Another one bites the dust. Anwar Al-Awlaki has been killed in Yemen. Yemen is claiming credit but news sources this morning are saying that America drone strikes are responsible.
Anwar Al-laki was b0rn in New Mexico and is considered the number one Al-Qeda boss. He has led a double life and misrepresented himself as an American supporter after 9/11. He is directly responsible for the underwear bomber, the Christmas Day bomber, and the Ft. Hood shooter. This was a dangerous operative.
No one can say that Obama is soft on terrorism.
People weren’t quite so gung-ho on this whole military fighting terrorism thing overseas when Bush was in office, but now all that’s changed. Amazing how a change in political party affiliation can change everything even though nothing has actually changed. No more calls for war crime trials, no more people camping out opposing the wars, no more congressmen making derogatory remarks about the press’s efforts fighting terrorism. I guess Obama really did bring about change after all. I wonder how Obama would have handled this if he had been at the helm during 9/11. I remember his campaign speeches when he was running for president, and they weren’t exactly pro-military as I recall. At least now we kill them to avoid the Git-Mo debacle.
SA, I dont think people were as opposed to fighting terrorism as they were going to war with Iraq once they found out there were no weapons of mass destruction.
Do you want him not to kill them?
I believe the military objective mght have changed. Additionally, I think this might have been a CIA kill, not that it matters. The morning news is debating this issue.
Everyone thought Obama would be very soft on Terrorism – even chastising the WH for trying to tone down the rhetoric around terrorism – he even campaigned that he would go into Pakistan to try and find Bin Laden, and took flak for those statements. Al-Awlaki was a bad dude.
Well, with all love and respect for my conservative brethren…more is different than just the party in the White House. Bush sent our boys into Iraq for, at best, a dubious reason. Obama isn’t risking thousands of lives, but dropping bombs from drones. And (I hate to say this), but hundreds if not thousands of innocent lives aren’t wasted with surgical drone strikes. And, after we drop a bomb on an individual terrorist, we don’t spend ourselves into oblivion rebuilding the country on our dime.
Credit where it’s due. Obama can count these little terrorist take-outs as a success. Maybe his only success, but it is a success, nevertheless.
H/T Pokie. Agree with most of your statement.
Yes, Pat, I agree. Al-Awlaki was a bad guy. It makes him even more repugnant that he was an American citizen. Good that he should have tasted a drone and all its rage.
I love the way Obama gets credit for the accomplishments of the security apparatus that he denounced prior to his election.
With all due respect to Pokie, you are showing incredible disrespect by referring to the sacrifices in Iraq as wasted lives.Iraq could still go either way but at present, it seems to be a somewhat functioning democracy in a sea of autocracy. And I would argue that the Arab Spring is at least partially a result of our success in Iraq.
Moon – we’ve talked about Obama’s foreign policy before and I’ve said that I like much of what he’s doing (as opposed to my views of his domestic policy). I like that he’s relying more on intelligence and covert operations, drones and missiles than direct military intervention. I like that he’s wised up on Guantanamo and other matters. I like that he understands that bad guys like bin Laden and al-Awlaki must be taken out.
However, I agree with SA’s point that the media and many elements of our population demonstrate extreme hypocrisy in their views on foreign policy. Obama is doing many of the same things for which they criticized Bush, but somehow it’s OK if it is being done by one of their own.
On the downside, Obama and his people have no vision of what America’s role in the world should be and how to implement a coherent foreign policy. Their efforts to use NASA and parts of our Foreign Service to build self-esteem in the Muslim world have failed dismally. This policy is a strong example of the administration’s failure to build an effective foreign policy. This sort of thing is a waste of tax dollars and represents meddling in areas that are none of our business.
We need to start downsizing the Pentagon and closing bases all over the world now. We should not be the world’s policeman. We should abandon completely the idea of nation-building. Other nations should sort out their own problems. Large military establishments are no longer needed as they were during the Cold War.
Our strongest adversary today, China, is more interested in making money than expansionism. Competition will be economic, technological and in the realm of intelligence and covert activities. Majoring in hacking and what we call “cybercrime” is a respected and sought-after field of study for Chinese college students.
