Prev Next
Featured Quizzes
Politix Daily Headlines
Featured Debates
Issues

See all 17 issues

People
White House

See all people

KILL LIST

White House Is Writing a Rule Book for Obama's 'Kill List'

The motive? Mitt Romney

Next>

by Mary Noble

Senior Editor t

Image: AP

It's been known since 2010 that Obama has a "kill list" that he personally reviews to decide which terror suspects should be assassinated via drone strike overseas.

The list is one of the most controversial parts of Obama's presidency, primarily because it's such an obvious instance of presidential power without accountability. But that's set to change – perhaps. The White House is drafting a "Rule Book" that will lay down guidelines and standards for presidential use of the kill list.

Interestingly - or horrifyingly, depending on your point of view - the reason for drafting the rules was not a pure desire for accountability and transparency. No, the motive was Obama's anxiety at leaving the kill list in the hands of President Romney. Per the New York Times, "'there was concern that the levers might no longer be in our hands,' said one official...[and] Obama did not want to leave an 'amorphous' program to his successor."

The Rule Book was set to come out in time for a Romney inauguration in Jan 2013 – but now that's no longer a danger, "the matter may have lost some urgency," as the NYTimes puts it.

As of today, CIA drone strikes have killed 2500 people during Obama's presidency.

Via the New York Times.
Like this article? B Vote Up
?

Will the "rule book" address your concerns over the kill list?

Comments (view in Forum)

  • FFX_VA
    !
    @dances-weebles Mormons w/machine guns killing indiscriminately, not even close. Chicago democrat killing people he doesn't like, now that's believable! Where's Jimmy Carter's outrage!? Guess politics is thicker than morals. Hey, do you think Rush is on his list?
  • wild_turkey6
    !
    No, it is not. No one person should have the power to decide to have a person killed. Due process? Did the executive branch forget that?
    Even in war the military follows rules of engagement and escalation of force procedures.

  • View all 6 replies >

  • PNWest
    !
    Yes - these drone strikes have killed off many threats to the US that would have otherwise been free to harm America or would have had to have been taken out by US soldiers on the ground. This would have led to more US losses. These strikes are used in areas where it would be hard or impossible for US troops to operate because the local populations hate the USA. I have no problems with collateral damage to the civilians in these areas as long as it saves US lives. That being said there should be a formalized list of rules that are followed prior to using the drones. But the President should have the authority to override the rules should he need to.
  • wild_turkey6
    !
    @PNWest Says the guy whose avatar is a peace sign. I'm all for saving US troops, but we still have due process. If someone is on that list, they should have a trail and found guilty, and sentenced. I am curious as to what kind of vetting process it takes to make it on the kill list.
  • PNWest
    !
    @wild_turkey6 I am in favor of protecting as many American lives as possible. Whether you agree with it or not there is not going to be due process in a war zone. Personally I am very happy that Osama bin Laden had his brains spilled all over the floor of his hideout in Abbottabad instead of being brought to trial. I don't want to see American lives put at risk on the ground unless absolutely necessary. These drone strikes have made being the longevity of number 2 guy in al Qaeda shorter than that of a moderate republican and I am all for that.

  • View all 21 replies >

  • Keyjo
    !
    Terrorists endanger the entire world. They have no accountability or connection to any central government. They are renegades. Obama had been accused of not being decisive, but if you ask me, this kill list is damned decisive! He has not picked these targets at random, you can be sure our CIA and allied intelligence have had input.
    I can't blame him from being guarded. Romney would likely abused it for personal financial gain, and to benefit his buddies.
  • FFX_VA
    !
    I think you missed the point of the article, Right or wrong Obama is killing people as he sees fit, there are no written rules. In his mind he can do it that way, but when there was a chance someone else might have that power he had the guys scramble to develop "rules". What the story doesn't say is one of the driving forces are the legal questions, he doesn't want to get historically burned the way Bush was over water boarding. Since he won, the "rules" are no longer a priority. People here aren't terribly upset though because most of the people killed are bad guys and the innocent ones don't show up on the evening news like they do in Gaza.

  • View all 49 replies >

  • wild_turkey6
    !
    Really, right. In 2008, he ran on no torture and closing Gitmo and giving enemy combatants the right to a civil trial. I'm OK with that, as it is part of our heritage of taking life, liberty, and property only in the case of due process. But 4 years later, Gitmo is still in business and he has a kill list. Has a judge or jury had any say in this?
  • stepped_in_it
    !
    Nope! Refer to the Egyptian story before commenting here. Sounds like someone has a "power" trip going on here and thinks he is "above the law". I wonder if Obama closes his eyes and does the old Einey, meney, miney moe to chose his next drone attack?
  • stepped_in_it
    !
    @woodtick57 Nope....don't think ONE man should ever be able to ORDER any of the above! Why? Because who pays for that one man decision? American soldiers! When you want to do something on your own, cinch up your combat boots and go fight with the soldiers!(would make that decision a little harder to make if you knew you had to stand before that enemy). By the way, please don't give me that "they knew what they were signing up for" crude. And I'm not just talking about this admin.....I'm talking about past, present and future admins....
  • o
    woodtick57
    !
    diplomacy with fire from above as a backup. it works well.

    he has kept a divided nation with nuclear weapons from falling into te hhands of some really radical religious whackjobs. that makes for a peaceful world, yes?
  • CanisCanemEdit
    !
    @woodtick57 - Hmmm. You might want to read that again.

