@jamesmthomson Absolutely. My guess is that it was probably a cell phone strike (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/nsa-drone-strikes-based-on-mobile-phone-data-9119735.html …).
-
-
Replying to @cmuratori
@cmuratori That would mean that the US erroneously targeted someone their intelligence believed to be a combatant, no?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jmt5050
@jamesmthomson No, it means they just target people without any intelligence at all.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori
@cmuratori Terror suspects purposely putting others in harms way 2 confuse intelligence.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jmt5050
@jamesmthomson Are you suggesting that the CIA has never had an agent impersonate a reporter?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori
@cmuratori No. U r twisting yourself in knots here. My argument is clear--the US doesn't purposely target non-combatant civilians.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jmt5050
@jamesmthomson I'm twisting myself in knots? You're saying you can kill anyone who you call a combatant, whether you have evidence or not.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori
@jamesmthomson So I'm saying, where's the moral high ground there? Do you just want ISIS to call people combatants before they behead them?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori
@jamesmthomson You only approve of US killings because you believe the lies the people doing them tell you.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori
@jamesmthomson If you chose to believe ISIS or AQAP's lies instead, you'd feel the opposite. But the truth is, _all of these are wrong_.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@jamesmthomson Killing should have been a last resort, and now it is a first resort, and that is a travesty for everyone.
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.