License to Kill...Americans by Drone

Tuesday's release by the Obama Administration of a 16-page "white paper" on targeting and killing of AMCITs by drones has failed to stir nearly the public denunciation that I expected when the news first broke.

Policical talking heads Chuck Todd, Domenico Montanaro, Natalie Cucchiara and Brooke Brower posted today possible reasons for the lackluster response:

What’s been surprising about this entire episode has been the lack of outrage from Congress. Don’t they want the administration to have to justify their actions even in AFTER-action settings? It’s amazing that it took Brennan’s confirmation hearing to convince the White House to allow even a FEW members of Congress to read the ACTUAL legal memos and not just a “white paper.”

Political whiplash: You’ll be forgiven if you’ve had political whiplash with Republicans defending Obama on the issue. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and even ex-Bush U.N. Amb. John Bolton gave full-throated defenses of Obama’s use of drones even in the targeting of American citizens-turned-al Qaeda operatives. Graham yesterday said that he was "totally supportive” of the actions. Bolton called it “entirely sensible” and “derived from the Bush administration approach to the War on Terror.” This is not a Democrat vs. Republican issue. This is an Executive branch vs. Legislative branch issue. There are still important and serious questions to be asked about the United States' use and increased use of a program that can catch (and has caught) civilians in the line of fire. But the big difference between this and, say, the political opposition to the torture memos is you had prominent voices on the right opposing this (John McCain), who were feeding the media back in the day. It’s not like Hillary Clinton is sitting in the Senate criticizing the drone program. That’s essentially what McCain did to Bush. But, as we learned then and see now, the public also seemed to overwhelmingly favor the use of drones overseas to target terrorists. In a Washington Post/ABC poll last year, 83% said they approved; it’s when they’re used domestically that people start to have privacy concerns.

Many leaders from both sides of the aisle are seemingly following the sentiments of their constituents. If, in fact, 83% of Americans approve of drones assassinating terrorists overseas, then they apparently do not distinguish between killing foreign terrorists in foreign lands and killing AMCITs in foreign lands. Makes sense to me. If a SEAL or Force Recon Marine in Iraq, Afghanistan or anywhere OCONUS is authorized to kill an AMCIT by way of 7.62mm round to the skull, then why would it be any different for a Barclay Lounge operator (aka Air Force UAV pilot) sitting in Nevada to fire a Hellfire missile from a Predator at the same target?