The
Post’s View
More oversight and disclosure on
drones
By Editorial Board,
AFTER SEN. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) held the
Senate hostage Wednesday
in order to warn that American citizens could be targeted by drone strikes on
U.S. soil, he was rightly taken to task for gross and irresponsible
mischaracterizations of the Obama administration’s policy. We’ve got another
complaint: Mr. Paul and his followers are distracting attention from the real
issues raised by the administration’s secret warfare.
Mr. Paul’s filibuster
was triggered by the response of Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. to the
question of whether the president “has the authority to order lethal force,
such as a drone strike, against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil, and without a
trial.” Mr. Holder’s
unremarkable answer was
that the administration had no intention of ever using such force but that “in
an extraordinary circumstance,” such as the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, it would
be “necessary and appropriate” for the president to order military action
inside the United States…”
Cassi Creek: I find
Rand Paul to be poorly informed for the position he holds. His recent filibuster was a waste of Senate
time. The Washington Post’s description
of him as “paranoid” is a gross understatement.
The drone
wars provide a means of gathering intelligence, tracking and locating enemy
combatants, and to a lesser degree, eliminating those enemies without risk, or
with minimal, to U.S. forces.
I would be
more comfortable if the strike functions were controlled by the DOD and its
various branches. I’m somewhat
uncomfortable with the CIA carrying out as many strikes as they have. However, I realize that much of the drone
strike program must be compartmentalizes and somewhat shrouded from the general
public. The nature of covert operations
is that they are not intended to be public knowledge. The success and safety of people involved in
such operations as the bin Laden execution depend upon secrecy. Even Congressional oversight committees must
be prevented from full knowledge in some matters until the operations are
underway. Recall that the opportunity to
capture bin Laden in 2001 was blown by a member of Congress spilling the fact
that we had cell phone captured location information that would have resulted
in rapid resolution.
There is much
about UAVs that promises benefit to the general public. Their long loiter time makes them well suited
for SAR purposes. Whether or not it
becomes widespread practice, they will become standard equipment in many
military units and public safety services.
Their wide variation in size and in carrying capacity will further
define their functions. Currently, I
believe that their good outweighs their bad, unlike much of the Congress that
will eventually try to control and define their uses. The djinn are out of this bottle, too. It’s not going back in. It behooves us to find the leading role and
maintain it.
No comments:
Post a Comment