    "...extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation..."
  • harold
    !
    It would be helpful if, before comments are made, people would read the source to which the storiy refers...

    "The attempt to write a formal rule book for targeted killing began last summer after news reports on the drone program, started under President George W. Bush and expanded by Mr. Obama, revealed some details of the president’s role in the shifting procedures for compiling “kill lists” and approving strikes. Though national security officials insist that the process is meticulous and lawful, the president and top aides believe it should be institutionalized, a course of action that seemed particularly urgent when it appeared that Mitt Romney might win the presidency."

    Given a new president's need to get up to speed as fast as possible, I don't see why this doesn't make good sense.
  • DARSB
    !
    I don't mind a "kill list" of terrorists who want to blow up Americans, and I actually find it okay that the President personally approves each name on the list (personal responsibility, anyone?) But the current lack of Congressional oversight is troubling.

    As Mike Lyons has suggested, let's limit the CIA drone program to surveillance only and leave launching Hellfire missiles to the military. That way the Congress would be able to exercise its war powers obligations and reduce the discretionary powers of the Executive branch.
  • u
    classychazy
    !
    This one is a little tricky. On one hand does anyone have the right to actually have a list like this and really have to answer to no one about it? The other is whether this list will really help us kill terrorists. My biggest problem is the answer to no one part. I am not a big fan of the drones either, but they do save lives. If he is going to be having a list like this then he must be held accountable if things go bad!
  • DogLady_1
    !
    2500 people killed by drones... and ALL of them were on the Kill List? ALL of them were terrorists? Dear Pres. Obama: Our Constitution calls such lists "letters of marques" and they set a bounty on the heads of international criminals. Anyone can take out a targeted bad guy and their country can benefit from the bounty paid. Can we please start doing things the way our Constitution dictates? Or do we have to continue to work outside the Constitution "in the name of national security"? You were sworn to uphold and defend our Constitution. "The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home" --James Madison
  • o
    woodtick57
    !
    i believe the military also uses the fdrones to kill people on the battlefield. they are not just used to target and kill terrorists hhding out in remote villaes and such.
  • u
    whataGOVwehave
    !
    Ya can I get a #4 with large fries and some death on the side. If this had a guarantee not to harm civilians that's great.......but it doesn't. I can wait to see these rules.
  • 1adam2
    !
    oh come on! you all have already voted for the government of the devil. so shut up and quit complaining, about what the devil does. does not make any difference, who you all elected with the devil. the devil wins, either way.
  • u
    CommonSense
    !
    I think the person should be given the opportunity to turn themselves in and be put on trial or depending on the circumstances to put in a plea deal in exchange for information. But that's it. If they don't do that they should be fair game. Drone strikes are better than putting troops in harms way.
  • Post Removed by Moderators
  •
    Denizen_Kate
    !
    "Will the "rule book" address your concerns over the kill list?" Depends on the rules, doesn't it? As it is, the CinC decides upon targets and I assume does so when opportunity presents itself regarding someone on the list. If they change the rules, who will be making those decisions? This article is far too vague to answer any real questions on the issue of drone strikes.
  • akjep6
    !
    Sure within that 2500 is mostly innocent women and children and knowing that I could die any day from a drone attack would probably drive them crazy enough to join in acts of terrorism
  • akjep6
    !
    @dkpayton like it was said in the debates we can't kill our way out of this. It sucks I ain't like downplaying what happened 9/11. But America is better than that to be slaugthering their people to let's not stoop down to their level they are already winning by America policing the world
  • u
    dkpayton
    !
    @akjep6 i say lets of keep right on doing like we are doing. if they get tired of there people dying maybe they will get off there butts and do something to help get the terrorists out of there.
  • u
    Libertyiskey
    !
    @dkpayton Has not worked yet. What has happened is that they would rather be oppressed and they join the terrorist cause were doing worse things to them by killing them. Go look at our approval rating from these people before we started drone warfare and look at it now after. Do you really not understand or see it as a possibility that by us killing innocent citizens makes us not look so appealing and great to these citizens and give them incentive to join the people who actually do hate us?
  • u
    dkpayton
    !
    @Libertyiskey do you not understand that if we dont use drones we will have to send troops in to do the job. do you not remenber them dancing in the streets over there when the towers fell. i do ... if they want to join the people that hate us fine . send two drones instead of one...

  • View all 6 replies >

  • R Load more comments...