quoting myself from another thread:kingblaze84;5580049 said:What makes you think Obama wouldn't trust the use of drones with another president? Didn't he support President Bush's use of drones?
"i'll go you one better: remember in the run-up to the 2012 election how the Obama administration essentially said (i'm going to paraphrase rather than hunt for a link right now) that they'd need to put policies in place to regulate the drone usage should Romney win the election? which carries the implication that his administration DIDN'T need them?
Election Spurred a Move to Codify U.S. Drone Policy
if Bush had done something like this in, say, 2004, people on this forum would have lost their fucking minds."The attempt to write a formal rule book for targeted killing began last summer after news reports on the drone program, started under President George W. Bush and expanded by Mr. Obama, revealed some details of the president’s role in the shifting procedures for compiling “kill lists” and approving strikes. Though national security officials insist that the process is meticulous and lawful, the president and top aides believe it should be institutionalized, a course of action that seemed particularly urgent when it appeared that Mitt Romney might win the presidency.
“There was concern that the levers might no longer be in our hands,” said one official, speaking on condition of anonymity. With a continuing debate about the proper limits of drone strikes, Mr. Obama did not want to leave an “amorphous” program to his successor, the official said. The effort, which would have been rushed to completion by January had Mr. Romney won, will now be finished at a more leisurely pace, the official said.
whatever you think of Romney, why does Obama NOT need the same level of regulation as to what he does with the drones?
look, the "war on terror" was prosecuted in some fucked-up ways under Bush, but we're really going to claim no one was trying to find and take out high-ranking targets with drones under Bush?FuriousOne;5580451 said:How is it Hypocrisy when Bush's body count is random as fuck. There weren't any strategic targets like the kill list which is actually put together with various intelligence agencies taking part with valid high ranking terrorist targets getting taking out, it was kill the entire country and sort it out later. The only high ranking targets bush took out was a regime that had nothing to do with 9/11.
DHS is fucked up (possibly beyond recovery), but this ammo thing never makes me flip out. it's supposed to be 1.6 billion rounds over how many years, and hollowpoint ammo might not be "for use in war" ammo, but it's definitely "for use by law enforcement" ammo. and frankly, the way people freak out about hollowpoint ammo, i don't think they really know what it is.Black_Samson;5582178 said:1.6 Billion Rounds Of Ammo For Homeland Security? It's Time For A National Conversation
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphben...-conversation/
i just need them to leave me some, damn it