Does the US Government Have the Right to Kill American Citizens with Drone Strikes

[dogtowner]

no they don't...because those are part of a war and in other nations where we don't have police. I know you know this, but the Military does shit overseas that it can not do legally to citizens in the US...all the time..since there was a military.

Again...plane hijacked by by a American...who is going to fly the 747 into the white house...Would you down it with a F-15?
Yes: why is it ok to use a F-15 on a American but not a drone?
No: you would let the white house be destroyed and the plane anyway?

There are rules in place on use of force in the United states, even on non citizens. Do you believe that somehow a drone is just not subject to them even though anything else is?

hijacked plane = imminent danger

and yes we do things elsewhere involving non citizens as they do not enjoy constititional protections.

but we are talking about citizens not posing imminent threat and it does not matter if its a drone jet or pack of attack chihuahuas. its NOT ok to do. now i am not pollyanna enough to think its never happened as i know different. but the administration did not speak of it at all much less claim.legality.

 

[Texas_tea]

you seem to just ignore the fact that Ibrahim al-Banna, a leader in al Qaeda, was the listed target of the strike...that he was not killed in the stike, does not change who the target was. Not evryone killed in war, was the target..

Have evidence of this false claim?

 

[pocketfullofshells]

hijacked plane = imminent danger

and yes we do things elsewhere involving non citizens as they do not enjoy constititional protections.

but we are talking about citizens not posing imminent threat and it does not matter if its a drone jet or pack of attack chihuahuas. its NOT ok to do. now i am not pollyanna enough to think its never happened as i know different. but the administration did not speak of it at all much less claim.legality.

are you unable to understand or is it just your intent to ignore that they have already stated that Drones could not be used if you don't pose a imminent threat? Again if you are sitting in your house planning a attack , they can't fucking use a drone to kill you? Got it? Not legal...Never said it was ..

The question asked was Could a drone be used in the US..and Yes...As you stated , if there is a Imminent threat it is in theory possible ....NO plans do use it...and not even likely...But is is possible? Yes.

You guys just fear the boogie man, no matter how much you look under and see there is nothing there...you make sure in your head it still is.

 

[dogtowner]

are you unable to understand or is it just your intent to ignore that they have already stated that Drones could not be used if you don't pose a imminent threat? Again if you are sitting in your house planning a attack , they can't fucking use a drone to kill you? Got it? Not legal...Never said it was ..

The question asked was Could a drone be used in the US..and Yes...As you stated , if there is a Imminent threat it is in theory possible ....NO plans do use it...and not even likely...But is is possible? Yes.

You guys just fear the boogie man, no matter how much you look under and see there is nothing there...you make sure in your head it still is.

the president also daid he would not use executive orders to bypass Congress and proceeded to do just that.

the. lesson is that you declaw tyrants with constant vigilance.

suggestions of intent are meaningless from disho.orable people.

 

[PLC1]

are you unable to understand or is it just your intent to ignore that they have already stated that Drones could not be used if you don't pose a imminent threat? Again if you are sitting in your house planning a attack , they can't fucking use a drone to kill you? Got it? Not legal...Never said it was ..

The question asked was Could a drone be used in the US..and Yes...As you stated , if there is a Imminent threat it is in theory possible ....NO plans do use it...and not even likely...But is is possible? Yes.

You guys just fear the boogie man, no matter how much you look under and see there is nothing there...you make sure in your head it still is.

But t hey do use drones to kill people who are simply sitting in their houses or their cars and may or may not even be planning an attack.

If the president can just decide that someone is a "terrorist", undefined, and kill them, in Yemen, what is to keep them from doing it here in the USA?

 

[Texas_tea]

If the president can just decide that someone is a "terrorist", undefined, and kill them, in Yemen, what is to keep them from doing it here in the USA?

Don't forget ... and then refuse to answer any questions about the attack as the White House has done with the killing of a 16 year old American citizen in Yemen who was not accused of a crime and not labeled a terrorist.

I think the best example of this would be the Hutaree Militia in Michigan that the Obama Administration accused plotting an anti-government uprising? This group was later acquitted by Judge Victoria A. Roberts in a Federal District Court. She stated: “The government’s case is built largely of circumstantial evidence,”

What if Obama had taken this group out with a drone and refused to answer any questions about the attack .... Americans would never know the difference. This kind of power cannot go unchecked in this Country and the rules for engagement HAVE to be clearly defined in accordance to law and the US Constitution regardless who is in the White House!

NEVER should it be shrouded in secrecy!

 

[Cruella]

What if Obama had taken this group out with a drone and refused to answer any questions about the attack .... Americans would never know the difference. This kind of power cannot go unchecked in this Country and the rules for engagement HAVE to be clearly defined in accordance to law and the US Constitution regardless who is in the White House!

NEVER should it be shrouded in secrecy!

This is one of the most corrupt Administrations we've ever had. There is a huge cover-up of Fast and Furious and Benghazi and who knows what else is out there, or yet to happen.

 

[Texas_tea]

who knows what else is out there, or yet to happen.

One thing is for sure ....
More Abuse of Power and more violations of the US Constitution.
One need not be a psychiatrist to see a consistent pattern here!

 

[pocketfullofshells]

the president also daid he would not use executive orders to bypass Congress and proceeded to do just that.

the. lesson is that you declaw tyrants with constant vigilance.

suggestions of intent are meaningless from disho.orable people.

What do you really want from them?

They say they would not and have no plans to use such a power
They state that what your talking about would not be legal,
And you bitch still...about something they have not done, will not do, and have no plans to do.
Do you want them to make it double illegal for you to be happy? Maybe say drone attacks in the United states in a no imminent threat fashion are, double secret illegal on probation?

