One of the few foreign policy successes of the Obama Administration has been its drone program. This aerial, remote-control arsenal has enabled the U.S. to take out hundreds of some real nasty, vicious bad guys. Like al-Qaeda terrorists or other assorted would-be low-life, mass serial killers that have sought to do great harm to the U.S. and its allies. People whose greatest joy in life is to murder unarmed, innocent civilians on a massive scale. Better yet, in their mind’s eye, would be to kill children in their school rooms, or babies in their cribs. But as I’ve said, the drone program (started under the Bush Administration) has been successful in eliminating a lot of terrorist scum before they could bring their diabolical schemes to fruition. One can only speculate as to how many thousands of lives have been saved as a consequence of the drone program. And by the way, as I mentioned previously, a terrorist is just a serial killer on a larger scale, who uses some trumped up religious fanaticism theory to justify his lust for murder.
So despite the huge success of the drone program in preventing untold tragedies, there are those on the far right, and far left, that have combined in a marriage made in heaven (or is it hell) to sharply criticize the use of unmanned drones to kill off would-be mass murderers. It seems that a memo has surfaced, written by legal types in the Obama Administration, that spells out the legal justification the President has in ordering a drone strike on a terrorist, even if that would-be killer is an American citizen. According to this memo, the President has nearly unfettered power in issuing the okay to undertake such action. This has set off howls of protest from both right and left wing crackpots that too much power has been assigned to one person, namely the President. So I thought it might be worthwhile to explore the delusional fantasies that infect those on both ends of the political spectrum.
To be clear, the only other alternative to using drones to kill off bad guys would be to parachute troops into harm’s way in what might be a fruitless attempt at capturing these terrorists. Undoubtably, this would result in significant loss of life to American troops, as well as the real possibility that their action could result in failure. And yes, American citizens have joined al-Qaeda and other sundry terrorist groups, often in high profile positions. I don’t think that those victimized by a terrorist attack, however, would care a hell of a lot, if the perpetrators came from the U.S. or Saudi Arabia. Once an American has committed himself to acts of treason against his native country, I believe that all his rights have been forfeited. So let’s explore first, the left-winger’s objections to what should otherwise be considered acts of sanity and rationality.
Under the far left’s umbrella huddles those who consider evil to be virtually non-existent. If a person commits what society would normally consider acts of evil, it’s not because he is really a bad person. After all, could such a person be blamed if he was raised in rat-infested slums, surrounded by gangs pushing drugs and whores, had abusive parents, bad genes, or was brain-washed by religious fanatics or other unsavory characters. If he does bad things, it’s not really his fault. Or perhaps he was raised by affluent, but cold-hearted parents who were always dumping him off in boarding schools while they continually vacationed aboard luxury cruises. Again, not his fault when he decided his hobby would be strangling unsuspecting women. I mean, he never felt the love. In fact, there are no evil people; just bad environmental or genetic influences. And besides, doesn’t the Constitution guarantee due process for every American citizen, even if they are traitors? Such goes the thinking on the far-left as they shudder in horror over the drone program successes.
The far right, in contrast, never had any inhibitions about killing bad guys. In fact, their motto has usually been-“ready, FIRE, aim,” or shoot first and ask questions later. Those hacking away through the far right-wing underbrush usually have an extensive weaponry arsenal, and are always ready for the next gunfight at the OK Corral. Their objections to the President’s right to decide on drone kills exists because that President is Barack Obama. After all, giving all that power to someone who’s a Communist, Socialist, Marxist, Leninist, Stalinist, left-wing pinko (pick one or two) out to destroy the country, can never be a good thing. Besides he isn’t even American, having been really born in Kenya. No less a personage as Donald Trump will attest to that. So how can you give such a person the final say in drone strikes? These are the delusional other-worlds that both left and right wing whackos choose to occupy.
To be sure, no one is saying that the drone program is not without its faults. Very often, when drones are launched, besides killing the terrorists, innocent civilians who happen to be in the vicinity are also killed or wounded. It’s called collateral damage, and it occurs in every war. It is highly unfortunate, but we are in a war with fascist Islamic Jihadism. Normally, extensive efforts are undertaken to avoid collateral damage, but it will happen as long as Islamic Jihadists continue their battle with Western societies.
I will leave you with one last mention. Through diligent investigation, I uncovered a fact about the killing of Osama bin-Laden that has never been reported in the media. After he was shot, the Navy Seals found a “Trump for President” button attached to his robe.