Obama or Drone Mania?
Rand Paul is not a soft-hearted person. The junior U.S. senator from Kentucky has accused Hillary Clinton of high treason, and his political platform, highly praised by members of his own Tea Party, foresees the near end of the state. However, on March 14, the incendiary Republican discovered millions of left-leaning and extreme-left supporters in a flood of tweets hailing his insurrection against Obama's ability to exercise power over life and death as grand master of the terrorist-killing drones.
On that day, Paul addressed the Senate for 13 hours straight. His objective was to question the constitutional legality of the secret targeted-killing drone program, especially in circumstances where it could be used in the U.S. The wearisome Eric Holder, current U.S. attorney general, sent him the following message: “Does the president have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil? The answer to that question is no.”
Paul's concerns may seem crazy, but they still are indicative of a degree of suspicion at the heart of public opinion. More than four years after its implementation, political and legal imbroglio still besets the high-tech war at the center of White House anti-terrorism policies.
According to civil liberty organizations and some members of Congress, this secret document* strongly resembles one released by the Department of Justice during George W. Bush's presidency, which legalized the use of torture at a secret CIA location. Clearly, the drones would be to Obama what Guantanamo Bay was to Bush, a symbol of a blatant abuse of power.
The CIA Withdraws Jurisdiction from the Special Forces
Numerous members of the former Republican administration have rejected this comparison.
“The use of these devices has been a systemic failure,” said Dick Cheney, former vice-president, in a rare TV interview. “Abandoning special forms of interrogation, which provided valuable information, has led us to bet everything on an assassination policy that is sterile and ineffective.”**
Aware of the change of opinion on his "royal" right to determine life and death, Obama wanted to aim for transparency and legalize, once and for all, the use of armed drones. But cries of outrage from lawyers in the White House have deterred him from going too far. In the future, Congress will be consulted if another U.S. citizen is involved. As for the CIA, it is considered too scandalous and secretive of an organization and will soon be barred from these operations, which will be entrusted to special military forces reputed to be — whether rightly or wrongly — even more virtuous and law-abiding than civilian intelligence services.
As other countries begin relying on these same technologies, Obama intends to establish international standards for the use of drones under war time law. However, he is not exactly in the best position to be giving these kinds of lessons.
* Editor's note: The author seems to be referring to the Department of Justice's release of a secret memo to the Senate Intelligence and Judiciary committees in June 2012.
** Editor's note: This quote, accurately translated, could not be verified.
On that day, Paul addressed the Senate for 13 hours straight. His objective was to question the constitutional legality of the secret targeted-killing drone program, especially in circumstances where it could be used in the U.S. The wearisome Eric Holder, current U.S. attorney general, sent him the following message: “Does the president have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil? The answer to that question is no.”
Paul's concerns may seem crazy, but they still are indicative of a degree of suspicion at the heart of public opinion. More than four years after its implementation, political and legal imbroglio still besets the high-tech war at the center of White House anti-terrorism policies.
According to civil liberty organizations and some members of Congress, this secret document* strongly resembles one released by the Department of Justice during George W. Bush's presidency, which legalized the use of torture at a secret CIA location. Clearly, the drones would be to Obama what Guantanamo Bay was to Bush, a symbol of a blatant abuse of power.
The CIA Withdraws Jurisdiction from the Special Forces
Numerous members of the former Republican administration have rejected this comparison.
“The use of these devices has been a systemic failure,” said Dick Cheney, former vice-president, in a rare TV interview. “Abandoning special forms of interrogation, which provided valuable information, has led us to bet everything on an assassination policy that is sterile and ineffective.”**
Aware of the change of opinion on his "royal" right to determine life and death, Obama wanted to aim for transparency and legalize, once and for all, the use of armed drones. But cries of outrage from lawyers in the White House have deterred him from going too far. In the future, Congress will be consulted if another U.S. citizen is involved. As for the CIA, it is considered too scandalous and secretive of an organization and will soon be barred from these operations, which will be entrusted to special military forces reputed to be — whether rightly or wrongly — even more virtuous and law-abiding than civilian intelligence services.
As other countries begin relying on these same technologies, Obama intends to establish international standards for the use of drones under war time law. However, he is not exactly in the best position to be giving these kinds of lessons.
* Editor's note: The author seems to be referring to the Department of Justice's release of a secret memo to the Senate Intelligence and Judiciary committees in June 2012.
** Editor's note: This quote, accurately translated, could not be verified.
Previous article![]( "Afghan Peace Process: Doubts of Karzai Administration")