posted on Mar, 8 2013 @ 07:17 PM
Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
I agree with the use of drones to kill individuals who are suspected terrorists who present a clear threat to national security.
BUT, and it’s a big BUT
There has to be more strict and transparent rules governing who is targeted and why the are targeted this practice of sending a hellfire missile up
the butt of anyone who has ever met a Al-Qa’ida member is just ridiculous and counterproductive, so this could be a good thing if its done right.
Drone strikes I think are needed but only in some very rare cases where there is no alternative.
You know, this assassination and torture business is getting entirely out of hand. There is another story running right now about Bin Laden's
Son-in-Law who is mysteriously appearing in U.S. Custody in New York City in what sounds like a recent rendition from overseas. Isn't that also
something we aren't supposed to be doing anymore to hear them talk...but obviously are?
I think there is a fair, American and proper way to solve this problem because I DO agree in saying there are extreme examples where targeted
assassination may not only be necessary but be the very best option for hundreds or perhaps even thousands of other people in the line of being
impacted by something.
We need to pass a proper numbered Constitutional Amendment
declaring that 1). The United States will engage in these things at times and 2), in
order to DO those things *ALL NINE* of the Supreme Court Justices must sit, hear and UNANIMOUSLY AGREE on the course of action and in advance. No
split decision. No B.S.. All or it isn't approved to happen and it's *ALL* on the record.
It can be a classified session for the times, when details during
a shooting war aren't necessarily for the public (and enemy) to read ...but
also with absolute timelines to public release of the transcripts of all hearings/decisions on these things after xx years. By law...in the
That, in my view, would be a compromise all would be served enough by to satisfy the needs of just about all sides who could step back from ideology
for it's own sake.