B-Daddy at The Liberator Today, initiates a great discussion regarding the legality of killing U.S. citizens overseas, specifically the drone strike that took the life of American-born Anwar al-Awlaki and the use of state secrecy laws as implied justification for the killing. He finishes off his post with this:
Meanwhile we continue with the irony of Obama looking very Bush-like in the use of state secrecy laws to shield inquiry into the legality of the administration's actions in the war on terror. What incongruity will we next face, perhaps anti-Wall Street protests supporting an administration filled with bankers and financiers?
Posts
3 comments:
I think that the left is learning that Bush wasn't such a moron after all.
Thanks for the link. The issue is very troubling, because we are very close to the knife edge. Killing American traitors on the battlefield when they take up arms against our country? No problem. Operating drones to kill a specific American who was mostly a propagandist in a country that we are not at war with? Tougher. Where do we draw the line? What is the distinction between combat operations and revenge? When are we going to withdraw the blank check the President was given to prosecute the war on terror?
Cheney was right.... Obama owes the Bush Admin an apology.
{Holding Breath]
Post a Comment