Few people have given much, if any, thought to what our role in the world should be. Presently, it is being defined by lobbyists, the defense industry and massive campaign contributions to keep the taxpayers’ money flowing into unneeded expenditures.
Its a lot easier to to give the muslim world credit for their original contributions in math and science that enabled us to go into space than it is to go to war with one small nation after the other. Recognition is cheap in terms of money. Much math and science came forward when western Europe was a desert in terms of knowledge. I recommend the book The Physician by Noah Gordon as a good read with well researched history.
The Chinese are not going to invade Japan or the US, or set off bombs in Times Square, but:
http://www.bnet.com/blog/high-tech/the-real-cyberthreat-to-us-business-chinese-college-kids/139
NASA:
Moon program – no.
Space shuttle – grounded.
Mars – no time soon and no specific goals.
Foreign policy of building self-esteem in the Muslim world – “foremost” goal.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/nasa039s-new-mission-building-ties-muslim-world
One of the other goals (not “foremost”) is to reinspire kids to study science and math. I like this one but certainly hope Obama means American kids rather than foreign kids. How do self-esteem programs for kids in Muslim or any other countries help my kids get inspired to study math and science? Reminder Mr. Obama, my taxes are paying for NASA’s budget; not the families of the Muslim kids in foreign countries.
Let’s put this all into perspective, NTK.
I don’t think we can afford much in the outreach department right now. However, words don’t cost money. A little recognition would go a long way in the good will department. Funny that this article came out now. On the other hand, almost all the math that enabled us to go into space originated in the middle east, starting with basic algebra. That acknowledgement would cost little.
Obama has been a far more effective Commander-in-Chief in prosecuting the war on terror than George W ever was!
Second Alamo – You are mistaken if you believe everyone who questioned Bush war on terror policies switched to high-fiving Obama for continuing those policies and expanding some. There are any number of people and organizations – me included – that have been very blunt in criticizing the Obama administration on issues like CIA cross-border drone attacks, by-passing Congress and the War Powers Act when he sent U.S. troops to Libya, hiding behind the state secrets privilege at a record pace, and re-upping the Patriot Act spying program. One example is Glenn Greenwald at Salon where you can find any number of articles critical of Obama, including one today entitled “The Due-Process-Free Assassination of U.S. Citizens is Now a Reality.” http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/index.html
An issue that I have written and spoken on frequently is torture. I’ve criticized Bush for authorizing it and Obama for ignoring it. One of the main pieces of “evidence” the U.S. cited to justify the invasion of Iraq was a claimed connection between Saddam and al Qaeda and weapons of mass destruction. You may recall Colin Powell talking about that at some length when he addressed the U.N. The primary “evidence” of these connections came from Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi and it was later determined to be false. When al-Libi was asked why he had lied, he said he told the interrogators what they wanted to hear in order to make the torture stop. The fact we tortured and the consequences of it have largely been ignored. It is, in my view, inexcusable that President Obama whistles past the torture graveyard pretending it doesn’t exist.
Moon, let’s not exaggerate. Yes, Muslims made some contributions to the development of algebra over the course of history but its roots extend back to Greek and Babylonian times. Some of its history traces back to Egypt, but we’re talking mostly about Alexandria and other Greek cultures prevalent at that time in the area. Historians generally credit the Greek mathematician Diophantus as the father of algebra. Muslims and the politically correct crowd trying to score points and denigrate Western accomplishments will debate Diophantus but I’ll stick with the view of historians with no biases.
Calculus, which was far more instrumental to space exploration than was algebra has no roots in the Islamic world at all. It also traces back to Greece with modern calculus being an entirely European discovery. Sir Isaac Newton developed calculus for his laws of gravity and motion, which were the keys to space exploration. The other founder of modern calculus was Gottfried Leibniz, another European.
Even all that aside, and recognizing that the Islamic world did make some contributions to the development of mathematics, why should we be fundamentally altering NASA’s mission to make it a “feel good,” self-esteem promoter for the Muslim world instead of doing what it was created for – space exploration and science. If kids in Muslim countries lack self-esteem, why don’t people in their own countries deal with the problem? It’s ridiculous that I as a US taxpayer should be expected to fund “feel good” programs in other countries.
