Nimreitz

Right. So Dornado, I should be okay with it because there are better ways for them to kill US Citizens?

Dornado

I'm not trying to suggest that we should sacrifice any freedoms. My point is that this isn't really about drones. this is an argument about executive power as it relates to the use of force that is over 200 years old. We shouldn't be any more or less fearful of the tyrannical use of force than we ever have been. Raising the argument is just easy political fodder, and Paul knows it.

__________________

Dornado

Ask Fred Hampton , they didn't need a drone to get him

__________________

Bogg

I don't think that was ever really an issue. Paul is trying to play it up like Obama was trying to make it legal to drop a Hellfire on people for thought crimes, but everything I've read makes me believe that Holder was barely leaving the door open for armed drones to be used in active emergencies. Regardless of whether it's a police officer with a handgun or a military drones, there are rules already in place covering this kind of thing. Seems more like people panicking over a scary new technology than anything.

Krstic All-Star

I still haven't seen a good practical reason for disallowing drone strikes on US soil other than a glaring lack of military necessity (as opposed to drone strikes abroad, irrespective of the target's citizenship)

__________________
LIPA delenda est

nycwolf

Anyone trying to say only in acts of war are delusional. We us drones in foreign countries because we dont have control or if we alerted foriegn leaders the person we are after would be tipped off. According to repkrts someone tipped off osama a couple times. Drones would not have stopped 9/11 or pearl harbor because e didnt know it was happening and only found out after! If we knew about the 9/11 plot the fbi or whoever would have gone to their house or hotel and got them. This is silly. Drones are used for two things spying and killing both should make liberals and their aclu buddies cringe.