Charles Krauthammer: Now Obama wants to be seen as 'drone warrior'

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • mohokat Ogden, UT
    June 6, 2012 7:54 a.m.

    Drone Warrior? Absolutely appropriate. A Drone is unmaned. Fits. Remote controlled. Fits. or maybe unmaned pres.would be the best fit.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    June 4, 2012 4:42 p.m.

    Ever the partisan crowd doing their thing. We could end all this silliness if each side would be grown up enough to acknowledge the accomplishments of the other side. Were the "conservatives" saying the same things about Bush as he paraded on the deck of an aircraft carrier - emblazoned with a banner proclaiming "mission accomplished". Were they complaining of the grand standing then?

    Yes, I know, liberals made fun of Bush at the time. But at some point it would be nice to have one side act like grown ups, and acknowledge that the other "AMERICANS" might just have done something right.

    But I am not holding my breath. It seems minds have settled on the fact that to have a particular party win is far more important than to acknowledge successes other Americans. Fortunately I know we have a long history of this silliness all the way back to Jefferson and Hamilton - one of the nastiest fights ever. The difference is that back then, Hamilton was mature enough to support Jefferson when the option was Raymond Burr. With current thinking, Hamilton would be guilty of high party treason, and Hamilton labelled that days "RINO".

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    June 4, 2012 1:10 p.m.

    maybe Hollywood will add Barack to the shield of the next Avengers - Drone Fighter or maybe Captain Ciaos!

  • Jared Average, SE
    June 4, 2012 11:15 a.m.

    Conservative Scientist, we shouldn't give Pres. Obama credit for ending the war in Iraq. He said he would remove troops starting Day 1 of his presidency - he didn't. Instead he followed the withdrawal plan established by the Bush administration. Pres. Obama had zero influence on the end of the war in Iraq. He didn't prolong the war (Pres. Bush would not have either) but he should not receive credit for ending it (just as he should not receive credit for killing Osama bin Laden - all he said was "Ok, go ahead" - he did not gather the intelligence, he did not make the plans, he did not make the strike).

  • Linus Bountiful, UT
    June 3, 2012 4:41 p.m.

    "I believe any genuine person can evolve their position on a whole host of issues including foreign policy." Mr. Conservative Scientist, you are so diplomatic. You are so charitable. You are so good at kissing up.

    We are not talking about a "genuine" person. We are not talking "evolving." We are talking Machieaveli.

  • conservative scientist Lindon, UT
    June 3, 2012 1:17 p.m.

    Although Krauthammer makes a few salient points and I generally agree with many of his past positions, I do take issue with his general tone and conclusions today. I am no lover of Obama and am anxious to see him leave office as soon as possible, but I give him Kudos for a series of foreign policy successes - ending the war in Iraq, avoiding a war altogether in Lybia, and the successful and relatively cheap killing of terrorist operatives with these drone attacks. I will also be the first to admit I disagree with him on several foreign policy issues, but I want to give credit where it is due.

    Having served in Iraq, I understand something of the horrors of war. Using drones to take out terrorists without the cost of American's being killed is a big plus for me. I have also had issues with our "interrogation techniques" of the past - no matter how successful - I stand with John McCain on this issue who was himself a prisoner of war. Krauthammer also accuses Obama of hypocrisy, but I believe any genuine person can evolve their position on a whole host of issues including foreign policy.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    June 3, 2012 7:59 a.m.

    I don’t understand the left’s “morality” on this issue. Obama can assassinate suspected terrorists by executive order without due legal process but President Bush was “evil” for enhanced interrogation of captured terrorists to obtain information to save innocent lives! Killing them is ok but we must not, cannot violate their “rights” on the battlefield or in GITMO! Strange “morality” going on here! Interpretation: if Obama is commander in chief, terrorists have no rights, but if GWB is commander in chief, terrorist thugs and murders do have unalienable, sacred rights!