@NTK
Try doing calculus without algebra. Even the word algebra comes from arabic. I didn’t feel I was exaggerating. Last time I looked, Egypt was part of the muslim world as was Babylon.
Its been all too easy to be dismissive of the Arab world and is part of the problem we have with American image in the middle east. A little recognition for cultural contributions is the beginning of a cheap fix.
@Moon-howler
But Moon, the “Egyptians” who developed math, etc. were actually Greeks (Alexandria, etc.). Greeks were later expelled from the entire area we know now as Egypt. Muslim crusades killed and expelled pretty much everyone else from North Africa and the Middle East within just a few centuries after Mohammad.
http://www.strangepolitics.com/images/content/177752.jpg
I wasn’t referring to our soldiers as the “wasted lives”. I was referring to any civilian in Iraq (understanding of course that most civilians are killed as a direct result of the “bad guys” using them as shields). I’m not so sure we want to be too quick to tout the Arab Spring as a triumph…..so far I’m not seeing all the good for us that is coming out of that movement. You’d be better served focusing on my comment about making a friggin’ mess with entire armies that we then have to pay to clean up (why I have no idea). One drone, one bomb, no pay to clean up. Say what you want, but that’s a great idea. Oh, and what’s going to happen to Iraq after we’re gone……well, you should be able to figure that one out for yourself.
Interesting position by the ACLU on this. I had not thought of the constitutional issues raised by ACLU and other civil rights groups–
“Jameel Jaffer, the deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, today said that his organization believes “that the targeted killing program violates both U.S. and international law. As we’ve seen today, this is a program under which American citizens far from any battlefield can be executed by their own government without judicial process, and on the basis of standards and evidence that are kept secret not just from the public but from the courts. The government’s authority to use lethal force against its own citizens should be limited to circumstances in which the threat to life is concrete, specific, and imminent. It is a mistake to invest the President — any President — with the unreviewable power to kill any American whom he deems to present a threat to the country.”
The whole article–
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/09/how-does-the-president-have-the-right-to-target-for-killing-a-us-citizen/
Clinton, you read my mind. I was going to ask Mr. Morris for his opinion on the targetted killing of an American citizen outside of the United States without trial.
Even the WaPo seems to take a dim view.
“The new title, cited by officials at the White House and the CIA, reflects Aulaqi’s evolution from Muslim cleric to alleged terrorist plotter, as well as a desire by American officials to persuade the public that the extraordinary killing of a U.S. citizen overseas was warranted.”
and
“Yemen experts have expressed skepticism about the escalating assertions about Aulaqi, and characterizations of him as a key operational figure.
“Certainly Aulaqi was a threat, but eliminating him is not the same as killing Osama bin Laden,” said Gregory Johnsen, an expert on Yemen. Johnsen noted that other AQAP figures are more influential in the organization, and more important to its operations. Among them are Naser Wuhayshi, the head of the organization, and Qassim al-Raymi, its military commander.”
Maybe I’m Monday morning quarterbacking here but even if this guy is the lowest of the lowest pond scum. Did we as a nation do this in a way that’s consistent with our laws and our beliefs?
So, that no one thinks I was trying to rain on the parade, I posted it because I found the issue to be an interesting take on things.
I would like to see people who are treasonous to get their just punishment. So I am not sure how I feel about the issue. I guess it is how many of our rights are we willing to sacrifice for security. That has always been the deepest concern and question.
I would imagine that the concept of imminent danger comes into play. After all, if someone is causing a imminent danger to an individual, the police have been authorized to use appropriate force even if it results in the loss of life without due process of law. So one would probably have to show that this guy posed an imminent danger I suppose.
I support the President on this one. The guy posed a clear and present danger to Americans, was responsible for past terrorist acts that killed Americans, and should have been killed at the first available opportunity.
Not to get in a pissing contest but the muslim/arabic/whatever world has made significant contributions to the world of math and science. Its so easy just to give them credit where credit is due. Al-jabru sure doesn’t sound English to me. The Jews and the Arabs were the only groups who advanced medicine at all during the dark ages. Western Europe trained barbers.
