New York Times gives us the news that our fearless leader who cannot stand the thought of water boarding, drones away killing men women and children who happen to get in the way. There is so much to discuss about the piece, but I will focus on the children. The piece that was missing is that this very President to cover his ass, declared by executive order that it was fine for child soldiers. So if he drones kids, hey, they are soldiers.
“This was the enemy, served up in the latest chart from the intelligence agencies: 15 Qaeda suspects in Yemen with Western ties. The mug shots and brief biographies resembled a high school yearbook layout. Several were Americans. Two were teenagers, including a girl who looked even younger than her 17 years. ”
You might want to check out the set up for this Obama makes it illegal for U.S. Citizens to criticize the government of Yemen
“How old are these people?” he asked, according to two officials present. “If they are starting to use children,” he said of Al Qaeda, “we are moving into a whole different phase.” Meanwhile he is the one who authorized the use of children.
Our earlier post: Obama waives prohibition on child soldiers: While Michelle is worried about our kids and their exercise and caloric intake, her husband dearest signs an Executive Order for Africa to send their kids to war. Typical Progressive logic.the President has taken it upon himself to waive the sanctions against countries using child soldiers. The Child Soldier Protection Act was originally passed in 2008 by Congress-but he just waives it.
”I hereby determine that it is in the national interest of the United States to waive the application to Chad, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Sudan, and Yemen of the prohibition in section 404(a) of the CSPA”. So children, it’s off to war you go.
Executive Order :
It was not a theoretical question: Mr. Obama has placed himself at the helm of a top secret “nominations” process to designate terrorists for kill or capture, of which the capture part has become largely theoretical. He had vowed to align the fight against Al Qaeda with American values; the chart, introducing people whose deaths he might soon be asked to order, underscored just what a moral and legal conundrum this could be.
If you’ve ever wondered why those drone strikes in Pakistan are so good at avoiding civilian casualties, wonder no longer:
It is also because Mr. Obama embraced a disputed method for counting civilian casualties that did little to box him in. It in effect counts all military-age males in a strike zone as combatants, according to several administration officials, unless there is explicit intelligence posthumously proving them innocent…
[I]n interviews, three former senior intelligence officials expressed disbelief that the number [of civilian casualties] could be so low. The C.I.A. accounting has so troubled some administration officials outside the agency that they have brought their concerns to the White House. One called it “guilt by association” that has led to “deceptive” estimates of civilian casualties.
Read more: NYTimes.com H/T: Trench Press
H/T: Hot Air has a great run down of the rest of it with a good discussion of the piece.