Drones and Obama

Drones and Obama

 

In case your thinking this is going to be about the low information voters or the mindless statistMQ-9_Reaper_-_090609-F-0000M-777 Obama supporters, this isn’t about those folks. It’s about the picture to the right.

Just what is a drone in today’s day and age?


An unmanned combat air vehicle (UCAV), also known as a combat drone or drone, is an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) that is armed with weaponry and has no onboard human pilot. Currently operational drones are predominantly under real-time human control.

Drones are the technological advancement of war fighting and battles through the ages. Any advancement or knowledge of what your opponent is up to, troop strength and the like gives the battle commander an advantage. Observation balloon’s were used during the Civil War by both the Confederate and Union armies. During the Vietnam War the technology improved to the use of O-1 Bird Dogs flown by fighter pilots who kept real time surveillance, assisting ground forces, fighter aircraft and request for air support.

In 2013 drone operators often sit in relative comfort, unlike their historical counterparts. The drone operator is in no direct danger from the actions or proximity of his drone. The current drone operators live in a disconnected world, from the actions of their drones.

The recently released Department of Justice (DOJ) “White Paper,” gives an insight to the Obama administration and their thought process in the use of drones over the United States. The DOJ memo states:

“broader concept of imminence” than actual intelligence about any ongoing plot against the U.S. homeland. The condition that an operational leader present an ‘imminent’ threat of violent attack against the United States does not require the United States to have clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests will take place in the immediate future.”
“…informed, high-level” official of the U.S. government may determine that the targeted American has been “recently” involved in “activities” posing a threat of a violent attack and “there is no evidence suggesting that he has renounced or abandoned such activities.”

The DOJ memo give erroneous credence to, an “informed, high-level” official of the U.S. government… having constitutional authority to respond to a threat of a violent attack against the United States.

For the second time since 2011, Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Senator Patrick Leahy [D-VT], have sent a letter to President Obama requesting the legal opinions prepared by the Department of Justice regarding legal justification for the targeted killing of American citizens abroad. (The Senators are continuing to await a response from the President to last weeks letter.)

Senator Mike Lee, (R-Utah), has gone on record regarding the white paper saying, the justification presented could, “swallow the rule” guaranteeing the due process rights of Americans.”

Time will tell if President Obama will hold to his statement, Obama-We’re the Most Transparent and Ethical Administration in U.S. History, or continue to dodge and deflect and hide behind Executive Privilege?

 
  • http://www.facebook.com/darryl.hawkins.52 Darryl Hawkins

    Based on the justification given, I would be inclined to seek to destroy any identified drone on the basis that it is a weapon seeking a target and being near me poses a real and present threat. It would be as if someone walked up and pointed a gun at me. Do I not have the right of self defense? Of course I do. Drones don’t give warnings, nor attempt detainment for arrest.