1. Most of the drone debate, pro and contra, assumes drone strikes are a net benefit for U.S. security, whatever the legal & moral flaws.
-
-
4. Here's the CIA's former Kabul station chief arguing that drone assassinations are a net liability in Af-Pak war:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/graham-e-fuller/global-viewpoint-obamas-p_b_201355.html …
-
5. Here a Naval Postgraduate School prof argues that drone srikes are an overused tactic in search of a strategy:http://www.lobelog.com/drone-wars-tactics-in-search-of-a-strategy/ …
-
6. And the security costs to US territory in blowback attacks from drone strikes abroad are real, & demonstrably highhttp://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/7/drone-blowback.html …
-
7. Whether or not drones are a strategic benefit to the US is the gateway question. If the answer is "no", then there are no more questions.
-
8. One last skeptic of drone strikes' net strategic value: ex-DNI director Dennis Blair http://nyti.ms/1OXOSuj pic.twitter.com/GXwI8pteNt
-
Don't listen to the prudes and prisses. Strategic questions about the use of lethal force ARE moral questions.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.