Tuesday, February 5, 2013

Justifying Drones

Via NBC:

A confidential Justice Department memo concludes that the U.S. government can order the killing of American citizens if they are believed to be “senior operational leaders” of al-Qaida or “an associated force” — even if there is no intelligence indicating they are engaged in an active plot to attack the U.S.

The 16-page memo, a copy of which was obtained by NBC News, provides new details about the legal reasoning behind one of the Obama administration’s most secretive and controversial polices: its dramatically increased use of drone strikes against al-Qaida suspects, including those aimed at American citizens, such as the  September 2011 strike in Yemen that killed alleged al-Qaida operatives Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan. Both were U.S. citizens who had never been indicted by the U.S. government nor charged with any crimes.

The secrecy surrounding such strikes is fast emerging as a central issue in this week’s hearing of White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan, a key architect of the drone campaign, to be CIA director.  Brennan was the first administration official to publicly acknowledge drone strikes in a speech last year, calling them “consistent with the inherent right of self-defense.” In a separate talk at the Northwestern University Law School in March, Attorney General Eric Holder specifically endorsed the constitutionality of targeted killings of Americans, saying they could be justified if government officials determine the target poses  “an imminent threat of violent attack.”

Maybe it’s just me, but I’m never comfortable with anybody that can come up with a justification for doing something based on the theory of “It all started when I thought he was going to hit me.”

Presidents of both parties have been able to come up with reasons to sidestep due process and launch preemptive attacks because they thought something might happen by telling the world that they prevented something worse from happening.  But it’s shaky ground, and a lot of innocent people have suffered for it.

It’s one thing to be prepared against your enemies.  It’s entirely another to do go after them based on little more than supposition.  When you do that, you had better be damn sure you’re right.

One bark on “Justifying Drones

  1. I agree with you about exercise caution; however, my dad always told me that you know a man by the company he keeps. If they are hanging out with the bad guys and know our capabilities, they get what they deserve because they are up to no good.

Comments are closed.