Guest Post: Drone Warfare In America

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by John Aziz of Azizonomics

Drone Warfare in America

How would Obama supporters feel if they learned that their beloved President was running far-to-the-authoritarian-right of arch-hawk Charles Krauthammer on one particular civil liberties issue?

Sadly, the answer is that the most Obama supporters probably wouldn’t feel very much at all, because support for Obama has always predominantly been emotion-driven (he promised change “you can believe in”, not “change that I can logically convince you will be beneficial“).

But I digress. Charles Krauthammer weighed in on FOX yesterday to telegraph his opposition to bringing drone warfare to the skies of America.

Krauthammer said:

I’m going to go hard left on you here, I’m going ACLU. I don’t want regulations, I don’t want restrictions, I want a ban on this. Drones are instruments of war. The Founders had a great aversion to any instruments of war, the use of the military inside even the United States. It didn’t like standing armies, it has all kinds of statutes of using the army in the country.

 

I would say that you ban it under all circumstances and I would predict, I’m not encouraging, but I am predicting that the first guy who uses a Second Amendment weapon to bring a drone down that’s been hovering over his house is going to be a folk hero in this country.

 

The Founders we’re deeply opposed to the militarisation of civil society. There is all kinds of aversions to it and this is importing it because, as you say, it’s cheap, it’s easy, it’s silent. It’s something that you can easily deploy. It’s going to be, I think the bane of our existence. Stop it here, stop it now.

And this is a big deal. A recent report by Micah Zenko noted:

Worried about the militarization of U.S. airspace by unmanned aerial vehicles? As of October, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) had reportedly issued 285 active certificates for 85 users, covering 82 drone types. The FAA has refused to say who received the clearances, but it wasestimated over a year ago that 35 percent were held by the Pentagon, 11 percent by NASA, and 5 percent by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). And it’s growing. U.S. Customs and Border Protection already operates eight Predator drones. Under pressure from the congressional Unmanned Systems Caucus – yes, there’s already a drone lobby, with 50 members — two additional Predators were sent to Texas in the fall, though a DHS official noted: “We didn’t ask for them.” Last June, a Predator drone intended to patrol the U.S.-Canada border helped locate three suspected cattle rustlers in North Dakota in what was the first reported use of a drone to arrest U.S. citizens.

But I’m going to go even further than the threat to civil liberties: I am fairly certain that the militarisation of U.S. airspace by drones is itself a huge national security threat. While Zenko notes that drones “tend to crash”, the downing of a U.S. drone over Iran late last year — supposedly via an Iranian hack — seems to suggest that it is possible for drones to be commandeered by hackers or hostile powers. And if that’s not the case today, then it almost certainly will be tomorrow. Putting drones into the air above the United States is like going to sleep on a bed of dynamite. It’s an invitation to anyone to try and commandeer a plane, possibly one stocked with high-tech weaponry.

The Federal government would do well to quit groping Grandma at the TSA checkpoint, and start worrying about the potential negative side-effects of systems they are putting into place. All the TSA security theater in the world cannot stop a determined hacker from commandeering a drone.

Charles Krauthammer is right (and after the Iraq invasion which he championed I never thought I would say that): it could be the bane of our existence. Stop it here. Stop it now.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
mayhem_korner's picture

 

 

"Don't taze me bro...er...drone?"

hedgeless_horseman's picture

 

 

...the Sheriff's Office just took receipt of a Fed-Funded drone with weapons capability.

At $300,000 each, I love what this says about America's financial priorities. 

insanelysane's picture

Awesome episode where Barney buys a surplus motorcycle with sidecar.

Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Looks like the same googles I put on my dog when he rode on the gas tank of my Harley.

Those were the days my (feline) friend.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KODZtjOIPg

emersonreturn's picture

hedgelsshorseman, what's happening in cornrow? it used to be such a sleeply little hollow?  has the local prison decided to take in high rent terrorists? 

GeezerGeek's picture

Is "less lethal" anything like "a little pregnant"?

Seer's picture

So many wedding parties, so few drones...

I wonder whether they'll hold a funeral service for the "fallen officer."

