General Discussion

Xithras

(16,191 posts)

30. That is exactly the point.

Thu Mar 7, 2013, 03:05 PM

Mar 2013

There is no purpose in using a missile to take that person out, though we do that type of thing every day in other countries. This whole flap started when the administration was asked whether those same actions could take place on U.S. soil. A proper answer would have been: "No. We would use FBI agents to arrest them in that situation."

But that wasn't the answer that was given.

There is NO valid cause to drone strike a citizen in a non-combat situation. EVER. There are no extraordinary circumstances that would justify it, because we have the domestic law enforcement capacity to take that person into custody directly. Holder should have responded that way, but instead attempted to avoid being pidgeonholed on what is really a fairly simple issue. That's NOT a question that a public servant is allowed to be vague on.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

49 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Do people think President couldn't use the military if one of these "patriot" groups attacked? [View all] SpartanDem Mar 2013 OP

My understanding is they have targeted Al Queda and the Taliban with the law... Kalidurga Mar 2013 #1

Considering what they did to the righteous, peaceful, 1st Amendment Occupy movement: Fire Walk With Me Mar 2013 #2

my thoughts exactly FirstLight Mar 2013 #13

The federal government didn't do SHIT to OWS. Comrade_McKenzie Mar 2013 #14

um, yeah right, total coincidence that occupations were cleared out almost simultaneously Warren Stupidity Mar 2013 #18

Was that the federal government? Were there armed drones? MineralMan Mar 2013 #36

You think we're droping bombs on people in the middle of our cities SpartanDem Mar 2013 #37

Please see First Light's post above yours. Fire Walk With Me Mar 2013 #38

If Clinton saw McVeigh coming, and law enforcement wasn't able to TwilightGardener Mar 2013 #3

I believe you are correct Still Sensible Mar 2013 #4

Defining 'imminent threat' is useless. There will always be unforeseen circumstances. randome Mar 2013 #7

The Obama administration didn't get bogged down with "imminent." Comrade Grumpy Mar 2013 #11

If we brought in 535 politicians, I have no doubt it would get bogged down. randome Mar 2013 #12

There Is No Real Question About This, Sir: The Military Can Suppress Insurrection The Magistrate Mar 2013 #5

The "big battle" is just a carrot siligut Mar 2013 #6

This is probably why the teabaggers are grandstanding about domestic drones meow2u3 Mar 2013 #8

It's their form of patriotism. Confederate flag thrown in for free. freshwest Mar 2013 #41

What if the patriot's kid is eating pizza at a cafe? Can we drone his ass, too? Comrade Grumpy Mar 2013 #9

That would depend entirely on the kind of pizza the kid is eating Katashi_itto Mar 2013 #31

Take Waco, and raise it to the BENGHAZI! power ... zbdent Mar 2013 #10

In answer to your question, no. Your OP is a straw man. cthulu2016 Mar 2013 #15

No strawman. The AG was asked if the President could attack citizens on US soil SpartanDem Mar 2013 #23

Don't use logic in front of these hyperbolic ideologues. Comrade_McKenzie Mar 2013 #16

if they arrayed themselves for battle and engaged the government in war? Warren Stupidity Mar 2013 #17

Imagine yourself in the Army and you are ordered to upaloopa Mar 2013 #19

It all depends on what you think "imminent" means. kudzu22 Mar 2013 #20

My point was these powers had been use in times of bordering on revolt SpartanDem Mar 2013 #24

I expect the President to act as needed to preserve the Union. bluedigger Mar 2013 #21

Agree. randome Mar 2013 #22

The argument isn't about suppressing an active insurrection. Xithras Mar 2013 #25

Yours is not a valid scenario. randome Mar 2013 #28

That is exactly the point. Xithras Mar 2013 #30

If you substitute 'military force' for 'drone' in your post, I agree with you. randome Mar 2013 #32

In that situation? Yes. Xithras Mar 2013 #33

I don't think the President claimed that power on U.S soil SpartanDem Mar 2013 #29

No, that's your argument. Not "the" argument. jeff47 Mar 2013 #34

Forgive my ignorance here. Mz Pip Mar 2013 #26

Foolish waste of time to call DOD One_Life_To_Give Mar 2013 #27

The level would have to be high to warrant such action. A foreign military action on our soil yes. LiberalFighter Mar 2013 #35

Dudes, what was the Civil War? The miltary fighting traitorous Americans on US soil. McCamy Taylor Mar 2013 #39

John Brown, pre posse comitatus nadinbrzezinski Mar 2013 #40

posse comitatus isn't ironcald SpartanDem Mar 2013 #44

As you posted, you'd need a full fledge revolt nadinbrzezinski Mar 2013 #46

You mean like Kent State ? RagAss Mar 2013 #42

I believe that was national guard troops or the police ThomThom Mar 2013 #48

How the U.S. Military Would Crush a Tea Party Rebellion arely staircase Mar 2013 #43

What's wrong with using normal police? JVS Mar 2013 #45

It was illegal until Bush got the law removed. ThomThom Mar 2013 #47

"One of these patriot groups"... How many people is that? cherokeeprogressive Mar 2013 #49