# Should drone pilots face homicide charges **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 10, 2012, 4:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-drone-pilots-face-homicide-charges/637283 "2012-10-10T04:29:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2012, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-drone-pilots-face-homicide-charges/637283/61 "2012-10-10T17:26:47Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > Presidents have discarded habeus without a problem. “Without a problem?” Really? The Bush administration argued exactly that when they asserted that the detainees in Guantanamo had no habeas corpus rights. Guess what? They lost. Rasul v. Bush. > [@TriPolar](#): > > The cases you cite don’t involve immediate threats (I think, I’ll have to look further). I’ve never said that the President isn’t empowered to take actions against immediate threats. I only said that your broad assertion that “the constitution places no limits on the presidents ability to make war except for the requirement that such war be funded by congress” was patently false. And it is. > [@TriPolar](#): > > And yes he can violate treaties and laws outside of the Constitution to protect the nation. My grand statement remains unchallenged by history. Your grand statement remains wrong, and I’ve provided you with multiple examples of how it is wrong. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2012, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-drone-pilots-face-homicide-charges/637283/62 "2012-10-10T17:40:52Z")
> [@Hamlet](#): > > “Without a problem?” Really? The Bush administration argued exactly that when they asserted that the detainees in Guantanamo had no habeas corpus rights. Guess what? They lost. Rasul v. Bush. > > I’ve never said that the President isn’t empowered to take actions against immediate threats. I only said that your broad assertion that “the constitution places no limits on the presidents ability to make war except for the requirement that such war be funded by congress” was patently false. And it is. > > Your grand statement remains wrong, and I’ve provided you with multiple examples of how it is wrong. You keep arguing cases that have nothing to do with making war. You are wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Naive\_Evian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Naive\_Evian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Naive_Evian)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2012, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-drone-pilots-face-homicide-charges/637283/63 "2012-10-10T17:55:34Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > You answered your own question. The president can’t declare war, openly or covertly, only the congress can do so. Congress did not declare a general war on terror. They declared waragainst those nations, organizations, and individuals responsible for 9/11. There has been no evidence that this applies to the people being killed. In fact, some of the people killed are in groups that were not even in existence in 2001. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2012, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-drone-pilots-face-homicide-charges/637283/64 "2012-10-10T17:58:30Z")
> [@Naive\_Evian](#): > > Congress did not declare a general war on terror. They declared waragainst those nations, organizations, and individuals responsible for 9/11. There has been no evidence that this applies to the people being. In fact, some of the people killed are in groups that were not even in existence in 2001. Have they withdrawn the funding? No. Somebody arguing with me name a case where anyone in the US has been convicted of a crime for carrying out duly authorized acts of war. ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2012, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-drone-pilots-face-homicide-charges/637283/65 "2012-10-10T18:02:12Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > You keep arguing cases that have nothing to do with making war. So when said making war, you didn’t mean the wide panoply of actions the President can take while pursuing a war, like detaining prisoners, trying enemies, seizing ships, or attempting to secure the necessities for warmaking, but rather only military actions on the battlefield? Because that seems to be the only possible way for you to continue to insist you were somehow correct. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2012, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-drone-pilots-face-homicide-charges/637283/66 "2012-10-10T18:05:47Z")
> [@Hamlet](#): > > So when said making war, you didn’t mean the wide panoply of actions the President can take while pursuing a war, like detaining prisoners, trying enemies, seizing ships, or attempting to secure the necessities for warmaking, but rather only military actions on the battlefield? Because that seems to be the only possible way for you to continue to insist you were somehow correct. Exactly. The situation as described in the OP. Nice of you to get back to the topic. That’s the only point I’m arguing. In general I agree with you and the others outside of direct military action against our enemies, i.e. killing them where we can find them. As I noted earlier, I’d hope for the conviction of any president or anyone else who knowingly acted against someone who was not an immediate threat. ---
