Lots of talk lately about the Obama administration’s policy of drone strikes on terrorists.
“Bush did it too”, but Obama has escalated the number of these strikes, and also conducted the first strike ever against an American citizen (Anwar al-Awlaki).
I’m not sure yet if these strikes are right (i.e., legitimate combat / battlefield strikes), or wrong (i.e., more like extrajudicial killings; possibly war crimes, when they hit civilians on non-battlefields). But I do know that they provide a fascinating window into left-wing hypocrisy. I’ll tally some examples.
- When Bush was President, these strikes were, to lefties, a sign of American darkness. But now that Obama is President, … ?
- Obama does more of these killings than Bush did. But aren’t they worse than waterboarding?
- When it looked like Romney might win the 2012 election, Obama wanted rules to govern when these strikes are done on Americans. But since Obama won, he doesn’t feel the need for rules. Huh?
- White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan said these strikes are part of “the inherent right of self-defense.” But the Obama administration wants to restrict Americans’ gun rights. So, the State has a right of self-defense… and not individuals? (Obama will empower the State, every time.)
- Obama’s Justice department has called for a “broader concept of imminence” in assessing threats that would justify these strikes. Wait: wasn’t a “broader concept of imminence” bad, according to lefties, when Bush was assessing the threat of Saddam Hussein?
Feel free to add any that I’ve missed.
And not to beat a dead horse, but… when will Obama get around to closing Guantanamo? Isn’t its existence supposed to be a moral affront like a Nazi gulag, or something?
FROM THE COMMENTS: Paul brings up Hillary Clinton laughing over the death of Gaddafi, “We came, we saw, he died!”
I think it goes beyond the question of hypocrisy, “What kind of conniptions would the Left have had, if Bush did it?” Bush wouldn’t have. Lefties, take a good look: If Hillary’s moment there (specifically enjoying an enemy’s death, notwithstanding the collateral damage on civilians and kids that was involved) doesn’t show a repugnant lust for power, what ever would?