Those goal posts must be getting a bit heavy for all those who are moving them so many times lately!

What sad creatures of sophomoric world views our brethren on the Right seem to be these days! -Kevo

And the mindless media reports all of it mindlessly.

A case of the good being the enemy of the perfect. A good policy being the enemy of the endless war on terror. If this keeps Obama may HAVE to invade another country.

That doesn't mean I think they are not illegitimate

Excellent use of the triple negative. Parse that, baby!

"That doesn't mean I think they are not illegitimate," he added. "No, we have every right to kill the other side's warriors."

So al Qaeda have the right to kill American warriors wherever they find them and any incidental casualties such as family members are just "collateral damage".
The US is truly fucked up and that includes many on the left who use this issue to beat up the right rather than attempting to put a stop to these morally repugnant acts which are equal to much that Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union did.

News flash: Conservative Republicans don't want to kill terrorists. Why are Republicans giving comfort to our enemies?

This is classic Rovian politics. Make an opponents strength a weakness.

Implant a tracking device up Thiessen's ass and kick him out of a plane over enemy territory. When we get a video of his capture, we'll send in Cheney to the rescue. He gets to waterboard all the prisoners he can catch.

Can't these lying sacks of crap just STFU?

Quote: 'Heads, the right wins. Tails, the president loses.'

Only in the minds of the lunatic fringe. Twenty some percent of the American population is bat-shit crazy. The rest of us are amused by the wingnut spin, not swayed by it.

"That doesn't mean I think they are not illegitimate," he added.

Suddenly, I understand why there is so much tortured logic in the Patriot Act.

Still, he needs to train harder. The Olympic judges aren't really impressed by the triple anymore, he needs to move on and stick the quadruple negative with a toe loop.

Actually, the US is as bad as Nazi Germany except for the industrialized genocide, although even that is probably not far off is some right-wing Americans get their way.

“What about ordering a village of resistants to be massacred? … Is that a power that the president could legally—”

“Yeah,” Yoo replied, according to a partial transcript included in the report. “Although, let me say this: So, certainly, that would fall within the commander-in-chief’s power over tactical decisions.”

“To order a village of civilians to be [exterminated]?” the OPR investigator asked again.

“Sure,” said Yoo.

And his fucking president wants people to look forward rather than back. What, forward to another Lidice, Oradour-sur-Glane or My Lai?

Does this jerk realize that in order to capture and interrogate more of them, we would have to invade Pakistan, and that Pakistan might have something to say about this?

The whackjobs on the right are constantly touting their 'philosophies', but all I see is a shared mental illness.

They've convinced themselves that torture is a noble persuit, and that more of it is better.

Typical armchair warrior--Does Thiessen not get our ability to capture some of these guys is extremely limited? He assumes--incorrectly--that there is a choice between killing or capturing. Not so.

Chopin - I rolled with laughter after reading your solution. Then it started to make a whole lot of sense!
As many readers have responded before in all different subjects regarding Obama's successes, the Right will take the opposite approach no matter what the situation. I find it rather amusing really. Too bad we have to rely on the likes of Jon Stewart (a comedian) or SNL to expose their hypocrisy to a wide audience. It would never be exposed on the Sunday News Talk Shows (or shall I rename that The Sunday GOP Talking Points Only shows).

This whole talking point may be wierdly out of date. The drone attacks were largely halted last summer, along with even the use of air power in combat, according to the recent Esquire article "End of the Air War":

"The number one priority in Afghanistan, McCrystal declared, was to secure the population so normal life could resume. The US needed to rob the militants of popular support, he argued. Dropping bombs only disrupted lives and drove people into the arms of the Taliban. So civilian casualties from airstrikes had to stop-immediately.

"The directive has required a radical shift in the approach to Afghanistan. For most of the first eight years of the war, the US and its allies relied heavily on air power to keep militants in check. The problem is that air strikes-even with maximum precision and care-can alienate the people needed most for a successful counterinsurgency campaign. America's mightiest engineering accomplishments-drones and smart missiles-are actually impediments to the social engineering required in Afghanistan. So with a single stroke, McCrystal took the US's biggest technological advantage off the table. The military would have to make do without its most potent weapons."

Well, it certainly makes sense for radical conservatives "over here" (Republicans) to be concerned about our killing too many radical conservatives "over there" (Taliban, al Quaeda, etc.). After all, what in gods' names do we do with all these heavily armed soldiers, who's only function in life for years on end has been to kill radical conservatives, once "over there" runs out of radical conservatives for them to kill?

Wouldn't seeing your heroes and teachers vaporized, ignominiously, without an audience reduce the size of the incoming class?

If Obama killed every single enemy of this country, the Republicans would criticize him for making the US have nobody left to fight. Obama can't win this battle. And he shouldn't try. The Republicans are literally cheering for the terrorists and want to protect them against Obama. If that's not an enemy combatant, I don't know what is.

No, no, no, you don't understand. Obama is killing the terrorists because they know too much. They know that he was born in Kenya and they have the birth certificate to prove it. They know that he`s a Muslim jihadist like themselves, so he`s killing them before they can spill the beans.

He's not killing terrorists to protect 'Murrica, but for his own selfish reasons. Don't you see? It all makes sense now!

"Heads, the right wins. Tails, the president loses."

Since complaints will appear either way, policy should be guided by doing what is *right.*

I know this site is dedicated to the politics of government, but addressing *policy* now and then - the morality of the preemptive extrajudicial assassinations conducted by this administration - might be worthwhile, IMO.

What? All you have to do is:

1. parachute into one of the most rugged, desolate places on earth,

2. put on a fake beard and talk with a foreign accent,

3. try to determine the whereabouts of the Taliban/al Qaeda from local tribesmen who would be very apprehensive divulging any information to outsiders, and seem to be rather hostile to anyone not from around their parts,

4. and then infiltrate the most violent and xenophobic religious militias in the world, and capture their leader.

How hard could it be?

It should be noted that the Bush Administration actually did pull its punches on a known terrorist (al Zarqawi?). Not for intelligence purposes, mind you, but so that they could argue that his presence in the Kurd region of Iraq was further justification for invading Iraq (even though Saddam Hussein had little control over that region).

(NBC discussed the decision to not take him out years ago, and the decision to use his presence as an argument for invasion was in Woodward's "Plan of Attack.")