**Author:** ![Naive\_Evian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Naive\_Evian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Naive_Evian)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2012, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-drone-pilots-face-homicide-charges/637283/67 "2012-10-10T18:16:05Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > Have they withdrawn the funding? No. > > Somebody arguing with me name a case where anyone in the US has been convicted of a crime for carrying out duly authorized acts of war. Then I don’t understand why the president cannot say Mitt Romney is a terrorist (part of a group invovled in 911) and order him killed. All Congress could do is remove the funding or impeach. But since your posisition is that the president does not have to present any evidence, I don’t see how the Congress could find a high crime or misdemeanor. Wouldn’t they just have to accept the president’s designation of Mitt Romney as a terrorist without evidence? Just because no prosecutor has done this before doesn’t mean it cannot be done. One of the things that makes this cases easier to bring charges is because the pilots are operating in the US. ---
**Author:** ![Naive\_Evian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Naive\_Evian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Naive_Evian)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2012, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-drone-pilots-face-homicide-charges/637283/68 "2012-10-10T18:19:19Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > Exactly. The situation as described in the OP. Nice of you to get back to the topic. > > That’s the only point I’m arguing. In general I agree with you and the others outside of direct military action against our enemies, i.e. killing them where we can find them. As I noted earlier, I’d hope for the conviction of any president or anyone else who knowingly acted against someone who was not an immediate threat. But there has been no evidence that the people killed were an immediate or imminent threat. Or even the definition of imminent threat. ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2012, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-drone-pilots-face-homicide-charges/637283/69 "2012-10-10T18:24:12Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > Exactly. The situation as described in the OP. Nice of you to get back to the topic. I see now. You make a massively incorrect, poorly phrased comment, and when I point out that you are blatantly wrong, it’s on me for not understanding your misuse of the phrase “making war” to mean only one aspect of “making war”. Gotcha. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2012, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-drone-pilots-face-homicide-charges/637283/70 "2012-10-10T18:44:58Z")
> [@](#): > > Should drone pilots face homicide charges Not unless they have violated the UCMJ…just like any other soldier, sailor or marine in a combat situation. If you locked up the drone pilots then you’d need to lock up every other combat pilot who flew a mission involving firing a weapon, and every marine and soldier who did the same. Since no one is crazy or stupid enough to actually try that (you are talking about literally 10’s or even 100’s of thousands of individuals who have pulled trigger or launched weapons…or aided those who did those things), it’s a non-starter. So, simply answer to ‘Should drone pilots face homicide chargers’ would be an emphatic no, plus a strange look at the person asking such a ridiculous question. Possibly with a quick look around for some escape exits in case the person asking such a silly question is serious…and possibly demented. 😛 > [@](#): > > It is clear that the pilots are killing people, and we do not know the procedures that they go through. It is clear that YOU (and possibly 60 Minutes) don’t know what procedures are used. I’ve seen a bit of the procedures a drone pilot goes through to get weapons release authorization on the History/Military Channel (possibly you should tell the good folks at 60 Minutes to check it out sometime…and maybe watch a bit of it yourself). Regardless of whether what I’ve seen is accurate or isn’t accurate, however, you do realize that the military is under civilian control and oversight, right? That means that even if you don’t know the procedures, and I’m wrong, that there are civilians in our government who DO know and have approved of those procedures. Just like there are civilians who know and have approved the rules of engagement for drone operators…and everyone else that might be in a combat situation. > [@](#): > > I don’t know if the prosecutors have jurisdiction over the base, but from the 60 Minutes program, the pilots live off base, so they just need to find one act that a person involved committed that furthered the conspiracy that happened in the prosecutor’s jurisdiction. Um, no. If the drone operators did in fact commit a crime, they would be charged and tried under the UCMJ for it. There is no conspiracy here, only delusion and ignorance. > [@](#): > > But this is such an important issue, we need a brave prosecutor to bring these charges and then deal with any issues that come up. What you’d need is a bat shit insane prosecutor who got their law degree out of a Cracker Jack box and who has only practiced law in their own head space. ---
