We inherited this mess, did we?
Let's go back to when Bush was still president and there was a campaign going on. Obama suggested the use of drones in Pakistan and was upbraided for it by Clinton and McCain, with Bush remaining mute. He defended his proposal vigorously, and Obama supporters were on board. Bush eventyally followed Obama's suggestion.
I voted for Obama because of his many other qualities and in spite of his passion for killing people in the "Af/Pak Theatre" of war.
Are you saying the practice of one country to commit random kidnapping of americans to serve in a foreign navy under brutal conditions for years is not grounds to start a war against that country? Is that right?
I must have misunderstood. It seems to me that if any country regularly kidnapped the citizens of another country to serve in it's imperialistic navy, then it should expect to have war waged upon it.
The "pressing" by the Royal Navy of British sailors who had deserted their posts to take refuge in the ex-Colonies was an excuse for the land-grabbers in Washington to attempt to conquer Canada in 1812, much like the Gulf of Tonkin incident (Vietnam) or the Maine's sinking (Cuba) or the WoMD that Saddam was supposedly threatening the world with (Iraq). The US can always come up with a rationalisation to attack somebody else and sell it to their people later as genuine true American history (accept no substitutes).
Posted by Robert Sneddon at November 3, 2009 03:44 AMPresident Obama is the drone murder King. Heck of job, Mr. President. But somehow, using acts of terror with drones and missiles aimed at small villages in rural Pakistan is not going to increase American security; it is decreasing American security by outraging millions of Pakistanis and millions more Muslims in other countries. You can't fight terror with terror... Imperialism is not a good policy in the 21st century, even for imperial America...
Posted by james k. sayre at November 3, 2009 09:48 PM