I don’t understand the left’s “morality” on this issue.
Obama can assassinate suspected terrorists by executive order without due legal
process but President Bush was “evil” for enhanced interrogation of
captured terrorists to obtain information to save innocent lives! Killing them
is ok but we must not, cannot violate their “rights” on the
battlefield or in GITMO! Strange “morality” going on here!
Interpretation: if Obama is commander in chief, terrorists have no rights, but
if GWB is commander in chief, terrorist thugs and murders do have unalienable,
Although Krauthammer makes a few salient points and I generally agree with many
of his past positions, I do take issue with his general tone and conclusions
today. I am no lover of Obama and am anxious to see him leave office as soon as
possible, but I give him Kudos for a series of foreign policy successes - ending
the war in Iraq, avoiding a war altogether in Lybia, and the successful and
relatively cheap killing of terrorist operatives with these drone attacks. I
will also be the first to admit I disagree with him on several foreign policy
issues, but I want to give credit where it is due.Having served in
Iraq, I understand something of the horrors of war. Using drones to take out
terrorists without the cost of American's being killed is a big plus for
me. I have also had issues with our "interrogation techniques" of the
past - no matter how successful - I stand with John McCain on this issue who was
himself a prisoner of war. Krauthammer also accuses Obama of hypocrisy, but I
believe any genuine person can evolve their position on a whole host of issues
including foreign policy.
"I believe any genuine person can evolve their position on a whole host of
issues including foreign policy." Mr. Conservative Scientist, you are so
diplomatic. You are so charitable. You are so good at kissing up.We are not talking about a "genuine" person. We are not talking
"evolving." We are talking Machieaveli.
Conservative Scientist, we shouldn't give Pres. Obama credit for ending the
war in Iraq. He said he would remove troops starting Day 1 of his presidency -
he didn't. Instead he followed the withdrawal plan established by the Bush
administration. Pres. Obama had zero influence on the end of the war in Iraq. He
didn't prolong the war (Pres. Bush would not have either) but he should not
receive credit for ending it (just as he should not receive credit for killing
Osama bin Laden - all he said was "Ok, go ahead" - he did not gather the
intelligence, he did not make the plans, he did not make the strike).
maybe Hollywood will add Barack to the shield of the next Avengers - Drone
Fighter or maybe Captain Ciaos!
Ever the partisan crowd doing their thing. We could end all this silliness if
each side would be grown up enough to acknowledge the accomplishments of the
other side. Were the "conservatives" saying the same things about Bush
as he paraded on the deck of an aircraft carrier - emblazoned with a banner
proclaiming "mission accomplished". Were they complaining of the grand
standing then? Yes, I know, liberals made fun of Bush at the time.
But at some point it would be nice to have one side act like grown ups, and
acknowledge that the other "AMERICANS" might just have done something
right.But I am not holding my breath. It seems minds have settled
on the fact that to have a particular party win is far more important than to
acknowledge successes other Americans. Fortunately I know we have a long
history of this silliness all the way back to Jefferson and Hamilton - one of
the nastiest fights ever. The difference is that back then, Hamilton was
mature enough to support Jefferson when the option was Raymond Burr. With
current thinking, Hamilton would be guilty of high party treason, and Hamilton
labelled that days "RINO".
Drone Warrior? Absolutely appropriate. A Drone is unmaned. Fits. Remote
controlled. Fits. or maybe unmaned pres.would be the best fit.