The United States began using drones to conduct targeted killings in the wake of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. President George W. Bush authorized dozens of drone strikes against terrorism suspects , and President Barack Obama continued this practice and actually expanded the use of drones. Drones use continued under President Trump and President Biden. Drones were used in areas of war, such as Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya and also against terrorist suspects found in countries such as Pakistan, Somalia and Libya.
@ISIDEWITH6yrs
Yes, but only if there is undeniable evidence they are planning to attack our country
@ISIDEWITH6yrs
No, they should be captured and given a fair trial
@ISIDEWITH6yrs
Yes, but only if there is undeniable evidence they have committed an attack against our country
@ISIDEWITH6yrs
No, capture, interrogate, and imprison them instead
US should give option for foreign nation to turn them over or risk foreign aid/US handling the matter if nation refuses
depends on the situation like if the terrorists did something to America or any other Allied country
Yes, but only if they are going to or have attacked our country in an extremely threatening way.
@98XNPHP3hrs
All viable mean to capture and imprison them should be taken to hold them accountable for their actions and to serve justice. However, if a situation is serious enough and a serious threat must be terminated. Then I believe it is the right thing to do to eliminate the threat.
@98XNGLG3hrs
Yes, but only if the country that the criminal/criminals are hiding in alow it but you can override that if it is a horrible terroristic act.
@98XLDLR4hrs
if they have or are planning to attack
@98XKV5Z4hrs
I think if they have attacked our country before, and plan to again that they should be seen as a bounty target. Wanted to be captured alive but use lethal force if necessary.
Yes if there's evidence that they've killed a lot of people
@98XK6K44hrs
if theres a lot of proof
@98XJ8LX5hrs
Tell the government of the foreign country to assassinate them so no warcrime.
@98XHYZS5hrs
When enough evidence is provided , that it is a terrosit planning on hurting out country , planning on killings, assasination should be requierd
If is it suspected then no, if they have undeniable proof, then yes
@98XHJ5C5hrs
Yes, only if there is undeniable proof of a planned attack and/or committed attack on our country.
@98XGZCH6hrs
Yes. People can do whatever they want in this country.
@98XGTLZ6hrs
Mind your own Business.
@98XD6ZX7hrs
Capture, and kill only confirmed terrorists
Yes, if there is undeniable evidence that they are expected to attack our country or others that are allies.
@98X5TN623hrs
Yes but carefully knowing that they are actually a threat we don't want to start A-war
@98X525P1 day
Yes, but only if there is undeniable evidence they are planning and have committed to attack our country
@98X3YWJProgressive1 day
Only if they have full authority and cooperation from said country.
@98X3W6YRepublican1 day
I feel if anything they should be incarcerated and given a fair trial first, and depending on those results if there are plans, or attacks that were proven to be carried out to or by them, then yes.
@98X3GPPRepublican1 day
The US shouldn't assassinate suspected terrorists without any evidence.
@98WWFKS2 days
i don't have enough knowledge to make an answer
Our government does what it wants
@98WSTCY3 days
Yes, but only if there is undeniable evidence they are planning to attack our country. And have permission to from that country.
@98WRNTN3 days
It must be positively confirmed that they are a terrorist and have taken innocent life.
@98WQW2R3 days
Yes, but only if authorized by Congress
@98WLLW73 days
I think do it smartly and dont make it a really big goal and just get them at the right moment.
@98WL9473 days
There should be evidence before any killings occur.
@98WL3MP3 days
Since their suspected we can't make any action
@98WKHWL3 days
Only if they've attacked first.
@98WGV2T3 days
No, because it can easily cause conflict and start wars in the US and the country is not at its best at the moment.
@98WGDSJ3 days
Merely suspected, no. But proven, like the Iranian general in Iraq, yes. And also we had the authority in Iraq to do so. Assassinating him in, say, India, without their approval would be a no.
@98W2GDP3 days
If the terrorist wants to change their life for the better then no, but if they don't then yes.
@98W77W24 days
yes, but depending on what the context and the situation is
@98W6Y5V4 days
no because just because theyre a suspect does not mean that they are a terroist
@98W5TYHRepublican4 days
Must have proof before acting upon suspicions
@98W3GYD4 days
It should only be issued if the suspect is confirmed.
Only if they have proof that indeed did do or plan to attack out country
@98W2ZG9Independence4 days
It depends on what the threat is and how it would affect the people and the society that we are currently around.
@98W25JC4 days
@98VZYBP4 days
it depends if a threat to the us
The historical activity of users engaging with this question.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
