Someone's going to be in a heap of poop for this:

So the TLDR is it authorizes the POTUS to attack terrorists outside of areas of conflict, amirite?

My understanding is that the stipulation for using drone strikes against an American citizen is that they must be involved in armed conflict with the US and that it further defines armed combat.

I haven't read the entirety of it, but if that's the case it makes sense.

Yeah there is SO much spin being put on this thing lately that you really need to be careful with wording.

So let's review. Joseph P Citizen moves to Afghanistan, and in his new personna of Ali Ben-Terror sits down with the local terrorist cell. Now without probable cause or actual evidense ole HRH Obama decides he is a threat to US troops in the area and authorized a drone strike on an American citizen in a foriegn land. Now what if Ali Ben-Terror is there just to write his book on terror and is doing research, rather than being a 'enemy' combatant. We all know the state of intelligence in this fiasco, so can Obama and crew just authorize these strikes.

Now move a little further up the incrimental agenda ladder. How soon using the same logic can Obama and crew justify strikes within the continental US, and the Sheeple will just nod and move along because it is Obama not Bush doing this.

NO, but our current intelligence system is broken as well, so what is defined in this decesion as enough evidense for authorization for the strike? Or will the need to interdict and potential action by Ali Ben-Terror be seen as enough.

Who ever saw the potential as cameras on stop lights to cameras damn near everywhere. You did see "Enemy of The State" we are that close to that fictional 'impossibility'. Did you ever read 1984, we are close to that as well. HG Wells saw London being bombed from the skies in one of his books from 1897, who ever believed then that there was going to be flying machines dropping bombs on London. In 1914 The French General Staff, wrote off aircraft as a useless and ineffective little 'toy'that would never amount to anything in war. Who ever thought that a President would round up a minority population and move them to camps (Japanese internment WW2, Native American 'Reservations').

Never say never when you are dealing with technology or agenda and a governments ability to abuse that technology or agenda for 'the good of all' as they define it at that time, where in reality the sole purpose is the projection of power by that government.

Edited by oldsoldier - 06 February 2013 at 2:10pm