size

Sky the limit for what evil intentions they could be used

in few yrs, this could be much bigger headache than Nuclear stuff (radioactive stuff much easier to detect, and comes always with signature (finger print), not so drone)

As said, stupid idea, you feel good for a few yrs, later you pay throw the nose

Basically, now, America, officially, kills political opponents, worldwide .. well .. others could do same .. it becomes legit .. this stupid idea started with Zionist killing Palestinians political leaders .. and ? ?


.

Thank you Very Much for your post, Azari.........

You have some points but........

Basically, now, America, officially, kills political opponents, worldwide ..

Old news..... At least as old as the Old Man of the Mountain and the Assassins.........

And really earlier...........

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ehud

If you want something more recent try AyaToilet Khomeni's Fatwa against Salmon Rushdie and anyone connected with the Satanic Verses...... Remembering that Japanese Translator who was killed by Murderous Muslim Maniacs........



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitoshi_Igarashi

Or for something closer to the Afghan Home where the Drones now roam........

Remembering that Northern Alliance leader who was killed by Al Queda Tallywackers right before September 11, 2001......

They too used a 'drone'..... a fake video camera filled with explosives.......

[Milo]

Drones are as inevitable as the sunrise, either develop and employ them or be killed by those who do.

Of course, the Muslim world is free to develop: drones, computer viruses, democracy, rule of law, video games, biotech...

But they don't.

This is obviously because they are too moral to do so, or maybe because the west is always sabotaging them (certainly there's no documented cases of the Muslims world sabotaging the west... ever!), or whatever the Muslim world says is the reason they are developing no technology or science to speak of; because Islam is not the problem.

Anyway, the point is that Islam has nothing to do with the problems of the Muslim world and that actions taken by the US to minimize casualties are always wrong. In fact, as already suggested, the US should try to maximize its casualties, because that's what the Islamic world does, and the Islamic world certainly has the moral high ground for doing so.

[Enki]

Pity not too many people will find it worthwhile voting for these candidates. But maybe the effort should be made first on local and state elections, and for Congress, before trying to run for President.

You mean like Governor of New Mexico, Mayor of Salt Lake City, or Congressman from Virginia?

[Ibrahim]

Drones are as inevitable as the sunrise, either develop and employ them or be killed by those who do.

This is a myth and fantasy of several levels. First, is assumes that these drone strikes are killing important and dangerous targets, one who, in Milo's world, would have been able to kill "us" had they not been so neutralized. There is no evidence of this whatsoever. Second, it assumes that there is no other means to fight people, when in fact many other tools do exist, they are just more difficult to use, and third it assumes that Milo's potential safety in mother's basement is more important that the Afghan children blown to pieces by drone strikes of dubious value. No doubt Milo deeply believes this, though that does not make it true.

Of course, the Muslim world is free to develop: drones,

What is "the Muslim world?" In any case Iran and Turkey have drone programs that I am aware of. Perhaps Milo means groups like "al Qaeda" who are the ones these mass civilian killings are ostensibly protecting him from? They do not have drones, but they have IEDs and suicide bombers, which are morally and practically the same thing. They relatively cheaply kill large numbers of civilians for some vague ideological benefit. The are exactly morally equivalent to the drone program, except that the actual killers expose themselves to greater personal risk.

Anyway, the point is that Islam has nothing to do with the problems of the Muslim world and that actions taken by the US to minimize casualties are always wrong.

The drone program does not minimize casualties. It causes significant numbers of civilian casualties for no perceptible benefit.

In fact, as already suggested, the US should try to maximize its casualties, because that's what the Islamic world does, and the Islamic world certainly has the moral high ground for doing so.

There is no moral high ground here, or if there is you are not standing on it. The US military (and you) share the same morality as terrorists. This is what you are advocating and defending, the mass killing of civilians for some perceived and probably non-existent self interest. Or just because you like the idea of Afghan children dying.

The assumption, absent any evidence, that these strikes and necessary and worthwhile, absent any evidence to that effect, is almost cult-like in certain quarters.

[Ibrahim]

Hopefully, there are fewer weddings at sea to accidentally hit...

Actually the weddings are struck on purposes. There is now evidence to suggest that the CIA organized the wedding and selected the bride for Anwar al-Awlaki in order to facilitate its strike on him.* Anyone else killed in the attack? Well the young men we automatically call militants (like his teenage son, also a US citizen) but the women, children and old men? Oh well, they had to die. It was necessary for your safety.

*checking up on this, he was hit in his car en route to a gathering related to the wedding, so relatively fewer civilian casualties in this attack. Perhaps the Pentagon predicted that killing a US citizen would raise more questions than the average strike.




I don't understand the Apocalypse Now reference.

[Ibrahim]

If it is true that 2%, or even 20% of the deaths are the actual people being sought, that is a terrible indictment of current US policy. Especially as these attacks are carried out with little or no civilian oversight, no trial, no appeal, nothing.

However, I am always wary of taking "aggrieved husbands and fathers" stories at face value. The US is facing hostiles in the tribal region, and they understand perfectly well that by portraying strikes as a weapon that kills almost exclusively civilians, they are scoring political points against the Americans, making it more difficult to continue the attacks.

