Published: Sunday, Feb. 17 2013 12:00 a.m. MST
The difference is huge..Obama uses drones as an alternative to boots on the
ground..Bush and the neocons just fought anybody and everybody. That being said
the author is right in that we do have choices and the choices are important bot
strategicly and morally.
This is all fine with me, because when it comes to issues of national defense,
partisanship has nothing to do with securing this nation. The military and its
capability should now sway one way, or another, because some choose to spew
political rhetoric. Some may disagree in what world events we choose to engage
- but how we engage should never be a matter of partisan politics.Keep our military out of politics.
Killing terrorists is moral but enhanced interrogation is immoral? Strange
MMSo, you see no difference between killing someone on the
battlefield and torturing a prisoner?Strange morality indeed.
Joe Blow. Always nice to have a discussion with you! Your are always civil as I
try to be and I thank you for that. Enhanced interrogation is not really
torture, frightening perhaps but hardly torture. Even if it is (was) it saved
lives regardless of what some people say. It led those Navy Seals to bin Laden
and stopped several terrorist attacks. Now, on the other hand, killing suspected
terrorists has eliminated getting any intelligence from them; dead terrorists
can't talk. Then there is always the collateral damage to innocents. No
one died from waterboarding, can't say that about drone attacks.
Yes, MM. Civil discussions are the best. 30 years ago, no one
would have denied that waterboarding was torture. Now, only staunch
conservatives deny it.And we know why that is.It saved
lives? Possibly. I sincerely thought that the US was above the
notion that "the ends justifies the means".So, are you
against drone attacks?If we would have used Drones to take out
Hussein and kept from invading Iraq at a cost of Trillions of $$ and thousands
of American lives, I vote for it every time.
People that have been water boarded consider it torture. Mancow, the
conservative radio host changed his mind pretty quickly after being water
boarded. We don't even need to have the discussion anymore.It's not the drones. It's the explosives at the end. When drones
were unarmed they sent a cruise missile or guided bomb and I'm sure the
people that died still don't care which.If Obama = Bush then
why are conservatives against it now? Because it's Obama and not Bush. You
just proved it. It doesn't matter the subject just that it's not a
conservative president. I'm looking forward to the cuts in
military spending comming up. Yaaaaay!
If we can't decern the difference between killing those who have declared
war on us, to which our own congress declared war back - and torture - which is
against all convensions of war... we have an issue. Killing your
adversary has always been part of what being at war means. Meanwhile, there
also have been long established rules and standards by which you treat those
captives, which are rulled as long as they are in captivity, to not be active
combatents. Are those rules always followed? No. That is why we
have the war crimes tribunal in the Hague. I know, it sounds odd to have rules
in war, but we do, and we as a nation should not lower ourselves to be equals to
those who do so willingly break these rules.
Bush and Obama are alike, especially with the "irresponsible and
unpatriotic" use of the Chinese credit card.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments