0

Responding to Robinson

Dear Editor:

When reading Eugene Robinson’s column, “Drones morally questionable go-to weapon,” (Friday, Dec. 6), I could not take the man seriously, his logic and deductions, his justification for his line of thinking were illogical from the first word of his column to the last.

I offer rebuttal: First, a few questions for Mr. Robinson.

Does he consider the Taliban’s’ go-to weapons, the car-bomb and suicide bomber, to be a moral way to wage war, given that the Taliban/terrorist have killed more innocent women, children and men, than drones have, or ever will kill.

If Mr. Robinson can condone the collateral damage of the go-to weapons of the Taliban/terrorist, when why can he not condone the lesser collateral damage caused by America’s drones?

Mr. Robinson says he can’t see how drone strikes can be considered a wholly legitimate way to wage war. Does he consider car-bomb and suicide bomber to be a wholly legitimate way to wage war?

Mr. Robinson said President Obama’s use of drones looks a lot like assassination; since when is killing our enemy, by any means, considered assassination?

In WW II, America shot down a Japanese bomber which was carrying Admiral Yamamoto, the man who planned the attack on Pearl Harbor. And, yes, there were liberals who called his killings an assassination!

Mr. Robinson’s implying that our drone strikes are assassinations is just as asinine as those liberals who called the shooting down of the bomber carrying Admiral Yamamoto an act of assassination.

Mr. Robinson carried his line of asinine thinking and logic a step further, when he said, “Even if the intelligence agents and military officers have perfect knowledge – meaning they are absolutely certain the target is a dangerous enemy – and fire the drones’ missiles with perfect accuracy, this amounts to summary execution. Is such killing morally defensible? “

Mr. Robinson first questions the morality of using a weapon which causes collateral damage; then he questions the killing of our enemy when we cause no collateral damage calling the killing a summary execution!

I ask Mr. Robinson how would we have won WWII had we, when we saw the enemy, taken him captive, read him rights, given him a fair trial?

Does Mr. Robinson believe Admiral Yamamoto should have been afforded due process?

If Mr. Robinson doesn’t think we should have given our enemy, in WWII, the benefit of due process before killing him, why does he think we should extend such niceties of war to the Taliban/terrorist who are our enemy and with whom we are in world-wide war, today!

Concerning our drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia, Pakistan complains (with a wink of the eye) and condones the drone strikes in the war against the Taliban/terrorist. Yemen and Somalia consider the strikes essential in defeating a common enemy, the al-Qaida/Taliban/Terrorist Alliance.

The week Mr. Robinson’s column appeared, a suicide bomber, in conjunction with gunmen, killed 52 innocent people and wounded 167 innocent people that was much collateral and intentional death and wounded, which included two German and two Vietnamese doctors, one Indian and two Filipino nurses.

Mr. Robinson finishes his deductions and conclusions by concluding that history will record Obama’s implementation of the Affordable Care Act as his greatest moral achievement and his greatly expanded drone war as his worst moral achievement.

I beg to differ with that conclusion and state that even though the dropping of the A-bomb on Japan killed many civilians it saved many Japanese lives, soldiers and civilians, who were prepared to defend Japan with spears and knives, on the beaches, not to mention the number of American lives President Harry Truman saved!

In his expanded use of drones, (for which I applaud him) President Obama is following in the footsteps of another Democrat , President Harry Truman, when he uses a new weapon on our enemy, and in using the A-bomb on Japan saved thousands of American and Japanese lives.

Yes, I deeply disagree with Mr. Robinson’s logic and conclusions in his column, Drones morally questionable go-to- weapon,” and hope other do, also.

Bill Smith

Stockbridge