1. It doesn't make it difficult to continue the attacks, nobody in America cares.

2. What do you think they are lying about? The US government already decided that all men were "militants" no matter what, so their assumed lying would be about the innocence of their wives, daughters, babies, and grandfathers killed by Hellfire missiles. Safe to assume they are on the level most of the time.

[Enki]

Al Qaeda is going to be flying solar powered quadrotors controlled by smart phones that can fly a bit of plastique through a window.

We've unleashed this and Milo is probably right, it's not going back in the bottle. Luckily back in the 1980s there was an instruction manual created for it back in the late 80s.



The solution is simple, you need to send a recruit who was trained by the messiah back in time to protect the messiah's mother from the robot soldier that will be sent back in time by the overlord computer network that won't be built until after the robot gets sent back and Cyberdyne reverse engineers the processing core from the robot's brain.

[monster_gardener]

If it is true that 2%, or even 20% of the deaths are the actual people being sought, that is a terrible indictment of current US policy. Especially as these attacks are carried out with little or no civilian oversight, no trial, no appeal, nothing.

However, I am always wary of taking "aggrieved husbands and fathers" stories at face value. The US is facing hostiles in the tribal region, and they understand perfectly well that by portraying strikes as a weapon that kills almost exclusively civilians, they are scoring political points against the Americans, making it more difficult to continue the attacks.

As to Enki going all Ned Stark and arguing that Americans should go send in the Marines in every time, I don't think the argument holds water. There is no reason to think that sending a few hundred heavily armed grunts who are trained to saturate targets with bullets and who rely heavily on calling in airstrikes would result in fewer civilian casualties, while significantly increasing US casualties.

Bombing a car on an isolated road that is returning from installing a roadside bomb -- perfectly ok.
Bombing a funeral of a militant leader attended by hundreds of men, zhyujwomen and children -- absolutely not ok.

as

Thank you VERY Much for your post, Taboo.

Good post.

As to Enki going all Ned Stark and arguing that Americans should go send in the Marines in every time,

Ned Stark was Very honorable but look what happened to the Stark Family : 3 or 4 dead (1 undead), 1 maimed the rest scattered

But that is what happens when you act dumber than your "Shaggy Dog"

So dumb that you don't pay attention when your Wolf warns you that Dire things are about to happen...

And remembering the discussion on the Starks here..... Even Ibrahim didn't like the follow the rules & do the right thing Starks.........

But it seems that Stark Trek Next Gen is going to be different........ Especially that Arya grrl......

She has a little list.....
Of people who will never be missed......

And her Mummy of a Mommy who is back with a vengeance...

[monster_gardener]

If it is true that 2%, or even 20% of the deaths are the actual people being sought, that is a terrible indictment of current US policy. Especially as these attacks are carried out with little or no civilian oversight, no trial, no appeal, nothing.

However, I am always wary of taking "aggrieved husbands and fathers" stories at face value. The US is facing hostiles in the tribal region, and they understand perfectly well that by portraying strikes as a weapon that kills almost exclusively civilians, they are scoring political points against the Americans, making it more difficult to continue the attacks.

1. It doesn't make it difficult to continue the attacks, nobody in America cares.

2. What do you think they are lying about? The US government already decided that all men were "militants" no matter what, so their assumed lying would be about the innocence of their wives, daughters, babies, and grandfathers killed by Hellfire missiles. Safe to assume they are on the level most of the time.

Thank you for your post, Ibrahim.

1. It doesn't make it difficult to continue the attacks, nobody in America cares.

Wrong again, Ibrahim..........

Enki/Tinker cares for one..........

And even I am concerned......

Do you read this forum or are you just scanning till you find an opportunity to insult America or Israel or Rhapsody etc?

[Jnalum Persicum]

.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ ... video.html

.

Very bad .. very bad

justifies others, other powers do same

Think of nuclear bomb dropped on Japan

@ that time, nobody had it, and nobody could do it

but now, most nations can do it

and see what a difficulty west is in now re nuclear bomb

pretty much any nation having nuclear bomb can do anything without being afraid

Drones are low tech, easy and low cost to built .. come in many size

Sky the limit for what evil intentions they could be used

in few yrs, this could be much bigger headache than Nuclear stuff (radioactive stuff much easier to detect, and comes always with signature (finger print), not so drone)

As said, stupid idea, you feel good for a few yrs, later you pay throw the nose

Basically, now, America, officially, kills political opponents, worldwide .. well .. others could do same .. it becomes legit .. this stupid idea started with Zionist killing Palestinians political leaders .. and ? ?


.

Thank you Very Much for your post, Azari.........

You have some points but........

Basically, now, America, officially, kills political opponents, worldwide ..

Old news..... At least as old as the Old Man of the Mountain and the Assassins.........

And really earlier...........

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ehud

If you want something more recent try AyaToilet Khomeni's Fatwa against Salmon Rushdie and anyone connected with the Satanic Verses...... Remembering that Japanese Translator who was killed by Murderous Muslim Maniacs........



