Has Obama Gone Too Far With His Drone Policies? >
Obama's Drone Problem Is Its Convoluted Semantics
The Obama administration keeps playing mix and match with drone policy language
February 6, 2013
About William F. Daddio:
William F. Daddio, Ph.D., is is the retired associate director for Protection/Chief of the U.S. Mint Police and an adjunct professor at Georgetown University.
Does it matter how far President Obama has gone with his drone policy? No. The problem is the government keeps shifting the legal boundaries one word at a time due to the convoluted semantics now used to justify these actions. I am a guy who is still trying to figure out why extraordinary rendition is more ordinary than kidnapping, enhanced interrogation techniques are better than torture, and extralegal is more legal than just legal.
The confusion occurs when the government replaces a term whose definition is commonly understood with a word or phrase that has no normal relevant meaning to the concept. It continues when they mix and match the rules of war with the requirements the police have in enforcing criminal laws.
[Check out our editorial cartoons on President Obama.]
An enemy leader who is credible and plans attacks against you is a legitimate military target. American military leaders learn Benedict Arnold has agreed to surrender West Point to the British. They post a sniper across the river to observe, while the Americans prepare to arrest him. Can the sniper kill Arnold on sight or does he have to wait until Arnold hands over the keys to the British or attempts to slip into the night?
The decision has little to do with the nationality of the target. What would the sniper think if he was told to terminate Arnold with extreme prejudice? It is just not that complicated unless you want it to be.
- Join the debate on Facebook.
- Follow U.S. News Debate Club on Twitter.
- Check out U.S. News Weekly: an insider's guide to politics and policy.
- Other Arguments
-
#1707
Yes — Drone policy must be debated openly, as other countries will follow America's example
DIXON OSBURN, Director of Human Rights First’s Law and Security Program
-
#2339
Yes — Drones strikes may be creating more terrorists than they eliminate
ROSA BROOKS, Fellow at the New America Foundation
-
#3287
Yes — Protecting the U.S. from terrorist attacks is critical but so too is the rule of law
ALEXA KOENIG, Executive Director of University of California-Berkeley's Human Rights Center.
-
#42815
Yes — Congress is to blame for Obama's oversteps on drone policy
BENJAMIN H. FRIEDMAN, Fellow at the Cato Institute
-
#51631
No — Drone strikes work, and threats to the United States necessitate them
JAMES LEWIS, Director of the Technology and Public Policy Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies
-
#51227
No — By adopting a George W. Bush-like approach to counterterrorism, Obama is doing what is necessary to keep America safe
DANIEL J. GALLINGTON, Senior Policy and Program Adviser at the George C. Marshall Institute i
Reader Comments (