I support President Obama, But....

[kpete]

Civilian Deaths Due to Drones Are Not Many, Obama Says

WASHINGTON — President Obama on Monday defended the use of drones to strike suspected terrorists in Pakistan and elsewhere, saying the clandestine program was “kept on a very tight leash” and enabled the United States to use “pinpoint” targeting to avoid more intrusive military action.

Mr. Obama, in an unusually candid public discussion of the Central Intelligence Agency’s covert program, said the drone strikes had not inflicted huge civilian casualties. “We are very careful in terms of how it’s been applied,” he said. “It is important for everybody to understand that this thing is kept on a very tight leash.”

MORE:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/31/world/middleeast/civilian-deaths-due-to-drones-are-few-obama-says.html

........................................

Investigation Finds U.S. Drones Strike Pakistan Every Four Days,
Killing 775 Civilians Since 2004

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/8/15/investigation_finds_us_drones_strike_pakistan

[limpyhobbler]

1. I criticize the president all the time, on many issues , but...

But the war in Af/Pak is one area where I think he has been doing a great job.

The drone casualties are very very very ugly, but not as ugly as the alternative.

There are real terrorists our there plotting attacks. We have an intelligence program to identify threats and if our government has information about threats to America, we have to take action. What is the alternative? Do nothing and wait for the next terrorist attack?

If the local authorities in that country are unwilling or unable to take action against terror groups, in my view the president is quite correct to take actions against them. If we didn't have the drones, we would have to send in people.

This is what President Obama promised to do if elected and he is following through.