Q7. I have scoured the transcript and find no explicit mention of what exactly the administration's objectives are. From your remarks I infer that the primary objective seems to be eliminating the threat of terrorist attacks on American soil by al-Qaida. Is that inference correct?
Q8. You say "the dangerous threat from al-Qaida has not disappeared," and that "it would be a mistake to believe this threat has passed." Does this mean the administration has not completely achieved its primary objective yet?
Q9. A criterion of efficacy is having some measure of whether the objective has been achieved. Foreign terrorists can sprout from anywhere anytime, making it impossible to ever gauge the full success of a counterterrorism objective. How will the administration ever know if the threat to the
Q10. A criterion of efficacy requires that an objective and the means of achieving it are credible; that is, they are what you say they are. Are you aware that many Americans (including a high ranking official in the Reagan administration) doubt the credibility of the administration's war aims and use of drone strikes, believing instead that the administration's " war on terror" is a hoax concealing the administration's aim of distracting Americans from the growing deterioration of socioeconomic conditions domestically; and of continuing its imperialism, including amassing further fortunes for the war making industry and sustaining career politicians?
Q11. A criterion of efficacy requires that any assessment of it include a reasonable accounting for the chain of intended and unintended consequences including side effects triggered by the use of drones. Did the administration take all such factors into account before concluding that drone strikes are efficacious?
Q12. One side effect of the gargantuan military spending including all expenses associated with the use of drones to seek forceful solutions to foreign problems is that taxpayer resources are being drained at the expense of helping to solve the myriad domestic problems eroding the ability of the
Q13. A criterion of efficacy is the requirement to analyze the relative merits of alternative means to the same objective. You argue that the use of drone strikes compared to other military means is a wise choice because they are less constrained by geographical considerations; can be done more quickly; avoid danger to U.S. personnel by remotely flying the drones; reduce the danger to innocent people in the targeted area; can aim precisely at the intended targets; and strategically avoid troublesome consequences that can ensue from "deploying large armies." In assessing the wisdom of the administration's choice how was it decided that drone strikes are wiser in the long run than persistently pursuing peaceful means to your objective?
Q14. A criterion of efficacy requires being satisfied on solid grounds that the objective sought is the right objective to pursue. Broader objectives or goals that if achieved might be more likely to end terrorism would be those to end the U.S. support of Israel's militarism and her illegally claiming adjacent land for settlement building; reduce considerably U.S. military presence in the Great Middle East; reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil; and to stop aiding global exploitation by multinational corporations headquartered in the U.S. or doing business primarily in the U.S. Do you think the
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).