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitoshi_Igarashi

Or for something closer to the Afghan Home where the Drones now roam........

Remembering that Northern Alliance leader who was killed by Al Queda Tallywackers right before September 11, 2001......

They too used a 'drone'..... a fake video camera filled with explosives.......

Monster ,

you miss the point

yes,

the Assasans, Alamut mountain

and

poor Rushdi

and and

but

that episode condemned by most

on the other hand

Obama gettin "Nobel Price" for doing same as that Khomeini FATWA or Assasans

not same

Yes, bad things & guys, Hitler, Tchigiz, Stalin, Opium War and and and

but , getting a "Nobel Price" and American people loving it, another thing

and

come a time, you can't go German : we did not know .. YOU KNOW everything


You lowering the bar day in day out .. making criminal, for animal reserved actions,
salonfähig, socially acceptable.

Not good for humanity, not at all

and

those killed by drones represent schools of thought, they must be beaten by opposing school of thought, killing them does not stop what they preaching .. that is why, Mc Cain saying, Al Qaida is
well and alive

If you know their position, if so, you can get them alive and put on TV and show their school
rubbish .. that is how this things going to be defeated and not just dropping a missile on them.






.

[monster_gardener]

.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ ... video.html

.

Very bad .. very bad

justifies others, other powers do same

Think of nuclear bomb dropped on Japan

@ that time, nobody had it, and nobody could do it

but now, most nations can do it

and see what a difficulty west is in now re nuclear bomb

pretty much any nation having nuclear bomb can do anything without being afraid

Drones are low tech, easy and low cost to built .. come in many size

Sky the limit for what evil intentions they could be used

in few yrs, this could be much bigger headache than Nuclear stuff (radioactive stuff much easier to detect, and comes always with signature (finger print), not so drone)

As said, stupid idea, you feel good for a few yrs, later you pay throw the nose

Basically, now, America, officially, kills political opponents, worldwide .. well .. others could do same .. it becomes legit .. this stupid idea started with Zionist killing Palestinians political leaders .. and ? ?


.

Thank you Very Much for your post, Azari.........

You have some points but........

Basically, now, America, officially, kills political opponents, worldwide ..

Old news..... At least as old as the Old Man of the Mountain and the Assassins.........

And really earlier...........

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ehud

If you want something more recent try AyaToilet Khomeni's Fatwa against Salmon Rushdie and anyone connected with the Satanic Verses...... Remembering that Japanese Translator who was killed by Murderous Muslim Maniacs........



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitoshi_Igarashi

Or for something closer to the Afghan Home where the Drones now roam........

Remembering that Northern Alliance leader who was killed by Al Queda Tallywackers right before September 11, 2001......

They too used a 'drone'..... a fake video camera filled with explosives.......

Monster ,

you miss the point

yes,

the Assasans, Alamut mountain

and

poor Rushdi

and and

but

that episode condemned by most

on the other hand

Obama gettin "Nobel Price" for doing same as that Khomeini FATWA or Assasans

not same

Yes, bad things & guys, Hitler, Tchigiz, Stalin, Opium War and and and

but , getting a "Nobel Price" and American people loving it, another thing

and

come a time, you can't go German : we did not know .. YOU KNOW everything


You lowering the bar day in day out .. making criminal, for animal reserved actions,
salonfähig, socially acceptable.

Not good for humanity, not at all

and

those killed by drones represent schools of thought, they must be beaten by opposing school of thought, killing them does not stop what they preaching .. that is why, Mc Cain saying, Al Qaida is
well and alive

If you know their position, if so, you can get them alive and put on TV and show their school
rubbish .. that is how this things going to be defeated and not just dropping a missile on them.






.

Thank You VERY Much for your post.........

You are right....... The bar is dropping.......... We are heading for a Phillip K. Dickensian World.........

But............

but , getting a "Nobel Price" and American people loving it, another thing

Not Down in the Black Gang...... Not down in my Red Neck of the Woods........

We thought it was a farce so hilarious that we started nominating Obama for other awards as ridiculous as possible..... things like IIRC the Heisman Trophy....... Listen to Hannity....... His name for Obama is:

/Sarcasm On

The Messiah

/Sarcasm Off

those killed by drones represent schools of thought, they must be beaten by opposing school of thought, killing them does not stop what they preaching .. that is why, Mc Cain saying, Al Qaida is
well and alive

If you know their position, if so, you can get them alive and put on TV and show their school
rubbish .

IMVHO No.........

Putting them on trial mostly gives them a venue to beat their chests, get assassination orders out through their "progressive" lawyers, and make fools of the Justice system and wastes millions of dollars.........

Perhaps going for LWOP instead of the Death penalty could shave some of the costs but Jihadis/Terrorists have a history of taking hostages to get they buddies behind bars out......

May have to do it sometimes but is mostly a waste of time.

IMVHO one part of the solution is give Guns to the Grrls.... and thus jam the Tallywackers and the like......

Another part is getting some of Uz off planet before we Crazy Chaos monkeys Crash this Cage called Earth........