**Author:** ![Gagundathar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a183cd/32.png) [@Gagundathar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gagundathar)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2012, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-drone-pilots-face-homicide-charges/637283/71 "2012-10-10T19:00:10Z")
The term ‘at war’ is in question here. For the past decade we, the USA, have been ‘at war’ with a terrorist agency. They have been harbored and supported by more than one nation. We declared that any nation who did so was our enemy. If Yemen has been harboring al-Qaeda militants, then we are justified in attacking those militants in that country, regardless of the method employed. We could have sent in tanks, troops, and infiltration units. We could have struck using cruise missiles from a destroyer hundreds of miles away. We could have sent jet fighter/bombers to immolate a targeted area. All of these actions would have been lawful as Congress would have supported them. Or, we could have sent remote armed robotic drones. Piloted by men and women in Arizona. The difference is difficult for me to determine. Is it merely because of the distance? The fact that a drone pilot doesn’t die if the drone crashes? Does anyone here think that the man or woman who directs a cruise missile strike that inevitably cause civilian deaths is culpable of murder? ---
**Author:** ![Naive\_Evian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Naive\_Evian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Naive_Evian)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2012, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-drone-pilots-face-homicide-charges/637283/72 "2012-10-10T19:07:49Z")
[QUOTE=XT;15576487 It is clear that YOU (and possibly 60 Minutes) don’t know what procedures are used. I’ve seen a bit of the procedures a drone pilot goes through to get weapons release authorization on the History/Military Channel (possibly you should tell the good folks at 60 Minutes to check it out sometime…and maybe watch a bit of it yourself). Regardless of whether what I’ve seen is accurate or isn’t accurate, however, you do realize that the military is under civilian control and oversight, right? That means that even if you don’t know the procedures, and I’m wrong, that there are civilians in our government who DO know and have approved of those procedures. Just like there are civilians who know and have approved the rules of engagement for drone operators…and everyone else that might be in a combat situation. .[/QUOTE] There is no evidence that the civilians ordering the strikes have gone through the proper procedures. Even if the pilots are following orders, they have responsibility to make sure the killings are proper. They have a duty to make sure every killing is legal. There is no evidence that the people billing killed are an imminent threat or part of a group responsible for 911. If the strikes are improper, everyone is responsible, top to bottom. There is enough evidence to charge, and the if the defendants want to argue justification, they can bring forth the evidence. ---
**Author:** ![Naive\_Evian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Naive\_Evian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Naive_Evian)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2012, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-drone-pilots-face-homicide-charges/637283/73 "2012-10-10T19:11:17Z")
> [@Gagundathar](#): > > The term ‘at war’ is in question here. > For the past decade we, the USA, have been ‘at war’ with a terrorist agency. > They have been harbored and supported by more than one nation. > We declared that any nation who did so was our enemy. > If Yemen has been harboring al-Qaeda militants, then we are justified in attacking those militants in that country, regardless of the method employed. > > We could have sent in tanks, troops, and infiltration units. > We could have struck using cruise missiles from a destroyer hundreds of miles away. > We could have sent jet fighter/bombers to immolate a targeted area. > > All of these actions would have been lawful as Congress would have supported them. > > Or, we could have sent remote armed robotic drones. > Piloted by men and women in Arizona. > > The difference is difficult for me to determine. > > Is it merely because of the distance? > The fact that a drone pilot doesn’t die if the drone crashes? > > Does anyone here think that the man or woman who directs a cruise missile strike that inevitably cause civilian deaths is culpable of murder? There is no evidence that the targeted people are an imminent threat or a part of a group responsible for 911. Until that evidence is brought forth, charges should be brought. We should not just assume that there is a viable affirmative defense. ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2012, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-drone-pilots-face-homicide-charges/637283/74 "2012-10-10T19:12:21Z")
Lesson One: Do not form your opinions based upon a single source, even if that source is as venerable as a long-running TV magazine show. ---
**Author:** ![Naive\_Evian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Naive\_Evian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Naive_Evian)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2012, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-drone-pilots-face-homicide-charges/637283/75 "2012-10-10T19:15:32Z")
> [@DrFidelius](#): > > Lesson One: Do not form your opinions based upon a single source, even if that source is as venerable as a long-running TV magazine show. I have already quoting other sources in this thread. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2012, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-drone-pilots-face-homicide-charges/637283/76 "2012-10-10T19:15:51Z")