Collateral Damage coming to a location near you...

mayhem_korner's picture

 

 

Then another horse came out, a fiery red one. Its rider was given power to take peace from the earth and to make men slay each other. To him was given a large sword. (Rev 6:4)

Lord Drek's picture

If only prophecy were actually being fulfilled by these events! We're only seeing the "beginning of sorrows". 

mayhem_korner's picture

 

 

I think you're right.  I have no prophetic insight, of course, but I try to find opportunities to weave the Word in...even the junkers read it before punching the red-arrow.

kinetik's picture

Spare us the hilarity of your bible. It had nothing to say when it was cobbled together by psychotic virgins in 400 CE and it has nothing to say now.

mtomato2's picture

Are you really as stupid as you sound, or did you forget the /sarc/ button?

mayhem_korner's picture

 

 

You know that science has debunked your 400 AD myth, right?

BTW, if it has nothing to say, why is it that the unfettered truth about you and everyone else is in it?

Maghreb's picture

I dunno man those numberless flying hordes spitting fire on the devestated survivors of the Middle East they talk about in Revelations, they are sounding alot more real than they used to. Half the shit we complain about here was mentioned thousands of years ago in the "book of bad shit" at the end of the Bible.

Drugged up Nation under new lady Babylon.check.

Mark of the beast controlling all trade.Check.

Wars and rumours of wars.check.

Man made pestilence and famine.check.

It has stood the test of time. There were people as smart if not smarter back then who faced the same challenges we all face today. Outlasted alot of shit.Credit where credit is due.

 

GoinFawr's picture

Yep, self fulfilling prophecies sure are easier to realize when you have a manual to guide you through the process step by step.

For magical books of antiquity, I prefer Tolkein to Rowlings though:

"Evil oft mars itself."

(Think of Ben Kingsley's character's final scene in "War Inc.")

Think for yourself's picture

I'm far from any kind of bible thumper (I'm not even Christian), I think the Church, as an institution, is the antichrist and I do not feel any better regarding ideologies or dogmas,  but your stance is so ideologic (whether you're pro-bible or anti-bible, you're still defining yourself in relation to the bible) that it is just as bad.

"He is wise who can learn from every one"
~ Talmudic saying 

Seer's picture

I'm no "follower," but I think it matters not, when something is a match it's a MATCH.  Seemed pretty pertinent to me. (green arrow from me)

GoinFawr's picture

"I think you're right.  I have no prophetic insight, of course, but I try to find opportunities to weave the Word in...even the junkers read it before punching the red-arrow."

Me too:

1 Samuel 15:2-3; God commanded Saul  “This is what the LORD Almighty says: 'I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.'"

And I think you're dead wrong, like so much tripe you spread plenty of prophetic insight around, the 'self-fulfilling' kind.

hangemhigh77's picture

Obama supporters are much more focused on important things like who rubs genitalia with who.

Seer's picture

You brought it up, does that mean that YOU are an Obama supporter?

Debtless's picture

I could never listen to Krauthammer drone on about anything. 

SWRichmond's picture

It's hard to believe a neocon like Krauthammer would oppose drones.

BlueCollaredOne's picture

AUVSI, GRAPH, Boeing, Lockneed, and Northrop Grumman just haven't cut him a check yet.  This is Charles way of saying "Bitch, give me my money."

Watch for him to change his tune in a few weeks.

*Off topic, but I swear that man looks like Lord Voldemort

kridkrid's picture

A little bit of political theater.  His token opposition will help to entrench the "left" in favor of drones.  he'll change his tune in due time.

Maghreb's picture

The left might be going to sell them as a new from of law enforcment that doesn't discriminate. Were all white on an infrared monitor.

evolutionx's picture

Have a look at Bank CDS and the ECB Fear Indicator: 

banks deposited

788B overnight

everything red like blood

http://www.cds-info.com

mayhem_korner's picture

 

 

Why does he think he's going "hard left"?  This is about individual sovereignty, which leftists want to confiscate at every turn.

writingsonthewall's picture

This is untrue and nonsense spread by the right.

