4 ms·
Shame? How about anger, or rage, or wrath? How about an inflexible demand to stop war crimes. No one wants to conduct a meaningful opposition because the Ameri
by whatafarce 11y ago
Shame? How about anger, or rage, or wrath? How about an inflexible demand to stop war crimes.
No one wants to conduct a meaningful opposition because the American system will destroy them. We are ruled by fear.
- grandalf 11y agoWell yes, all that too. I agree with your statement about lack of opposition/dissent. It is horrible.
- NN88 11y agoWhat would you do to stop the war crimes committed by these very targets?
- grandalf 11y agocould you explain what your question means? Who do you mean by targets?
- NN88 11y agoWhy should I have a problem with taking out this guy? https://theintercept.com/drone-papers/the-life-and-death-of-objective-peckham/ https://theintercept.com/drone-papers/the-life-and-death-of-...
- grandalf 11y agoArguably you wouldn't object to taking out nearly any random person on the other side of the world who you didn't know personally. That's not the point. It's a lot easier to just randomly assassinate people across the world than to come up with a sound policy that protects our interest while also obeying our values as a people. Historically, western culture has not condoned execution without trial. The notion of just lumping anyone within an age range into the category of combatants is so antithetical to what the US ought to stand for, that it's really quite shameful. It's only a small degree away from the ethos of so-called terrorists, who just try to kill anyone they can. What it boils down to is that the US is practicing terrorism abroad. I'm sure there would be circumstances where I'd approve of drastic measures, but at this point I'm very far from convinced that such tactics are remotely necessary or appropriate.