> [@Hamlet](#): > > I see now. You make a massively incorrect, poorly phrased comment, and when I point out that you are blatantly wrong, it’s on me for not understanding your misuse of the phrase “making war” to mean only one aspect of “making war”. Gotcha. It’s on you to read the OP and understand the context of the discussion. ---
**Author:** ![Naive\_Evian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Naive\_Evian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Naive_Evian)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2012, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-drone-pilots-face-homicide-charges/637283/77 "2012-10-10T19:18:44Z")
Everyone seems to be assuming the drone strikes are valid acts of war, but that is only true if the targeted people are an imminent threat or part of a group responsible for 911. I challenge any person claiming these are valid acts of war to present evidence that each is killing involved an imminent threat or a person that aw part of a group responsible for 911. ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2012, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-drone-pilots-face-homicide-charges/637283/78 "2012-10-10T19:30:46Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > It’s on you to read the OP and understand the context of the discussion. I continued to be confused when you went on to compound your original error and incorrectly asserted in a later post that: “Presidents have discarded habeus without a problem” and I had to point out, once again, how that was factually inaccurate in light of Rasul v. Bush. I know that you NOW want to draw limits around your inaccurate original statement, but when you continued to make incorrect assertions and seemed to think “making war” included denial of habeas, or when you yourself emphasized how “grand” your statement was, I concluded that you had not, in fact, had such a limited definition of “making war”. But now that we seemingly understand that “making war” refers only to “drone attacks”, I guess I’ll ask if you think the President can, without offending the Constitution, order drone attacks on an apartment in Chicago to kill a US citizen who was a suspected terrorist? ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2012, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-drone-pilots-face-homicide-charges/637283/79 "2012-10-10T19:32:08Z")
> [@Naive\_Evian](#): > > Everyone seems to be assuming the drone strikes are valid acts of war, but that is only true if the targeted people are an imminent threat or part of a group responsible for 911. I challenge any person claiming these are valid acts of war to present evidence that each is killing involved an imminent threat or a person that aw part of a group responsible for 911. Well anyone in the Taliban or Al Quaeda is part of the group responsible for 9/11. They don’t have to have been doing that in 2001. We didn’t stop to investigate the background of Japanese soldiers we killed in WWII if they weren’t soldiers when Pearl Harbor was attacked. I challenge you to name a case where any strike was intentionally conducted against someone not in your classification. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2012, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-drone-pilots-face-homicide-charges/637283/80 "2012-10-10T19:47:27Z")
> [@Naive\_Evian](#): > > Numerous innocent people have been killed. The pilots appear to have been negligent, at best. If they have evidence that mitigates their possible guilt, they can bring it forth. > > As it stands, we don’t know whether the pilots or those giving the orders do anything to make sure they do not accidently kill innocent people. We also do not know what the rules are for collateral killings, or whether there are even any rules. > > Being a soldier (I think these pilots are airmen) does not mean you cannot be a criminal. It does not mean that you can kill people without making sure you are not killing innocent people. > > We know that innocent people have been killed. We don’t have any evidence that the people involved can bring evidence to support an affirmative defense that justifies killing innocent people. > > If you don’t think these people should be charged, for the cases where innocent people were killed, what evidence do have that the pilots and the other people involved were justified in accidently killing these innocent people? What procedures did they follow? Were these procedures adequate to support an affirmative defense that justifies killing innocent people? > > For the cases where they decided to kill people around the target, what law allows a person to kill someone because the person to be killed is near a person that been targeted for killing? > > The more I think aobut this issue, the more i realize that the collateral killings are most obvious violation of the law. The pilots kill people without even knowing who the person is or whether the person has ever done anything that makes him or her a threat. There is no justification for this. Charge these pilots. They are cold blooded killers. We cannot have such people in our society. There are rules of engagement and rules of war. You would have to show that these were intentionally violated before you can demand a defense from the soldier. All you have is collateral damage. These pilots dont just randomly fly over some hostile area taking pot shots and targets of opportunity. There are procedures to minimize unnecessary collateral damage. The rules of war do not require us to eliminate collateral damage. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-drone-pilots-face-homicide-charges/637283.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-drone-pilots-face-homicide-charges/637283.md?page=5)