As others have mentioned, I can’t help but wonder how much useful intel we’re foregoing with these drone strikes; which, though briefly troubling when against American citizen-insurrectionists, are, imho, ultimately Constitutional. Those who disagree ought to be outraged with the president. This is a good example of what someone (was it Goldberg?) once called the “lowest form of punditry”: can you imagine the different response if this were a GOP administration.
h/t Jonah Golberg in Obama’s Terrorist Dilemma:
Which would you prefer: to be arrested, possibly waterboarded, and then tried by a U.S. military court in Cuba, or to be disintegrated by a Hellfire missile? What’s worse, to be executed after a less-than-perfect military trial, or to be executed with no trial at all?
And let’s not forget, these missiles aren’t that surgical. They kill the people around the target too. In this case Samir Khan, a U.S.-born editor of al-Qaeda’s magazine, Inspire, was killed — not to mention a number of others. Where was their day in court?
And that’s the point, really. If captured alive, terrorists pose political problems for Obama. Where do we put them? How do we interrogate them? And, most pressingly, how do we try them?
I don’t think those are tough questions. But Obama does. So he prefers to kill these people outright, avoiding the questions altogether.