ACLU files suit over Drone killings of US citizens

mikepegg44

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nat ... story.html

What do you guys think?

Most probably know where I stand, but I am glad this will finally have to be answered and have a precedent set. I can only hope that the courts side with the bill of rights and the constitution on this one...

Jason P

If you don't buddy-up w/ al-Qaeda and help plot terrorist attacks against civilians, you have nothing to worry about.

mikepegg44

Jason P wrote:

If you don't buddy-up w/ al-Qaeda and help plot terrorist attacks against civilians, you have nothing to worry about.

Why didn't they simply assassinate Nazi sympathizers? Or all the Japanese who might have been loyalists...The same reason they shouldn't assassinate US citizens now...rights baby...

If all terrorists on the list of the gov't are fair game...I think a lot of people will be surprised when the knock on the door isn't in fact a candygram...

cincybearcat

mikepegg44 wrote:

Jason P wrote:

If you don't buddy-up w/ al-Qaeda and help plot terrorist attacks against civilians, you have nothing to worry about.

Why didn't they simply assassinate Nazi sympathizers? Or all the Japanese who might have been loyalists...The same reason they shouldn't assassinate US citizens now...rights baby...

If all terrorists on the list of the gov't are fair game...I think a lot of people will be surprised when the knock on the door isn't in fact a candygram...

It is an interesting question. This didn't happen on US soil which is a big deal for me. Honestly, I can see the slippery slope but from where I am standing I'm leaning towards being ok with it.

cincybearcat

mikepegg44 wrote:

Jason P wrote:

If you don't buddy-up w/ al-Qaeda and help plot terrorist attacks against civilians, you have nothing to worry about.

Why didn't they simply assassinate Nazi sympathizers? Or all the Japanese who might have been loyalists...The same reason they shouldn't assassinate US citizens now...rights baby...

If all terrorists on the list of the gov't are fair game...I think a lot of people will be surprised when the knock on the door isn't in fact a candygram...

If my door is in yemen and my house is full of terrorists I would never expect a candygram from the us gov't. These guys knew they were targets, it's not like it was a surprise.

mikepegg44

cincybearcat wrote:

mikepegg44 wrote:

Jason P wrote:

If you don't buddy-up w/ al-Qaeda and help plot terrorist attacks against civilians, you have nothing to worry about.

Why didn't they simply assassinate Nazi sympathizers? Or all the Japanese who might have been loyalists...The same reason they shouldn't assassinate US citizens now...rights baby...

If all terrorists on the list of the gov't are fair game...I think a lot of people will be surprised when the knock on the door isn't in fact a candygram...

If my door is in yemen and my house is full of terrorists I would never expect a candygram from the us gov't. These guys knew they were targets, it's not like it was a surprise.

that doesn't matter though...they are american citizens...you are afforded rights...we aren't at war in yemen...it was a targeted assassination of a US citizen...I find it deplorable...I am not defending his dumb ass at all...he was an idiot for getting involved...I worry about the implications that being deemed a terrorist threat seems to be enough justification for being killed, US citizen or not...

Jason P

mikepegg44 wrote:

Jason P wrote:

If you don't buddy-up w/ al-Qaeda and help plot terrorist attacks against civilians, you have nothing to worry about.

Why didn't they simply assassinate Nazi sympathizers? Or all the Japanese who might have been loyalists...The same reason they shouldn't assassinate US citizens now...rights baby...

If all terrorists on the list of the gov't are fair game...I think a lot of people will be surprised when the knock on the door isn't in fact a candygram...

But we are not doing any of the things you suggest. We are taking on a current threat in al-Qaeda. If Nazi sympathizers and Japanese loyalists were hard at work trying to lace underpants with C4 and blow up commercial airliners over Detroit, then it might be a different story.

And how many US citizens have been targeted by drones and for what reasons? Are they going after people evading taxes or stealing girl scout cookies?

Just because you were born in the US doesn't give you immunity if you pose a serious threat, whether you be an al-Qaeda associate or a Bond villain. Much like in Lethal Weapon two, you can only pull so much shit under diplomatic immunity before Riggs puts a round between your eyes.

mikepegg44

Jason P wrote:

mikepegg44 wrote:

Jason P wrote:

If you don't buddy-up w/ al-Qaeda and help plot terrorist attacks against civilians, you have nothing to worry about.

Why didn't they simply assassinate Nazi sympathizers? Or all the Japanese who might have been loyalists...The same reason they shouldn't assassinate US citizens now...rights baby...

If all terrorists on the list of the gov't are fair game...I think a lot of people will be surprised when the knock on the door isn't in fact a candygram...

But we are not doing any of the things you suggest. We are taking on a current threat in al-Qaeda. If Nazi sympathizers and Japanese loyalists were hard at work trying to lace underpants with C4 and blow up commercial airliners over Detroit, then it might be a different story.

And how many US citizens have been targeted by drones and for what reasons? Are they going after people evading taxes or stealing girl scout cookies?

Just because you were born in the US doesn't give you immunity if you pose a serious threat, whether you be an al-Qaeda associate or a Bond villain. Much like in Lethal Weapon two, you can only pull so much shit under diplomatic immunity before Riggs puts a round between your eyes.

