Rand Paul Starts New Drone War In Congress

SonicSpike (242293) writes with news that the ACLU and Rand Paul both think every Senator should read David Barron's legal memos justifying the use of drones against an American citizen before he is confirmed to the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals. From the article: "Paul, the junior Republican senator from Kentucky, has informed Reid he will object to David Barron's nomination to the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals unless the Justice Department makes public the memos he authored justifying the killing of an American citizen in Yemen. The American Civil Liberties Union supports Paul's objection, giving some Democratic lawmakers extra incentive to support a delay to Barron's nomination, which could come to the floor in the next two weeks. Barron, formerly a lawyer in the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, penned at least one secret legal memo approving the Sept. 2011 drone strike that killed Anwar al-Awlaki, a radical Muslim cleric whom intelligence officials accused of planning terrorist attacks against the United States."

Comments

citizenship is irrelevant

[erikkemperman]

The way drones are currently employed in extrajudicial killing (a.k.a. murder), typically inside sovereign nations not at war with the US, is just as illegal when it targets US citizen as it is when it targets anybody else.

Not to mention the vast majority of drone victims who are not even suspected of anything but being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

This is a pretty reliable method of creating new terrorists.

Re:citizenship is irrelevant

[Anonymous Coward]

Hard to keep the war going without terrorists. Sounds like the plan is working well.

Re:citizenship is irrelevant

[Charliemopps]

The way drones are currently employed in extrajudicial killing (a.k.a. murder), typically inside sovereign nations not at war with the US, is just as illegal when it targets US citizen as it is when it targets anybody else.

Not to mention the vast majority of drone victims who are not even suspected of anything but being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

This is a pretty reliable method of creating new terrorists.

Well, I don't want to defend the drone war. I don't think we should be involved in this at all. But to call this anything but war is a disservice to everyone involved. This is what war looks like. It IS murder. You can't be on an offensive military footing and not commit murder. Remember the children killed by hellfire missiles while attending a funeral the next time your congressman starts talking about defending this country. We voted to allow this. We've voted for Republicans and Democrats time and time again. They will keep doing this until we either throw them out of office or we make it clear they can't win elections anymore if they keep using war as a pretext to scare us into voting for them.

This is our fault. We need to take responsibility and stop blaming our inability to vote outside party lines on some mythical 1% or military industrial complex. If you don't like war, stop voting for the party of war. It's the one with D or R after the names on the ballot.

Re:citizenship is irrelevant

[BoberFett]

Eh, I've been voting for non-interventionist Libertarians since I could vote. And every time I get mocked every time because "a third party candidate can't win". Well no shit.

I'd love to see the Libertarians, the Greens, hell even the Socialist Party start to see more representation in government. At least we'd loosen the stranglehold those scumbag Ds and Rs have.

Re:His concern is touching

[joelholdsworth]

It's so nice to see a Republican actually care about someone who does not reside in a uterus, provided they have a valid US passport.

And you don't care about people in the uterus? If not, then why not?

Re:His concern is touching

[Vermonter]

If Rand Paul wanted a higher office, he would play the game like all the other members of congress. Enough people don't even pay attention to what their congressmen do that your best bet to move up is to play the game and be valuable to your party, so that they financially back you and prop you up.

Wait..

[Charliemopps]

Wait a minute... did a senator just object to a judicial nomination for an actually valid reason?

Re:Wait..

[Anonymous Coward]

Calling a libertarian an "extreme right" shows that you have no concept of who the "extreme right" really are. Obama is more of a right winger than your average libertarian.

Re:His concern is touching

[joelholdsworth]

GP was talking about a person, and so am I. That's why we call them "unborn child", and "baby in the womb". Noone can discard a human life without being a murderer. Therefore to justify themselves - just like in any genocide, those in favour of killing unborn babies, have to label abortion as not killing, and the baby as not human.

What a stupid argument.

Let me ask you a question. Why are you not guilty of magical thinking when you put a living human adult in a different category to a zygote or a dishwasher? Why do you afford adult human cell collections moral rights that you don't afford zygotes or dishwashers. I'll tell you why: It's because your concience tells you that human life is special and must be preserved, and that murder is an outrageous crime, and yet you mock those who believe likewise for unborn children.

Stupid stupid stupid.

Word play. Redefining "person" to suit your own ends. All for a little convenience in your life. Toss the baby in the trash- who cares anyway.

Re:His concern is touching

[joelholdsworth]

It's a red herring. Almost all baby terminations are done purely for convenience.

Just because something happens, doesn't mean it should be legal, especially when it's morrally repugnant.