Monday, February 25, 2013

Droning on About Drones

Back in July of 2012, I posted, "Libs & Cons Finally Agree...but on What?"  This particular entry dealt with the Obama Administration's use of drone strikes on "American Citizens!"  The latest gripes actually comes for the far-political "Left," who apparently don't have enough to be mopey over.  They are taking issue with the "innocent civilians" who are being killed in the drone strikes.

On the other hand, the far-political "Right," still hasn't left this issue because it just sounds so scandalous!  If you're dumb enough, simple enough, and have that naggin' feeling that our government is going to "turn" on you next week, you might find yourself scanning the skies--fearful in the belief that somehow your insignificant life warrants the time, effort, and expense of a Hellfire Drone Missile.

Exhibit A:  The "American Citizens"

To date, three (3) "American Citizens" have been killed by a drone strike.  We got all three in one shot!!  That should make the supposed conservatives "happy."  Think about the savings!!  Three kills--one shot; that's efficiency!

My point is, despite the fact that the far-Right lunatics are trying desperately to insinuate that there is some consistent "Black Op" program to kill Americans; it just ain't so.  As for three "Americans" let's look back to July of 2012 to remember who they are, because ever-so-conveniently the political far right never mentions it:

Anwar al-Awlaki was born in New Mexico in 1971.  At age 7 (1978), he and his family moved back to Yemen for the next 11 years.  Awlaki returned to the U.S. in 1991 to go to Colorado State.  He attended the university on a foreign student visa and a government scholarship from Yemen, apparently by claiming to be born in that country.  “Spring Break” for Awlaki consisted of his involvement in the mujahideen. 

With a Bachelor’s degree in Civil Engineering from Colorado State and a Master’s degree in Education Leadership from San Diego State, Awlaki began work on his Ph.D in Human Resource Development from George Washington University. 

As he was working on his Ph.d in Human Resources, Alwaki couldn’t pass up on a job offer from Al-Queida.  Yes…that Al-Queida.  Known as “The Bin Laden of the Internet,” Alwaki quickly rose through the ranks of Al-Queida to become their senior recruiter, propagandist, and managed to have himself linked to several attacks and plots including the Fort Hood Shooter and the infamous “Christmas Day Underwear Bomber.”  After Bin-Laden's death, it was even suggested that he might become the new leader of Al-Queida.
His son, “Abdul” and Khan were also born in the U.S. and while Abdul was only 16 years old; is there anyone out there who honestly believes this kid wasn’t going to follow in “dear ol’ dad’s” footsteps?

These were not nice people.
It is true:  Anwar al-Awlaki, his son Abdul, and his accomplice Khan were born in the U.S.  They were citizens.


We kill and executive people every day in this country with or without due process, which is what the far-Right is screaming about.  We didn't risk American soldier's lives to capture al-Awlaki.  We didn't send him a subpoena.  We didn't get a chance to interrogate him.  We didn't spend months deliberating the charges and millions of dollars to prosecute him.

For what?

To have the "pleasure" of killing him ourselves.

Is this not the MOST stupid thing you've ever heard?  We have video of this guy raging against the U.S. and calling for "Jihad."  We have every military analyst saying he was a prime choice for the top spot of Al-Queida after Bin Laden's death.  We have the Fort Hood shooter and the Underwear Bomber pointing to direct ties and influence of al-Awlaki.  We needed a trial--why?!?!?

The insanity to all of this is that if you're a Latino and you gladly come to this country to pick our fruit, scrub our toilets, do our dishes, or bus our tables and have a child; well you're scamming us somehow!  You're here on the takeYou're hell-bent on destroying the U.S.!!  Especially--ESPECIALLY if you have a baby, an anchor baby if you will. An anchor baby, who shouldn't be allowed to be a citizen because it's parents came here illegally.

In fact, since July of 2012 there were all sorts of idea of how to curb illegal immigration.  We were going to build a wall, build a moat, build electrified fences, put troops on the ground, and we even discussed a "shoot-on-sight" policy.  That's how bad we hate "anchor babies."

However, if you're parents came here legally, father their own "anchor baby," who grows up to be a terrorist intent on destroying the U.S. and killing our citizens.  Well...well know he's a "citizen."

No other way to say it but:  That's pretty fucked up!

Still the far-political Right champions these terrorists.  I suppose the lawyers didn't get their cut.  We're willing to shoot Latinos on-sight who are eager to scrub our toilets.  The guy organizing the Christmas Day "Underwear Bomber" attack--they want to quibble about paperwork.

I'm not all that surprised by this continuous attack.  It's is politically convenient for this desperate fringe group to have such a "scandulous," if not thoroughly misguided, talking point.

A Bitch Slap for the Left:

Let me put this a delicately as I can:  What the hell is wrong with you people?!?  You're actually whining about innocent civilians getting killed oversees?!?  Tell you what:  Whenever you're 'misty-eyed' over 'dead innocent civilians'--log onto YouTube and watch some 9/11 footage.  Personally, I get real remorseless when I watch people leaping out the windows, 20 stories up, taking their chances with the fall versus the fire.