 

The left are not interested in power - the further left you go - the less power they want over the individual.

 

You're confused - and you're confusing the actions of left Governments to retain power under the attack from Capitalists (i.e. Stalin) from ACTUAL policies of the left - all of which result in ZERO government.

mayhem_korner's picture

 

 

I'm not confused at all.  The left is consumed with consolidating power and stripping people of their ability to exercise and dispose of their own labor.  Just read up on Thomas More and Plato and Marx and Alinsky.  Everything the left does is a guise for converting liberty into servitude - taxes, debt, environmentalism, social justice - whatever the "label", it's all about subordinating the individual.  But it is so engrained in the left that they do not see it.

I wonder, are you aware that your moniker is a Bible reference?  Mene, mene, tekel, parsin

writingsonthewall's picture

thanks for the reading list I went through 15 years ago.

Clearly you cannot have read Marx correctly or you would know the 'goal' is a stateless society - it's basically Anarchy with the class structure involved.

 

How can you preach about the power of the individual when democracy places the power over all into a single man 9or womans) hands?

 

How can you talk of individualism when the free market always moves towards monopoly power and the suppression of the individual?

(all this around you is NO coincidence - Marx should have taught you that)

 

I always laugh at those who demand individualism be the central goal for everyone - whilst engaging in systems which destroy it - and while over-egging the power of the individual.

 

I mean who built the Hoover dam? - was it one man () or the collective effort and sacrifice of many?

 

You can look at the greatest achievements of man and very few are down to individuals - and in most cases - usually invention - when absolute individualism is cited - the truth is often obscured by a re-write of history.

 

See Edison and the patent office - or the ignored supporters who assisted most of the greatest inventors, preventing them from starving whilst they carried out their 'great work'.

 

It's not good to fawn over individuals - that's why you keep electing presidents who FAIL.

Only the US people can get you out of the mess - but America's obsession with indiviudalism means you place all your hopes on 1 man rather than looking at yourselves and your own contribution.

 

Like I say, much to learn.

Cortez the Killer's picture

way to distort facts.

Individuals should be free to contract with one another to acheive a common goal without govt. interference.  That isnt collectivism, comrade, its freedom.

Now go back to your anarchist bunker and take a sponge bath

writingsonthewall's picture

I see this has degenerated as you don't like being shown up for a fool.

You have a problem, when I speak of collectivism I mean a body which is truly representative.

 

You speak of 'Government'.

 

This is why you are like a child crying to be given the same rights as adults but without any of the responsibility.

 

Without the collectivism - how do you propose that contract is worth the paper it's written on?

I mean in your fantasy we can make contracts with each other all day - without any interference - but sadly there will be no 'business' as they are worthless empty promises.

 

Your way will (and has already) resulted in war - my way has the buy in of all and therefore less likely to cause conflict.

 

Still much to learn.

GoinFawr's picture

On ZH you can tell by the downticks sans reasoned responses just how right you actually are.

Seer's picture

How wrong, according to popular wisdom... still doesn't mean that the "collective" is right.  Just saying (in defense of logic)...

GoinFawr's picture

I saw what you did there... +1

StychoKiller's picture

At one time, the majority believed that the sun revolved around the earth.  Check yer premises.

GoinFawr's picture

Where did Writingsonthewall say anything about astronomy? Anyway, the fact that the majority (I assume) doesn't believe that the earth is flat anymore shows that they are open to incorporating new information into their worldview at least some of the time... or are you arguing that because the majority were deliberately misled hundreds of years ago it must follow that they will always get all things wrong? If so: Check your universals.

Meh, I made an entirely valid (IMO) generalisation about the gang of 'Libertarians for the Further Deregulation of the Banks!' echochambermaidens that have infested ZH with their pig ignorance; there are exceptions, natch, that prove the rule. Are you one of them, or no?

Speaking of 'premises', you would do much better if you dealt with the things WOTW actually wrote, rather than inadvertently supporting my post.

Ricky Bobby's picture

Speak for  your self sonny. When I make a deal I shake hands and this Dude abides. Laws are built on foundations of sand true society is built on the bedrock of culture.

