Drone courts, Seal courts, war courts generally a terrible idea

Justice and warfare are two different things. 

If we start blending them we are likely to do both badly.

Warfare courts would compromise both judicial principles and field exigencies.

Innocent people die in warfare.  It’s warfare.  Get over it.  If you have a problem with it, don’t send people on foolish conquests halfway around the earth.

Courts for drones is only slightly off courts for artillery and air strikes.  Why are drones special?  If we need to get some kind of warrant or permission for a drone strike, how long before that gets extended to air strikes, artillery strikes, naval bombardment, door to door clearing of neighbourhoods, and everything else?

Do you really want to know if a judge signs off before you do these things?

Do you want court filings on sensitive subject matter on paper somewhere in that seive called Washington?

And what standard do you use to approve the target and/or to prove they are there?  If you use anything other than “beyond a reasonable doubt” to green light them it sets an extremely dangerous precedent.  If you use “beyond a reasonable doubt” it will be entirely ineffective in a military context. 

Drones and strike teams need to be able to act in total secrecy and respond to exigent circumstances and opportunities that may be fleeting. 

Whether they are taking out Al Queda or economic terrorists, a military response is necessary and has to be effective.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: