(I should know better than to start this.) Could POTUS order an infantry assault on my bunker

[Recursion]

if I were a U.S. Citizen holed up in an Al Qaeda compound in Waziristan?

Could he order an artillery barrage?

A piloted air strike?

If you answered "yes" to any of those, why not a drone strike?

If you answered "no" to all those, then do we agree the drones are not the problem?

[MannyGoldstein]

1. Agreed. The Imperial Presidency is the problem

Secret execution orders with zero oversight.

Drones just make it easier.

[randome]

2. 'Holed up in a bunker' versus 'Attending a meeting of terrorists'.

You're right, I don't see the difference.

[Recursion]

3. That's a fair point

On the other hand, should we wait for them to get back to their bunkers? Get all 18th-century and agree to times and places of battle?

[randome]

6. That would, of course, be preferable.

But I think the reason we sometimes launch an attack at 'festivities' like weddings, funerals, etc. is because the one(s) we're after are very careful about never being in an area that is not surrounded by civilians.

[Recursion]

7. I agree; that's the one time we know where they are

OTOH during the "good war" we we napalmed workers "houses" in Dresden. Really, the housing was the target...

[Zorra]

4. An artillery barrage on a WTO meeting would be far more effective.

He'd be taking out many of the real terrorist leaders all at one time.

Striking at the very heart and soul of terrorism, in fact.

But really, violence just totally isn't cool.

[Arctic Dave]

8. That and the Pentagon and all of Langley.

Hmmmmm.

I just ad an evil thought about OBL

[lonestarnot]

5. U.S. Citizen holed up in an Al Qaeda compound in Waziristan, you that stupid you get what

you own.