Comments (18) (Please sign in to comment)

1. 

   Gypsy8 said, 3 months ago

   This is a slippery slope that will come back to haunt.
2. 

   sw10mm said, 3 months ago

   Now they’re making the case to kill US citizens. Yay
3. 

   Ms. Ima said, 3 months ago

   Awww…. O’s 2nd apology tour didn’t get him another ‘No-brain Peace Prize’. How sad.
4. 

   Ennui_rudy Rutherford said, 3 months ago

   Don’t look up, Ima, the next drone may have your name on it.
5. 

   ruff said, 3 months ago

   @Ennui_rudy Rutherford

   Yep, I am aware of the fact that drones have no intelligence of their own and are totally controlled remotely….
6. 

   D PB said, 3 months ago

   This one’s even better then Lisa Benson’s!
   
   LOL
7. 

   ansonia said, 3 months ago

   @TimeWeaver

   lol, you admit obama really wasn’t going to “reach across the aisle” as he promised in his campaign…
   He just went out and told the world how we were going to disarm our nukes and make us defenseless so they would love us. No more super power in the world here.
8. 

   pirate227 said, 3 months ago

   Peace through force.
   There, it explained to all of you uniformed.
9. 

   mickey1339 said, 3 months ago

   Just goes to show you how the idolatry displayed was completely misplaced. We have a ramped up drone program, Gitmo still exists, Afghanistan got it’s own version of the surge and Obama wants to station troops in Southeast Asia so we have a “presence” to display our military power. Reading the Chinese newspapers and their constant hacking our banks and government pretty well displays their lack of fear.
   

   
   FWIW, read Bill Freeza’s article in the Huffington Post about scaling back the military, the resultant savings and redistribution of the “work force” involved.
10. 

    Mneedle said, 3 months ago

    @TimeWeaver

    No, it was “I am sick of having laws……make me king”
11. 

    M Ster said, 3 months ago

    Peace through force is great when:
    *
    a. We can afford it. Unfortunately, for the last 30 years, we’ve been borrowing to do it, and it is not sustainable.
    *
    b. The “enemy” backs down to the threat of “assured destruction”. Unfortunately, people driven by emotion and fanaticism often don’t respond logically to overwhelming force. Saddam certainly didn’t. And while he quickly lost that battle, our costs (human and financial) were much, much heavier than expected.
12. 

    dtroutma said, 3 months ago

    Obama should have closed Gitmo his first day. We should already be out of Afghanistan, and actually out of Iraq, not just our “combat troops”.

    
    BUT! Using “tools” to take out individuals, or groups of individuals who actually ARE combatants, as opposed to carpet bombing the landscape, as in Afghanistan, also including blowing up caves that have been civilian homes for centuries, and"shock and awe" killing thousands of noncombatants, IS a sounder policy.

    
    I don’t object to taking out genuine “bad guys”, in as simple, direct, and targeted means as possible, sorry, but a sniper, or even a drone, IS more selective, and “humane” than our reliance on massive air strikes to “overwhelm” an enemy, especially when it’s a scattered force of individuals.
13. 

    Fuzzy Thinker (I) said, 3 months ago

    Obama continues to follow Bush Policy while whining that everything is still Bush’s fault. Maybe Bush and Obama are following US State Dept policy. Civil Servant bureaucrats are the 4th branch of Government. (Remember the Star Wars example).
14. 

    mickey1339 said, 3 months ago

    Wow, I hadn’t thought of this but it looks like we are just right on the edge of another assassination controversy. I seem to remember there was a law we passed prohibiting assassinating foreign leaders. I wonder how long it will be before they decide that is no longer practical?
15. 

    Ms. Ima said, 3 months ago

    @Ennui_rudy Rutherford

    I’m looking up and no drones above me. But then again I’m not a terrorist, just a Republican.
16. Load the rest of the comments (3).