Cheney backs Obama policy on drone strikes

Now they have squat to run on.

Think Mitt Romney at the FP debate. This is one of the reasons the Obama's are in the WH. The Republicans preened on national security for 30 years and often maintained the presidency because of it. No more.

Now, back to your regularly scheduled Obama-is-Bush snark.

The Drone wars started in 2004, bureaucracies do not want to put themselves out of business as do their counterparts that is a fact.
They want to grow and get more power.



Its a sick cycle especially if Cheney puts his seal of approval on it.

Cheney's seal of approval is an acknowledgement of his own irrelevance though.

You could say the Republicans won the War on Terror; it is certainly how they won the 2004 election. Rational politics dictated a never-again response from the Democrats. Obama has done that and it has worked.

As for the U.S. spending more on defense than the rest of the world combined and our paranoia that extends right down to 2nd Amendment overreach by just about every Tom, Dick and Harry with a gun...I agree with M. Moore and "Bowling for Columbine," there is something wrong with us. Winning elections in such an environment means you have to go overboard on security. Until it bankrupts us, it probably won't change much. It is sad.

Because he's going to gut it and wants Republicans to get the blame. So it's not like he's a fan of Obama, really.

Bryant

Maybe it's his digital ticker...it's never blinking the right time.

...... If Cheney likes it

under Obama. They love it.....

the wrongness of using drones to kill people in countries we are not at war with.

PNAC Statement of Principles

June 3, 1997

American foreign and defense policy is adrift. Conservatives have criticized the incoherent policies of the Clinton Administration. They have also resisted isolationist impulses from within their own ranks. But conservatives have not confidently advanced a strategic vision of America's role in the world. They have not set forth guiding principles for American foreign policy. They have allowed differences over tactics to obscure potential agreement on strategic objectives. And they have not fought for a defense budget that would maintain American security and advance American interests in the new century.

We aim to change this. We aim to make the case and rally support for American global leadership.

As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world's preeminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?

We seem to have forgotten the essential elements of the Reagan Administration's success: a military that is strong and ready to meet both present and future challenges; a foreign policy that boldly and purposefully promotes American principles abroad; and national leadership that accepts the United States' global responsibilities.
snip----

Elliott Abrams Gary Bauer William J. Bennett Jeb Bush

Dick Cheney Eliot A. Cohen Midge Decter Paula Dobriansky Steve Forbes

Aaron Friedberg Francis Fukuyama Frank Gaffney Fred C. Ikle

Donald Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad I. Lewis Libby Norman Podhoretz

Dan Quayle Peter W. Rodman Stephen P. Rosen Henry S. Rowen

Donald Rumsfeld Vin Weber George Weigel Paul Wolfowitz

The truth is, modern American imperialism has nothing to do with concern for America, American citizens, or any human beings on the planet other than the 1% and their lackeys.

It's all about protecting and promoting the private interests of extraordinarily wealthy people and their profit making apparatuses (basically, multinational corporate monopolies).

You and I are expendable, and our interests are only of concern when they serve the interests of the 1%.

I strongly suggest that every American citizen take a few weeks off from work all at the same time, get together with each other, and discuss how we are going to wrest power from the 1% and create a genuine egalitarian democracy for ourselves. Of course, that will make the 1% very angry, and it may be necessary to come up with a plan to restrain them from causing mass harm to those of us who resist their control.