foriegn or domestic. I do not find our system for delivering death by jury to have any greater moral standing.
We have been delivering wholesale death in a sloppy and imprecise manner over there for nearly 10 years now. I am really not clear how a drone strike someplace takes it up a notch from "shock and awe", where we delivered 800 one ton bombs on a city of 4 million people in a day, most shot from 100s of miles away. None of those people got a trial, and it is very clear that the thumb was heavily on the scales of justice to rationalize that one.
After that event, I am not clear, short of using nukes, what more we could do to damage our moral standing. Bringing all of this to an end is the only way to begin to recover some moral standing. It was never going to end without killing Bin Laden and his close associates. No President was going to bring the troops home before that was accomplished. In that context, a few targeted drone strikes to bring this to an end seems relatively non-violent, when you compare it to "shock and awe" or Falluja. (Do you remember the point where the entire US Marines had to place an emergency order because they were actually running out of bullets? I do.)
Don't get me wrong, I think the entire thing top to bottom was as close to morally bankrupt as anything the US has ever undertaken (and it has undertaken some very morally suspect things). I just have difficulty singling out specific events for particular outrage anymore. This started for me most of 10 years ago. I call it "outrage fatigue".
Let's just bring the troops home, (most or all of them, from everywhere).
= new reply since forum marked as read