Maghreb's picture

The man has a point.

The withering of the state was the long awaited end result of Communism. Never happened any more than the neo-liberal fantasy that corporations would replace the role of the state beyond law enforcment. Marxism went from being a scientific theory of sociology and economics to a Totalitarian ideology. Shit happens.

Always been curious though. When he was talking about Capital was he really talking about the banks. And when he was talking about the banks was he really talking about the Rothschildes? His talk about the expansion of Capital and the chaos it causes sounds remarkably like Paul's talk about the expansion of debt.

Not to say i'm a fan of Marx but i wouldn't totally write him off as "collectivist" he was for the withering of government not what he got with the Soviets and the so called Communists. I'm wondering if that wouldn't be what the economy would look like if you democratized the banks and spread around their ability to create "Capital" out of nothing.

Seer's picture

"Now go back to your anarchist bunker and take a sponge bath"

So, you LIKE centralized power?  You are only advocating against Govt being able to hold this position.

For those who don't understand anarchism (and are programmed with that provided by TPTB):

http://www.spunk.org/texts/intro/practice/sp001689.html

[excerpt:]

One thing ideologues of all stripes share is a negative view of human nature -- they see us all as basically bad, and in need of improvement (achieved by a period of indoctrination, naturally, which they offer). Further, ideologues hold themselves exempt from this principal of negative human nature -- that is, they are okay, but the rest of the world is screwed.

However, this view is incompatible with anarchism, and entirely appropriate to authoritarian ideologies -- authoritarians all view people as basically bad, and in need of education, supervision, and above all, control, which they are all too willing to provide.

The anarchist, conversely, holds that human beings are basically good and not in need of guidance, coercion, and control -- indeed, we hold steadfastly to the idea that the only evils in society come about when some seek to control and coerce others, and that the mechanisms of power, privilege, and control turn even the saintliest stalwart into a connniving manipulator.

In other words, anarchists view people as good, and systems of control as bad, whereas ideologues hold the other view -- that people are bad, and systems of control are good (so long as THEY control those systems -- if someone else controls them, then they're bad -- that's how they seem anti-authoritarian when out of power -- but just wait until they do get a measure of power, and you'll see). It's an important difference, and determines the nature of the organization that arises from these foundations.

GoinFawr's picture

"One thing ideologues of all stripes share is a negative view of human nature -- they see us all as basically bad, and in need of improvement (achieved by a period of indoctrination, naturally, which they offer). Further, ideologues hold themselves exempt from this principal of negative human nature -- that is, they are okay, but the rest of the world is screwed."

Sorry Kropotkin, that was interesting, but hardly true. Ideologues such as yourself see humanity as 100% inherently good; as it's the only way that they can make the case that  'anarcho capitalism', or it's equally unicorn based parallel 'Marx's Endgame', could result in a reasonably functioning society.

Unfortunately for stubborn utopians and absolutists of all stripes, reality constantly demonstrates that we are very rarely born all good or all bad, and that either tendency isn't necessarily a direct result of being taxed (or not) within the womb. But the 'all baddies', especially the cleverer ones, ruin it for the rest of us, and so need to be coerced to behave. Shit, the 'all goodies' can be a bit unbearable at times too, but it's usually pretty safe to let them run with it... 

Stick that in your pipedream and smoke it.

jwoop66's picture

Are you still in college or are you just completely hopeless?

StychoKiller's picture

College?  more like Kindergarten:

[quote]

The Six Problems With Modern Progressive/Socialism

1) You really didn't learn everything you needed to know in kindergarten:  Progressive/Socialists love to think of themselves as sophisticated, nuanced intellectuals, but the truth is they have a kindergartner's view of the world.  If it has been defined as "nice" to people they like, they're for it.  If it has been defined as "mean" to people they like, they're against it -- and that is about as deep as it gets.  Unfortunately, that lack of adult perspective isn't so cute in political leaders who are making life and death decisions that may still have ramifications fifty years from now.

