The Media is Protecting the Drone Strike President Behind the NATO Banner
I got into many heated debates with a friend of mine that was former Special Forces. He wanted NATO to be disbanded, but I saw it as a good way to combat terrorism under a banner rather than the American flag. It is a good way to be covert by using NATO as a diversion to change world opinion of the USA. Plus, the blame spread around if things go bad and civilians are killed rather than being directly dumped onto the laps of American Soldiers. Obama has stolen my idea.
Notice that the media rarely mentioned NATO during the Bush years, because they wanted to pin civilian deaths on U.S. Troops. Just imagine if Bush used drones like Obama does to kill terrorists? The radical leftists shouted that Bush was a war criminal daily, but you never hear them say that to Obama, the Drone Strike President.
So, Bush is a war criminal for pouring water on the faces of murderers, but Obama is a hero for dropping bombs on them instead? These wars are now ‘just’, because Obama is following the Communist playbook (dictated by Moscow), whereas Bush was NOT. Sure, the Russians will bitch here and there, but that is because they want to disguise their alliance with the Democrat Party. The real enemy of Moscow is the GOP, not the DNC.
Above, I posted a list of news headlines and notice how they all report that ‘NATO denies civilians were killed’? Fox News actually gave it a twist, because they recall the media bias during the Bush years.
I agree with Obama’s tactics of using drones more, but this is not the kinder, gentler Liberalism world view that Obama preached during the Bush years. Also, intelligence gathering is suffering greatly, because terrorists are now killed instead of debriefed.
Why is it that the Obama Administration wants these terrorists silenced so badly? Are they trying to make sure that they carry some secrets to their graves? Very possible….
The Russian media spin on NATO killing civilians