 

[pocketfullofshells]

But t hey do use drones to kill people who are simply sitting in their houses or their cars and may or may not even be planning an attack.

If the president can just decide that someone is a "terrorist", undefined, and kill them, in Yemen, what is to keep them from doing it here in the USA?

yes...overseas...Again rules for how the military works in Pakistan...verses Inside the US...not the same. They also shoot people overseas...is our US military running around the US shooting people? nope.

Again, if your sitting at home planning shit..no fucking drone attack is going to happen...they can send the Police, atf, fbi....If your sitting in areas of Pakistan where even Pakistan Military has to fight to get into...Expect a drone attack and not the Police.

 

[Texas_tea]

What do you really want from them?

Full disclosure anytime an American citizen is killed by the US Government, at home or abroad.

But, we all know that will never happen with this administration. This administration is the MOST non-transparent and corrupt to occupy the White House in modern history.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

One thing is for sure ....
More Abuse of Power and more violations of the US Constitution.
One need not be a psychiatrist to see a consistent pattern here!

the abuse of power? what abuse? For stating that there are times where the US Goverement can kill someone without a trial...and that yes its possible a drone could be used for that though that is not anyones intent...Because before the goverment could not use force to stop a crime?

Or the abuse of saying that useing a drone against a American on US soil who is not taking action....would be illegal...Just like a cop can't shoot you for speeding...but can shoot you Try speed and run him over?

you just like to yell abuse of power, but don't have a clue what your talking about.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Don't forget ... and then refuse to answer any questions about the attack as the White House has done with the killing of a 16 year old American citizen in Yemen who was not accused of a crime and not labeled a terrorist.

I think the best example of this would be the Hutaree Militia in Michigan that the Obama Administration accused plotting an anti-government uprising? This group was later acquitted by Judge Victoria A. Roberts in a Federal District Court. She stated: “The government’s case is built largely of circumstantial evidence,”

What if Obama had taken this group out with a drone and refused to answer any questions about the attack .... Americans would never know the difference. This kind of power cannot go unchecked in this Country and the rules for engagement HAVE to be clearly defined in accordance to law and the US Constitution regardless who is in the White House!

NEVER should it be shrouded in secrecy!

Guess what, he did not use a drone strike...you know why...there was no legal justification for one...And again, you do know that the 16 year old kid was not the only person that died, or even was in the location where the drone stike happened...sometimes when you hang out with terrorist...you get killed...bo fucking hoo

If the Hutaree had gone threw with there plans and attacked a cops funeral ...would you cry about the cops shooting the pricks? no
If they hijacted a plane and where about the fly it into the white house...would you bitch if a f-15 did not read them there rights when it shot it down? No
so you don't care care about f-15s being used....but drones are somehow bad...that or you just would let the plane hit the white house.

 

[Texas_tea]

And again, you do know that the 16 year old kid was not the only person that died, or even was in the location where the drone stike happened...sometimes when you hang out with terrorist...you get killed...bo fucking hoo

Lie #2: U.S. claimed al-Banna was the actual target. The problem with that excuse is that al-Banna is alive and well, and was never at that site. Since that revelation, the Obama Admin. simply states there is no official record of the death of Abdulrahman, and sweeps the story under the carpet so it doesn’t even have to take accountability that the crime even happened.

http://davidkretzmann.com/2012/07/how-the-media-first-reported-abdulrahman-al-awlakis-assassination/

Abdulrahman was clearly the target. Abdulrahman's Grand Father says there were no other terrorist killed in the attack, only children including Abdulrahman's cousin. What is the White House response? To block the Freedom of Information lawsuit filed by the ACLU and refuse to state whether Abdulrahman or his father was killed.

If you are truly OK with this administration's excuse or lack there of, of killing an American citizen who is a minor and not even accused of a crime, then it shows your ignorance of the situation .... not mine!

If the Hutaree had gone threw with there plans and attacked a cops funeral ...

Again, this group was later acquitted by Judge Victoria A. Roberts in a Federal District Court. She stated: “The government’s case is built largely of circumstantial evidence,”

You cannot rebut my point by stating "if" ... stick with the facts in this case .....

If it fits your trollish agenda ... of course!

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Lie #2: U.S. claimed al-Banna was the actual target. The problem with that excuse is that al-Banna is alive and well, and was never at that site. Since that revelation, the Obama Admin. simply states there is no official record of the death of Abdulrahman, and sweeps the story under the carpet so it doesn’t even have to take accountability that the crime even happened.

http://davidkretzmann.com/2012/07/how-the-media-first-reported-abdulrahman-al-awlakis-assassination/

Abdulrahman was clearly the target. Abdulrahman's Grand Father says there were no other terrorist killed in the attack, only children including Abdulrahman's cousin. What is the White House response? To block the Freedom of Information lawsuit filed by the ACLU and refuse to state whether Abdulrahman or his father was killed.

If you are truly OK with this administration's excuse or lack there of, of killing an American citizen who is a minor and not even accused of a crime, then it shows your ignorance of the situation .... not mine!



Again, this group was later acquitted by Judge Victoria A. Roberts in a Federal District Court. She stated: “The government’s case is built largely of circumstantial evidence,”

You cannot rebut my point by stating "if" ... stick with the facts in this case .....

If it fits your trollish agenda ... of course!

We fired missiles at Bin Ladin in Afghanistan...he was not there...he was still the target...

It was asked a hypothetical about the Hutaree group....the point is they did not just go drone them...there guilt in court is not a issue ( also not guilty in court is not the same as not guilty...like OJ)

But I know you have to defend your right wing Christian hate groups