HAS JUST BEEN REVOKED!!

when you are born here you are born with certain unalienable rights or am I wrong?

we need to be better then them...It separates us from those that wish to blow up innocent people as their primary target...

Go Beavers

mikepegg44 wrote:

Jason P wrote:

mikepegg44 wrote:

Why didn't they simply assassinate Nazi sympathizers? Or all the Japanese who might have been loyalists...The same reason they shouldn't assassinate US citizens now...rights baby...

If all terrorists on the list of the gov't are fair game...I think a lot of people will be surprised when the knock on the door isn't in fact a candygram...

But we are not doing any of the things you suggest. We are taking on a current threat in al-Qaeda. If Nazi sympathizers and Japanese loyalists were hard at work trying to lace underpants with C4 and blow up commercial airliners over Detroit, then it might be a different story.

And how many US citizens have been targeted by drones and for what reasons? Are they going after people evading taxes or stealing girl scout cookies?

Just because you were born in the US doesn't give you immunity if you pose a serious threat, whether you be an al-Qaeda associate or a Bond villain. Much like in Lethal Weapon two, you can only pull so much shit under diplomatic immunity before Riggs puts a round between your eyes.

HAS JUST BEEN REVOKED!!

when you are born here you are born with certain unalienable rights or am I wrong?

we need to be better then them...It separates us from those that wish to blow up innocent people as their primary target...

I totally agree with you (not always a common thing in here).

Jason P

mikepegg44 wrote:

when you are born here you are born with certain unalienable rights or am I wrong?

we need to be better then them...It separates us from those that wish to blow up innocent people as their primary target...

You are born with rights. But if I walk into a preschool and start rattling off the F-bomb over and over at the top of my lungs, I'm most likely going to jail even though I have a freedom of speech. And that is the light end of the spectrum.

Cosmo

The questions I have in regards to the use of drones are mostly moral in nature and the consequences of our decision to use them. Here's what I mean:
By using drones... have we opened up our nation, our neighborhoods, as fair game in the rules of engagement?
Meaning, the drone pilots are in our neighborhoods, driving home after their sorties... picking up the kids from soccer practice and going out to dinner at the local Olive Garden, right?
Aren't these drone pilots, combatants?
In the conventional sense, the fighter/bomber pilots that strap an F-15 to their back and fly in harm's way are doing the same thing. The difference being, they are operating closer to the theater of operations and risk life and limb and threat of being shot down and captured. That is the risk that pilots take and they understand the risks of being in a war zone.
The drone pilots are doing the same thing, without the risk.
...
So... does that mean if an enemy agent comes over here and kills a pilot... at his home... in his car... while he is at dinner with his family... is is murder... or an act of war?
Would any bystander simply be considered 'collateral damage' the same way the neighbor of the house in Khandahar that is killed when the Hellfire missile hits its intended target?
...
I mean, if a nation like Russia or China used drones over here... wouldn't we go over there to kill their pilots? That would be justified, right? Because, after all, we all know war is Hell and we know what we are getting into when we go to war, right?

Jason P

Cosmo wrote:

The questions I have in regards to the use of drones are mostly moral in nature and the consequences of our decision to use them. Here's what I mean:
By using drones... have we opened up our nation, our neighborhoods, as fair game in the rules of engagement?

They flew two planes into the Twin Towers, another into the Pentagon, and another into a field. They have no rules of engagement.

This isn't a nation we are at war against. It's a fanatical ideology. It's not defined by borders or rules.

Cosmo

Jason P wrote:

Cosmo wrote:

The questions I have in regards to the use of drones are mostly moral in nature and the consequences of our decision to use them. Here's what I mean:
By using drones... have we opened up our nation, our neighborhoods, as fair game in the rules of engagement?

They flew two planes into the Twin Towers, another into the Pentagon, and another into a field. They have no rules of engagement.

This isn't a nation we are at war against. It's a fanatical ideology. It's not defined by borders or rules.

...
Fair enough. But, that's a different issue.
...
The issue at hand is Drones and their use.
If an enemy combatant blows himself up to kill a drone pilot, here in the U.S. Is it murder or an act of war?

Jason P

Cosmo wrote:

...
Fair enough. But, that's a different issue.
...
The issue at hand is Drones and their use.
If an enemy combatant blows himself up to kill a drone pilot, here in the U.S. Is it murder or an act of war?

It would have to be a unique scenario. In the places where drone attacks have been authorized, it has been in coordination or at least agreement with the governing party (even Pakistan where they talk tough in the media ... but really haven't done much considering we are dropping bombs in their backyard). An enemy combatant in this scenario is not acting on behalf of their nation, but on their version of a holy book (or propaganda spread by leaders using the book for control).

If we used a drone to take out a Chinese general in SE Asia, assuming they didn't retaliate by hitting a much more strategic target, they would have to undergo a lot of undercover work to determine who exactly piloted the drone in order to pull off the attack. The attack by the US would be considered the act of war.

If the DEA ever used drones to take on the Cartels, I could see them possibly having enough money to get a snitch to find out the pilot ... but again that would not be a nation going to war.

