Slashdot Mirror
ACLU Sues Over Legality of "Targeted Killing" By Drones
MacAndrew writes "The ACLU has sued the United States Government to enforce a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for 'the release of records relating to the use of unmanned aerial vehicles — commonly known as 'drones' — for the purpose of targeting and killing individuals since September 11, 2001.' (Complaint.) The information sought includes the legal basis for use of the drones, how the program is managed, and the number of civilian deaths in areas of operation such as Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Yemen. The ACLU further claims that 'Recent reports, including public statements from the director of national intelligence, indicate that US citizens have been placed on the list of targets who can be hunted and killed with drones.' Aside from one's view of the wisdom, effectiveness, and morality of these military operations, the inclusion of US citizens suggests that summary remote-control executions are becoming routine. Especially given the difficulty in locating and targeting individuals from aircraft, risks of human and machine error are obvious, and these likely increase as the robots become increasingly autonomous (please no Skynet jokes). This must give pause to anyone who's ever spent time coding or debugging or even driving certain willful late model automobiles, and the US government evidently doesn't want to discuss it."
then they should be eligible as targets as well.
Damn that pesky Bill Of Rights!
Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
Except this person is in a military/terrorist compound.
Also just how do you suggest we arrest someone that is in a rebel area of a foreign nation? Extradition is a bit tricky wouldn't you say.
Guess what if a sniper is in a combat area and he sees a US citizen in the service of an enemy he becomes a legitimate target. Heck he becomes a high value target.
We are not talking about Michigan or anyplace where our police can function. This is in a combat zone so yes you can toss civil law right out the window.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
If they're in the theater of operations for the war and there's intel showing them to be part of the planning staff for Al Qaeda or the Taliban or whoever, then that's it. There are no civil rights in a war zone; there are no legal niceties beyond avoiding unnecessary pain and suffering (which is what the Geneva Convention aims for). So I say, kill the bastards and let their version of invisible sky wizard sort them out.
No one's arguing that the US government (or any other government, for that matter) be able to do this on our own soil (or maybe there are, there are nutcases out there who probably would think it's a good idea). My argument, at least, is if these people are in Afghanistan, Pakistan, or any other Randomstan, they're legitimate targets and their termination should be prosecuted using whatever tools are best suited to the job, without worrying about whether a judge agrees with the military and intelligence community.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.