Thu Dec 6, 2012, 01:20 PM
graham4anything (11,464 posts)
Richard Clarke-Give Drones a Medal. Better to eliminate terrorists before, rather than retaliate aft
remember, democrats considered Richard Clarke a hero for railing against Bush for ignoring the memos before 9-11
So let's be consistent now.
I would love to post this entire editorial, however, we are only allowed to post 4 paragraphs I have been told, so I have to snip snip
I have examined the alternative methods of striking: F-16s, cruise missiles, commando raids. All of these methods are far more likely to kill innocent people and Americans. The attacking forces sweep in at high speed, have little or no time to assess the situation and then employ extremely lethal force over a fairly wide area. Alternatively, we could rely exclusively on indigenous security forces, but often they are not capable of effective action and are at least as likely to create innocent casualties.
But the fact is, the Obama Administration is pursuing both deradicalization and indigenous capacity-building with governments in the Islamic world. The President has also ordered the creation of new guidelines for the use of drones, to make their employment less frequent. So called “signature attacks,” those conducted on terrorist camps, will be reduced, and the emphasis will be placed on strikes against known terrorist commanders or groups known to be preparing attacks.
For the foreseeable future, however, drones will remain an important counter-terrorism tool. When used properly, they eliminate real threats and keep terrorist groups off-base, better than any other option the President has at his disposal.
And, at least for me, there is no doubt that it is better to eliminate terrorists before they strike, rather than to retaliate after there are dead Americans
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/give-drones-medal-article-1.1211249?pgno=2#ixzz2EITMVkYJ
3 replies, 774 views
Richard Clarke-Give Drones a Medal. Better to eliminate terrorists before, rather than retaliate aft (Original post)
Response to graham4anything (Original post)
Thu Dec 6, 2012, 02:01 PM
denverbill (11,078 posts)
1. How about removing their motivation to become terrorists in the first place?
I guess that would be too unmanly.
That would involve asking the question "Why are they attacking us?" instead of simply trying to kill them before they kill us.
And Lord knows after 9-11, nobody can dare ask that question.
I can tell you the answer too. Bin Laden attacked us because we had military bases in Saudi Arabia, which we have since removed. They attacked us in Iraq because we were in Iraq. They attacked us in Afghanistan because we were in Afghanistan.
All we have to do is withdraw our troops into our own borders, stop meddling in the affairs of other countries, and viola, no more terrorism against the US.
Response to msongs (Reply #2)
Thu Dec 6, 2012, 03:42 PM
graham4anything (11,464 posts)
3. Saving hundreds of thousands of lives over a few is better than the few dying anyhow along with 1000
and isolationism in a worldwide economy makes no sense at all
after all we are one