HOLLYWOOD STOCK EXCHANGE
THE ENTERTAINMENT MARKET
THE ENTERTAINMENT MARKET
Taking your scenario at face value, of course the government would have a responsibility to prevent the explosion. But the scenario is a
false choice. It's like an old episode of 24, where Jack Bauer has to do something horrible or thousands will die. No other choices! There is no time!
If it's the government's responsibility to prevent acts of terrorism, then the best way to fulfil that responsibility is through things like better intelligence and counter-terrorism practices, better coordination between intelligence and law enforcement, tracking of nuclear materials, etc. After all that, if it comes down to a drone to stop it, then the government has already failed at what it is supposed to do.
I understand the government's predicament. September 11 is still fresh in the mind, and no one wants to rule out anything that could conceivably prevent another tragic event. If there was a situation that could only be prevented by a drone strike, I expect the administration (any administration) would break the law now and apologise later. But because the question is being asked now, and they know what the answer would be if the unthinkable were to happen, they don't want to say "there's no legal basis for that", no matter how unlikely. Especially when the comeback is "Don't you care about American lives?"
Also, a couple of things about it being a military operation on US soil... My understanding is that the military (and CIA, which operates many of the drones in Yemen and Pakistan) can't assist US domestic law enforcement, though the National Guard can if it is acting under the authority of a State. There are currently Predator and Reaper drones (and presumably others) attached to certain National Guard units.
And there is an exception to this rule for nuclear threats - the AG can request the Secretary of Defense to provide emergency assistance if civilian law enforcement is inadequate. So in your scenario, the government should already have authority to send in the drones.
Filibuster Comment Mar 07, 02:18
I'm just glad Obama says he probably won't murder me without due process. Probably. {nm} Mar 07, 04:57
True. WHY was the fillibuster and the drone issue NOT covered much by the mainstream media? Mar 07, 06:33
There would be blood in the streets if Dubya had even suggested something so heinous as killing Americans on American soil. Mar 07, 06:36
This whole thing comes down to a philosophical debate as to whether the ends justify the means. Mar 07, 11:08
I did not percieve your comment to be partisan, nor did I intend to direct any part of my partisan comment at you. Mar 07, 13:11
The big difference in this scenario is that someone like Mohhamed Atta being waterboarded is not an American citizen. Mar 07, 12:05
Open the door a little, more and more freedoms are taken away by the criminals in government... Mar 07, 14:44
Excellent points. Thank you for your response. {nm} Mar 07, 15:04
Taking your scenario at face value, of course the government would have a responsibility to prevent the explosion. But the scenario is a Mar 07, 19:58