I'm tired of this war.  It's been almost a dozen years now.  This country beat back both Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, on two fronts, with war theaters in Africa, Europe, Burma, and the South Pacific, with a fraction of the technology that we have today.  Seriously--what is the issue?

Well we fought a war--not a "police action," not an "intervention,"--a war. Our enemy knows people like you exist in this country.  They count on it.  They see your compassion as our weakness and they're laughing at you.  We're fighting a culture that has no problem strapping a suicide vest on to a teenager and sending that kid into a crowded marketplace of his countrymen to blow himself, everyone else, and anything else straight to hell; secure in the belief that somehow this poor, dumb, deluded, confused kid will somehow "further the cause."

Do you really think they give a good goddamn that their innocents are being killed?

If they did, they wouldn't be in and amongst them.  If you think a (comparably) few civilians being killed is "uncivilized," go check out the mass carpet bombings of Nazi Germany circa 1943 or perhaps Nagasaki, Japan circa 1945.  

Our drone strikes are targeting the leadership caste of our enemy.  They're designed to cause confusion and ideally create a power vacuum or internal power struggle.  This means less dead 18 year olds for us.  I'm tired of seeing 19 year old amputees getting standing ovations for barely 30 seconds and then forgotten about.

It's time to end this war, not hear from the "bleeding hearts" among us who want to worry about civilians.

The Ron Reagan Jr. Contribution

The only individual who has offered a different take on drone strikes is Ron Reagan Jr., whom I'm really warming up to.  Ron frequently offers something to the discussion, that puts a different spin on and expands upon the conservation.  Recently, on MSNBC's "Hardball," Ron questioned whether having one person, the President, as sole "decider" of when and where drone strikes happen was a good precedent to have or even start.

There is some merit to his thinking, but in my opinion, the people on the "kill list" weren't plucked from the phone book or at random.  If you make the "kill list," odds are you've been on the CIA's watch list for some time and there is probably ample evidence that you're a threat to this country or simply an asset to Al-Queida.  Still, the political Right of this country enjoys this "Roman Emperor-like live or die" power that Obama possesses.  It's all so scandalous.  You or I could be next!  ...that is, if either of us are high-level operatives for Al-Queida.

Should one person, even the President of United States have such power?  Sure...why not.  Given the ridiculous track record of our Congress and Senate, I'd hate to think the next bomber or mastermind might live and kill off more of our young soldiers, while a committee debated.  And let's be thoroughly honest:  Any constructive criticism or concern by a true GOPer of this President is too often drowned out by the constant pathological need of the Right to obstruct, frustrate, and try to cause this President to fail.  So, thank you--but no.  The Commander-In-Chief, who holds that precious 'nuclear football' and will give the order to launch the nukes, can jolly well send a Hellfire missile Akmed's way.

Ever expanding the conversation, Ron Reagan Jr., poses the thought of are we setting ourselves up to conduct domestic drone strikes on suspected terrorists or is this policy just for overseas?  A fair thought.  Again--those that make it on the "kill list" aren't necessarily "suspected;" we have some decent evidence that suggests they are more than "suspected."

As for domestic drone strikes on suspected terrorists--sure!  Why not!  More and more, I'm of the opinion that we're the only stupid-ass country in the world that puts up with bullshit from our own citizens.  From Neo-Nazis, to crazed survivalists, to idiot gun-toting Tea Party members threatening to rise up to even supposedly "peaceful" Occupy Wallstreet schmucks who think that by blowing up a bridge, things will get "better;" we have a sizable population of undesirables, retards, social misfits, and anarchist blowhards.

These extremist are on both sides of the political spectrum, whether it's the far-right and their "The tree of Liberty needs to be watered with blood of tyrants from time to time," non-sense or the hippy far-left who riot at a G8 summit against corporations and document their exploits on their I-Phones.  It has gotten ridiculous!

Of course, these guys know the "routine."  For the most part they're able to spout off their treasonous and threatening rhetoric and hide behind the First Amendment.  They love to bastardize the First Amendment also, believing they can say anything--no matter how stupid, treasonous, dangerous, or untrue--because "da Constitution says so."  I really don't think that's what the Founding Fathers had in mind.

My firm belief is that once you decide to make war on the United States, you're fair game.  Why bother with these week long sieges and negotiations?  Why bother with the expense?  Why put officers in dangers because some fringe group wants their stupid manifesto heard?  Launch the missile, blow them to hell, let it burn, and clear away the rubble.  

Maybe, just maybe, if we did have a little "death from above," we wouldn't have all this cocky, alpha-male, in your face, blowhard nonsense.  Maybe if some of our citizens realized that we are a civilized society and acting "civil," isn't "political correctness," it's just a mandate that they not act like a complete asshole--maybe we'd have more of a equal discussion.   



No comments:

Post a Comment

Post a Comment