A defense bill approved in May by the House authorizes force directed against "Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated forces," but doesn't actually include any geographical limitations whatsoever. (Los Angeles Times ) A Closer Look At Drones -- L.A. Times editorial
The U.S. is expanding their use in targeted killings, but there are serious moral and legal questions.
Reports that the United States is establishing bases for drone aircraft in the Horn of Africa and the Arabian Peninsula are the latest example of a transformation in the war on terrorism that poses serious questions about overreach and accountability. According to the Washington Post, a "constellation" of bases would allow the targeting of Al Qaeda affiliates and other terrorists in Yemen and Somalia, new battlegrounds in the conflict with Islamic militants. Though some of the drones are supposed to be unarmed, the overall effort is designed for counter-terrorism, a term that encompasses both the gathering of intelligence and targeted killings. Bases are being established or have been established in Ethiopia, the Seychelles and Djibouti.
Read more ....
My Comment: I am sure that Congressional oversight will insure that all the rules and guidelines are followed. As to the question .... are these targeted killings in fact legitimate? Find me a better alternative and I will post it and do a viral campaign to publicize it via through all the milbloggers that I know.
1 comment:
There are legitimate alternatives, but they are either politically unacceptable, have an unsure probability of success, or will take an inordinate amount of time to plan and execute.
To put it bluntly, the drone program is appealingly high-tech (to certain political factions), relatively bloodless, relatively inexpensive to operate, and avoids politically embarrassing casualty figures.
Post a Comment