Posts Tagged ‘Hellfire missile’

The use of drones to launch Hellfire missiles has been a contentious issue for quite some time now.  It was a somewhat common topic during the Bush administration and it has exploded, literally and figuratively during the current presidential administration.  It has really made waves since the remote control death of Anwar al-Awlaki in 2011 and his 16 year old son just a couple days later, both by remotely piloted drones sporting the bad-ass Hellfire missile.  What made this situation uber-special is that al-Awlaki and his kid were both technically American citizens.

The whole point of contention in this matter is the “targeted” killing of American citizens in Yemen without “due process” as guaranteed by the Constitution.  It does not matter that Awlaki 1 was a senior member of al Qaeda, who is believed to be behind the Christmas shoe-bomber and his failed attempt to blow up an airplane.  Nor does it seem to matter that he was a “spiritual” adviser to the Fort Hood shooter, Abdel Hassan, quite possibly convincing him to unleash his inner jihadi on a hospital full of people.  I have a feeling that there is a little more to the killing of his son than the simple “assassination” of a boy who just happened to be unfortunate enough to have such a detestable piece of shit for his father, than the people on both sides of the aisle are up in arms about.  I don’t know, like maybe he just had the unfortunate enough piece of luck to be sitting in the passenger seat the day they blew up the guy they were really targeting, al-Awlaki’s number two.

Let us flash forward to present day and discuss the potential for use of drones within our borders.  That seems to be the hot topic of conversation across the board and one that the current administration is having a hard time framing an answer to.  At least that is an answer to a question that has no good answer to it.  While I am not really a fan of Eric Holder or current policies in general, I have to admit that the sensationalized scenarios being proposed by our latest crop of bullshitting do-gooders have no good answers to them.  So, here are my answers to the questions, stripping out all the one-sidedness that Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, and all the other assholes that keep stirring everybody up with their “common” man, real-American guy ways.  In reality they are bullshit artists who are just playing a 4-year long con on people so desperate for someone who says all the right things, while they go about spreading the flame of discontent.  Here is a clue people, the next election may be one via social media in four years, but the dumb-ass memes doing a word for word of your favorite politician are not really going to solve anything.

So, back to missile being launched within the continental US.  A surgical strike in a known terrorist, American or otherwise, in a coffee house right in the middle of D.C. is not really a surgical strike.  In that regard, something just as lethal, but better guided to the intended recipient, rather than all the unfortunate sheeple that happen to be sitting near them, like I don’t know a bullet, or a blackjack to the back of the head followed by a set of felx-cuffs may be the proper escalation of force in that particular instance.

Now, lets take same said asshole, again, American or otherwise, driving a truck full of something horribly destructive across the Kansas plains, intent on destroying something American.  Feel free to send a remotely piloted ballistic device right up their backside.  American or not, intent to use a Weapon of Mass Destruction in our country deserves quick, and deliberate use of force.  The more lethal it is up front, the less we have to take to trial later.

So what is really wrong with this picture?  Is it really about denying the rights of Americans and due process, or, is it really about people sitting in positions of power, realizing that they have been fucking us over for years and just trying a new way of maintaining their control over the parties they represent?.  Let’s be real here people, this is not about drones or hell-fire missiles, religion or lack there-of.  This is about solidifying a base of power that is intended to move either them or their party further along the power track; eventually culminating in the top seat.

How can I say what I am saying?  That is a good question.  My answer is simply this, because the speech and rhetoric is targeted and intended to appeal directly to the people they are speaking to; their sheeple.  They paint the other side of their argument as the big-bad wolf and themselves as the dutiful sheepdogs here to protect us sheep from those wolves.  There is nothing but superficial bi-partisanship; no intention at consensus or bridge building; no attempt made to bring America’s needs to the front and dig deep for solutions.  It is all rhetoric and appeals to the audience it is targeted to.  As long as side are drawn and represent the partisanship, rather than American issues, that will be the case.

There are a few politicians out there from multiple party lines that I would like to think can actually transcend what they are part of now.  As a confirmed pragmatist however, I am never disappointed to see things continue on as they have been for as long as I have been alive.  I will be pleasantly surprised though, the day one of these cats has the balls (figurative here) to actually give the finger to the system,  take the podium in either House of Congress, allegedly to speak about one thing, turn around and give a big “fuck you” to the other 534 elected officials they are representative with.

To all my peeps out there constantly posting politically charged memes and speech excerpts, do more than just proliferate someone else speech.  Demand the level of responsibility they preach about and make them pay when they fall short.  Don’t be a sheep for these assholes when you are sheepdogs in the real world.  No matter how appealing or accurate what they say is, it is just speech until they actually do something.

The reason for adding this little poll stems from reading a release by Attorney General Eric holder earlier this week about the justification for the death by drone in September of 2011 of one Anwar al-Awlaki.  Awlaki, a U.S. born Muslim cleric was a known facilitator for al Qaeda and was living in his ethnic home of Yemen at the time of his death.  In April of 2011, President Obama authorized the kill or capture of al-Awlaki with the drone strike being successful just nine months later.  See the Associated Press Article

Many feel the administration began a descent down the slippery slope by authorizing the “assassination” of a United States citizen without the benefit of a trial or at a minimum of an Executive finding which would have given irrefutable proof of his guilt.  The administration contends that the danger to American citizens as a result of not stopping the cleric far outweighed the judicial process.  Many also feel the administration has thrown the Constitution out the window in carrying out the attack.

Al-Awlaki had known ties as a spiritual adviser to three of the 9/11 hijackers, including number 20 who for some reason did not fly with his fellow jihadis and was arrested in Germany.  He also provided “guidance” to the Fort Hood shooter and blessed off on the attempted destruction of another airplane by the Nigerian underwear bomber.  It is also believed that he provided guidance to the attempted Times Square bomber and that the attempted bomber was going to join al-Awlaki when he was apprehended at the airport.  Awlaki was actively being hunted by government forces in Yemen as a senior member of al Qaeda.

Bottom Line Up Front (BLUF as we like to abbreviate it in the Army) is citizen or not, he was a danger to Americans and as far as I am concerned gave up his right to due process when he left the country and decided it was better to advocate the Islamic state through unadulterated violence on Americans and Westerners in general.  Cleansing through Hellfire missile was the most simple, expeditious manner in which to remove an enemy who would have used the rights he turned his back on and advocated against to his advantage.

Don’t take my word for it, do a little research and answer my little poll.  If there was ever a topic to stir some debate on, this is one of them.