But if the Chinese government specifically targeted a drone pilot and blew up his house without being provoked, then I believe Congress would have the right to debate if it was an act of war.

cincybearcat

Jason P wrote:

Cosmo wrote:

The questions I have in regards to the use of drones are mostly moral in nature and the consequences of our decision to use them. Here's what I mean:
By using drones... have we opened up our nation, our neighborhoods, as fair game in the rules of engagement?

They flew two planes into the Twin Towers, another into the Pentagon, and another into a field. They have no rules of engagement.

This isn't a nation we are at war against. It's a fanatical ideology. It's not defined by borders or rules.

Right. This reminds me of gorilla warfare. You need to adapt your strategies to deal with the risk imposed today, not yesterday.

I understand the hesitance on this one though. I'm not assuming I'm right, just my opinion at the moment.

mikepegg44

Jason P wrote:

mikepegg44 wrote:

when you are born here you are born with certain unalienable rights or am I wrong?

we need to be better then them...It separates us from those that wish to blow up innocent people as their primary target...

You are born with rights. But if I walk into a preschool and start rattling off the F-bomb over and over at the top of my lungs, I'm most likely going to jail even though I have a freedom of speech. And that is the light end of the spectrum.

why would you go to jail? not for saying fuck...probably for trespassing if you refused to leave...you certainly wouldn't be arrested for simply saying fuck at the top of your lungs...

but then you would be read your rights, a hearing would be set up and you would get bail or post bond. Then you would go to trail or plead guilty depending on what you were charged with...all the while you would be in what I like to call due process.

Jason P

mikepegg44 wrote:

why would you go to jail? not for saying fuck...probably for trespassing if you refused to leave...you certainly wouldn't be arrested for simply saying fuck at the top of your lungs...

but then you would be read your rights, a hearing would be set up and you would get bail or post bond. Then you would go to trail or plead guilty depending on what you were charged with...all the while you would be in what I like to call due process.

Care to try it? I'll even let you do it from a public sidewalk as they are getting off the schoolbus.

Maybe not arrested, but you will most likely find yourself detained and fined. You could spend money on the legal process and fight it, but that most likely indicates you are sane enough not to do it in the first place.

Anyway, lets put the focus on the guy convincing people to stick explosives to themselves and go kill the blue-eyed devil. If he was doing this from his second story apartment in San Dimas, I'm sure a unit would have been dispatched and he would have gotten his due process. But if you are operating from a lawless country and on the terrorist's most-wanted list, it not so easy to serve due process.

His due process was Obama getting on live TV and saying, "Hey, most unrighteous terrorist dude. We are most totally going to kill you for being a dick. Whoa."

Idris

In his own words, (PBS)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2Ofg2BacIM&feature=youtube_gdata_player

polaris_x

this really is based on one's perspective of the "truth" ...

the rights of US citizens at home and abroad have been trampled on from a long time ago ... americans live by some kind of false ideal that their nation is somehow grounded in principle when the reality is that the US has lost any kind of credibility a long time ago ...

we neither know whether the deaths of civilians are intentional or not anymore ... we don't know if they were targeting someone because they were a threat to america or if they were a threat to the american imperialistic empire ...

i know the lot of you are gonna view this as yet another anti-america rant and get your backs up ...

but this is simply grounded in reality ... for all the discussions that have been had on this board over the years - the one thing that is essentially taboo amongst many of you "loyalists" is the history of US foreign policy and the factual evidence that america has done many evil things in the name of imperialism and greed ...

the continued apathy towards that is what allows these things to happen now and in the future ...

Godfather.

I just read the artical......Anwar al-Awlaki ? really ????? BFD !! first off he put his own son in harms way and these guy's I don't care where they were born they were terrorist plane and simple F-em and screw the ACLU right in their neck....wow this just blows me away.


The suit stems from two drone strikes that took place over a six-week stretch last fall. The first, in September, killed Awlaki(so what) as well as alleged al-Qaeda propagandist Samir Khan(so what). The second strike, in October, killed Awlaki’s 16-year-old son(put in harms way by his own father). All three were born in the United States(so what).



Godfather.

BinauralJam

polaris_x wrote:

this really is based on one's perspective of the "truth" ...

the rights of US citizens at home and abroad have been trampled on from a long time ago ... americans live by some kind of false ideal that their nation is somehow grounded in principle when the reality is that the US has lost any kind of credibility a long time ago ...

we neither know whether the deaths of civilians are intentional or not anymore ... we don't know if they were targeting someone because they were a threat to america or if they were a threat to the american imperialistic empire ...

i know the lot of you are gonna view this as yet another anti-america rant and get your backs up ...

but this is simply grounded in reality ... for all the discussions that have been had on this board over the years - the one thing that is essentially taboo amongst many of you "loyalists" is the history of US foreign policy and the factual evidence that america has done many evil things in the name of imperialism and greed ...

the continued apathy towards that is what allows these things to happen now and in the future ...

Here's the trap though, Obama is allowing this to happen, Mitt will allow this to happen, so what do i do? It is Apathy, but i think our Government is going to maintain control of the world be any means necessary. Whether it be by Military or Economically.