We can't control the world and it's peoples any more-no matter how many drones strikes we do.The world sees us for what we are-a terrorist nation and the people of the world are doing their thing regardless of what we say about it.

bin Laden's goal was to undermine Western democracy.

We have foolishly followed evil down this dystrophic rabbit hole.

Once the executive branch grabs power like this, it doesn't give it back.

To dboy,

Maybe not YOUR adversaries, but I have no problem using the tactics of our adversaries as long as we win. Because America is on the right side of history, and not our enemies. We defeated Fascism, Nazism and Communism and we can defeat Jihadism as well.

So, if they send drones into the US we'll take them down the way Iran took down some US drones. Drones are here to stay and everyone will have them and make use of them. Nobody can stop the march of technology.

We have managed to lower ourselves to the level of our adversaries.

Osama bin Laden has won.

Disgusting.

A Times editor has just admitted that there would be diplomatic blow-back to openness. The editor 'justified' maintaining CIA secrets and lies because to do otherwise would risk popular opposition to drone bases in Saudi Arabia.

I spent a month in Pakistan and people are outraged at Americans for three reason:

One, that Pakistan's sovereignty is being violated.
Two, innocent bystanders are being murdered.
Three, that US foreign policy is swelling the ranks of Al Queda.

Of course Lincoln never thought of the Civil War as a "transnational conflict".

This is real news WNYC. THX for steppin' it up.

Welcome to al-Ameriqa.

"Targeted killing"?

When has the US admitted _not_ using "targeted killing"? The US was claiming "surgical strikes" in Vietnam?

So was the US lying then? Is the administration lying now? What's the threshold number of civilians killed before even the apologists at the Times or Post or CNN admit "targeted" isn't particularly "targeted" at all — especially when we conveniently define away any issues of what constitutes a target?

Do other countries have similar rights with respect to targetted killings, and could they carry them out in the United States? For example, could Britain have conducted such killings of IRA centers in New York? (Perhaps taking out Peter King?)

The jihadist enemies, and their fellow travelers, are whining because for once America is winning. America winning is an intolerable situation.

Can't we PLEASE send jgarbuz in his underpants and yarmulke with his Uzi, instead of drones??

dboy

Do they let you have access to the internet in Gitmo?

Ol' jgarbuz is on a moron rampage, this morning.

If serious questions are being raised about this White Paper might an inquiry into USAID and related "humanitarian" missions yield some murky truths about that?

Are some of the groups known as "Al-Qaeda in _______" actually affiliated w/the original al-Qaeda & working w/it, & others more like copycat groups?

And what does being a "member" of al-Qaeda actually mean? Osama bin Laden's driver was eventually acquitted, right?

To Sick

Yup. WE bombed lots of civilians in WWII. If the enemy hides amongst civilians, it's just their tough luck.We should do our best to avoid "collateral damage" wherever possible, but we must never allow the enemy to get away with using civilian shields to save themselves. The blood is on the heads of the terrorists.

I cannot believe we are spending hours of time discussing this.

I am happier that drones are doing this reconnaissance and killing rather than invading nations as we did under Bush.

There are far greater reasons to criticize the government. You really need to discuss Anwar Al Alaki's rights instead of campaign finance reform? Which affects me more?

If Sweden was harboring terrorists fighting us,of course we'd have the right to send drones into Sweden to get them?

Your guest just doesn't like drones. She would probably oppose any means of fighting our mortal enemies. This is nothing new. We've had pacifists throughout history.

jgarbuz:

And if any civilians are slaughtered in the process, well, that's just just their tough luck. Amurrikkka first!

It is monstrous for anyone to require our soldiers to risk their lives or limbs to perform tasks required by the war we are engaged in. I expect this type of effete "pettifogging" accompanied the abandonment of hand-to-hand combat in favor of long distance firearms. Why didn't we have a representative from the rehabilitation ward of a veteran's hospital to have someone with skin in the game.
This seems to be the same pettifogging discussion that accompanied the abandonment of hand to hand combat as the primary means for the folly of war.
(? Was Lincoln somehow at fault for allowing Grant to slay American citizens on American soil without obtaining individually court vetted warrants?

It is monstrous for anyone to require our soldiers to risk their lives or limbs to perform tasks required by the war we are engaged in. I expect this type of effete "pettifogging" accompanied the abandonment of hand-to-hand combat in favor of long distance firearms. Why didn't we have a representative from the rehabilitation ward of a veteran's hospital to have someone with skin in the game.
This seems to be the same pettifogging discussion that accompanied the abandonment of hand to hand combat as the primary means for the folly of war.
(? Was Lincoln somehow at fault for allowing Grant to slay American citizens on American soil without obtaining individually court vetted warrants?

We've let the Obama Administration get away with selling a lost war with a body count. Unfortunately, any fallout from this exposure will center around the issue of using drones on Americans issue and everyone will forget the mission in Afghanistan and the Middle East is a tragedy of genocidal proportions.

It is monstrous for anyone to require our soldiers to risk their lives or limbs to perform tasks required by the war we are engaged in. I expect this type of effete "pettifogging" accompanied the abandonment of hand-to-hand combat in favor of long distance firearms. Why didn't we have a representative from the rehabilitation ward of a veteran's hospital to have someone with skin in the game.
This seems to be the same pettifogging discussion that accompanied the abandonment of hand to hand combat as the primary means for the folly of war.
(? Was Lincoln somehow at fault for allowing Grant to slay American citizens on American soil without obtaining individually court vetted warrants?

US citizens fighting for the enemy should be tried in absentia, and if convicted of treason, executed. Nothing new about this, only that war today is over very long distances.

Any movements of censure from the UN, the ICC or some other body?