DRONES

Alright here is a shocker for most of you I am sure. I am generally not a fan of the Republican party...there I admitted it. Having said that, I have to admit Rand Paul deserves some credit. His thirteen hour filibuster brought attention to a topic many in the media, and otherwise have pretty much ignored. First, let me address another issue quickly, the way Mr. Paul used the filibuster is admirable. In today's Congress where nothing gets done, all too often congressional loop holes are used to defer debate, and where debate seems to be generally discouraged. Mr. Paul put some skin in the game, he found that the issue was important and he remained on the Senate floor for an extended time to get his point across. He didn't use the threat of it, or try any other tricks he just did it. Phew... that is out the way.

So drones... I have some major concerns with the whole idea but the issue breaks down into two major ones for me. First, as american citizens should the recent leaked White House memo that says that drones can be used on our own soil scare us. It scares me, although I am not sure that one can argue that the use would be illegal. If the United States government deems one of us an immediate terror threat they can certainly use guns or any force they deem necessary, drones are no different I suppose. It still scares me though that a robotic device can eliminate targets here or abroad without any due process what so ever. This does not even get into the ability of drones to spy on the population, 1984 anyone? Drones probably fall outside the traditional search and seizure Jurisprudence. It's certainly something we should be aware about. And, lest anyone forgot the current White House is run by a Democrat. We should all be scared by the extra judicial nature of this whole drones scenario.

My second concern, to a large extent we are one of the only countries with drones capable of carrying out military strikes. That means this is an area of first impression and we are making the rules. We have used this power to carry out attacks abroad often without getting permission from host countries. Our government decides that someone is a threat to America and sends an unmanned aircraft violating foreign airspace and carries out an attack. I have had this argument with some people and they contend that it is the only way to capture or kill some of these terrorists. The ends justify the means in their minds and I can see a lot of appeal in that logic. But, we have to be careful. We are setting an example that other nations may soon follow.

Let me take a stab at a very disconcerting parallel. Nuclear weapons, America is the only country to have used them in an attack. Ever since, the world has been back tracking from the use of nuclear weapons. North Korea, Pakistan, and Iran all worry us because at the push of a button these weapons could cause massive damage. What if Iran had drone capability and a rogue leader in Cuba allowed the Iranians to fly drones from Cuba. The Cubans believe that their latest leader was a target of an assassination attempt by the CIA and they know who the agent is.(They are correct in that the US attempted to carry out the assassination) An American spy tried to kill their leader certainly sounds like a threat that rises to the level of national security. The next day the Cubans/Iranians carry out a drone attack on a high rise in Miami where the CIA operative was believed to be living. Sound scary... it should... we have the power, what kind of example are we setting.

BTW this is an Obama problem not a Bush problem. The rate, frequency and sheer number of drone attacks under President Obama is far higher than under President Bush. I am interested to see what comments people have about this issue.