2) "Progressive/Socialists hate religion because politics is a religion substitute for Progressive/Socialists and they can't stand the competition." -- Ann Coulter:  Somewhat ironically, given the hostile relationship that has developed between the Left and Christianity, Progressive/Socialist beliefs have more in common with religious doctrine than a political agenda.  There is no significant debate on the Left about the aims of their agenda -- and the only "sins" believers can commit against their religion are no longer being politically useful, deviating from doctrine, or worst of all, cooperating with conservatives in some fashion.  No matter how much evidence piles up that big government doesn't work, that welfare destroys families, and that socialism doesn't bring prosperity, it makes no impact on Progressive/Socialists because their dogma is based on faith, not logic.

3) "It is not human nature we should accuse but the despicable conventions that pervert it." -- Denis Diderot:  There is no dream more eternal in the Progressive/Socialist heart than completely remaking human nature.  If we could all just care about the person across the world as much as we do our families, we could live in a utopia!  Unfortunately, in practice, human nature tends to be quite a bit more difficult to subvert than in the Progressive/Socialist imagination.  That's why, despite more than 5,000 years of human civilization, very little progress has been made in this area - but, oh, the Left is still trying.  One day, if they just spend enough money on the right government programs, all the wars will end and everyone will be living in identical million dollar mansions while we spend our days humming tunes from the latest Woodstock Tribute Album.

4) "Oh what a tangled web we weave, when at first we practice to deceive." -- Sir Walter Scott:  Like freaky religious cults, Progressive/Socialists have become adept at hiding their more abhorrent views from the public until it's too late.  It's common to see Progressive/Socialists adamantly deny that they hold a position over and over again only to completely switch sides the moment they have one more vote than they need to pass legislation.  Whether it's lying about their opponents or what they believe, honesty is certainly not considered to be the best policy on the Left.

5) "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye." -- Matthew 7:3-5: Despite the fact that Progressive/Socialists love few things better than to cry "hypocrisy," there is a rather bizarre disconnect between what modern Progressive/Socialists seem to believe about themselves and how they behave.  Progressive/Socialists believe that they're compassionate, but only with other people's money.  They tie themselves in knots trying to come up with valid reasons why terrorists hate the United States, but they never give a moment's thought to whether the people who dislike them might have a point.  They pat themselves on the back for helping minorities, but never stop to consider that Progressive/Socialist policies have done more damage to black Americans in the last fifty years than the KKK could have done in a millennium.  Somehow, stunning hypocrisies of this sort, which are too numerous to recount without doing a whole other column, never seem to be bother anyone on the Left.

6) "Trust yourself.  You know more than you think you do." -- Benjamin Spock:  It's great to have a healthy self-image, but there's not much to be said for thinking you're smarter than the collective wisdom and traditions passed down through human history just because you happen to read the Daily Kos.  Unbecoming arrogance of this sort permeates modern Progressive/Socialistism.  The most grave of decisions are undertaken by the modern Left without the slightest regard for the potential consequences.  Past disasters created by similar bouts of whimsical thinking, of which there are many, are treated as acts of God untethered from mere human decision making and prompt no self reflection whatsoever.  That's because to the modern Progressive/Socialist, the real world results of their policies are secondary in importance to the amount of positive self-esteem generated by supporting that policy.

[/quote]

GoinFawr's picture

good gawd, tell me you're being paid to regurgitate all this hooey. You don't actually believe that convoluted rat's nest of utter twaddle, do you? The Bold doesn't help much either; I suggest you hit the capslock and italics for the lot to give it some real ooomph.

[/oog]

knightowl77's picture

individuals who are free to associate or not associate with who they choose... They can choose to work together voluntarily, or they can freely decide NOT to work together....The point is, it is THEIR choice, not some collective....Should they band together for a paycheck to accomplish something, it is still an INDIVIDUAL choice...

GoinFawr's picture

I bEt you puT up QUITE a fuSS the fiRst TIMEyour parents asked you to take OUT the garbage.

forexskin's picture

huh?

/sarc, right?

left=redistribution of wealth=empowered government doing the taking from individuals = statism...

there is a left-right axis (bread and circus), i get that, but that's separate from the statist-anarchist (power vs. freedom) axis

or... /sarc...