I’m sure there will be a lot written about how we got al-Awlaki. Three things come to mind right off the bat. First is whether any President has the extraordinary authority to unilaterally order the extra-judicial execution of an American citizen. The presumption of innocence and due process of law have been pretty fundamental constitutional principles, or so it seemed until now. Second is the legal basis that allows a civilian to kill someone who presents no immediate threat. If the fight against terrorists is a war as opposed to criminal activity as many argue, then under the law of war (Geneva Conventions) members of the armed forces have combatant immunity allowing them to kill and wound and otherwise do things in the course of the conflict that civilians aren’t allowed to do. Civilians do have the right of self-defense, but that requires an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm; otherwise killing another person is usually called murder. I am not aware of any authority that allows the President to put a civilian in control of a lethal offensive weapon system to be employed in another country to hunt down and kill people. Third, what about the other people that were killed in the course of killing al-Awlaki? In war, immunity extends to collateral damage from a proportionate attack on a legitimate military target. Here, it appears the drone attack was conducted by Title 50 CIA civilians rather than Title 10 members of the U.S. armed forces. I don’t know if there is any legal justification for killing others unfortunate enough to have been near al-Awlaki when the missile struck. They say bad facts make for bad laws. I’m concerned that when bad people like al-Awlaki are involved it makes it too easy for good people to rationalize letting bad things happen. Similar to torture, not many lose sleep when they believe 100 percent of the people we do bad things to are bad people who deserved it. It concerns me when we skip over the processes we’ve put in place over the years to try and insure we are 100 percent right before we do things we can’t undo later.
Thanks, Mr. Davis. I was hoping someone would provide an analysis of the issues. I like to gather as much information from various sources before I finalize my opinion.
I heard that these legal issues may have been voiced in the last couple of years since apparently there was some protest when the person was originally authorized to be on some list a couple of years ago. I think it may have been after this guy was identified of being involved with the underwear bomber, but I am not sure if it was at that time or not. I didn’t know our target lists were even public knowledge.
Here’s an article by Michael Hirsh this afternoon in National Journal raising some of the same issues. I suspect there will be a lot more indepth commentary in the days ahead.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/with-awlaki-dead-it-s-clear-obama-s-campaign-against-al-qaida-knows-no-bounds-20110930
Thanks again. As a aside, I sometimes chuckle at reports like this when they say that “Overall, the number of Predator drone strikes has more than tripled during Obama’s presidency.”
I just wonder if this is because the President increased the use of them by policy or whether they weren’t available configured as offensive weapons in large quantities before or both. I would think that President Bush would have used them often too if they were available in large numbers.
It is a little like saying that Truman dropped two more nuclear bombs than Roosevelt.
“concrete, specific, and imminent”
One might want to consider the fact that a leader of a known and proven terrorist element does meet those criteria every moment, principally because, unless you have penetrated his inner circle and/or his action mechanism, you will never know when, where, and how he will strike. I posit that under those circumstances, the criteria (concrete and specific: he has sworn openly to kill us whenever he gets the opportunity; imminent: we do not know his plans) have been met by the terrorist leader himself through his own established patterns of action. To hold back your hand in such a case because of legalistic opinions offered by someone like the ACLU, where no responsibility whatsoever rests for the actual protection of the lives of our citizens from terrorist attacks, could well mean the death of innocents. Is that a price you want to pay? Next time it could be someone you love on a plane with the destination of Detroit Metro Airport. Would the legal arguments assuage your grief and anger?
Mr. Davis, thank you for that answer. It was very informative.
@Morris Davis
Except for al-Awlaki being an American citizen, wasn’t this the exact argument used by the Clinton Administration to defend its decision not to take out Bin Laden in the fall of 2000 (and obviously before 9/11)? The CIA had him in the sights of a Predator in Afghanistan but took no action, despite a declaration in 1998 that the US would use all means necessary to get him.
All the legal niceties were followed, but 3000 people were killed on 9/11 and expensive, deadly wars Afghanistan and Iraq followed.