Aren't you uncomfortable about how incessant focus on the OP's issue fits so well with Republican propaganda?

I just saw that american crossroads thing and thought hey, what gives?
Whatever no big deal.

I don't know what to think of the OP issue anymore.

I used to have an opinion on it but I don't know anymore.

Halt right there, citizen.

THIS IS THE INTERNET POLICE!

Round them all up and turn them in. There problem solved.

towards the U.S.?

a 100 acts of terrorism, but was pardoned by the first Bush.

What should the Cubans and Venezuelans governments have done? If they had launched drone strikes in downtown Miami would you have defended it?

As arbiter of all that is right. And it decided we could invade other sovereign nation's airspace at will?

Since we were first formed as a country, wars of aggression have followed.
First we took on the French and Spanish claims to the "Mississippi Terrortories"
and for a long time invaded every American Native tribe,
then we took on Mexico when we annexed Texas, and later Cal.
and later expanded our interest into So America via the Monroe Doctrine ( which essentially told European countries hands off the Americas, that USA and Britain had dibs).

you get the gist...

hat tip to the late Mr. Zinn.

Will our epitaph be the same?

Not conquered by a hostile nation, but buried under the debt incurred by never ending wars.
One wonders.

So we seem to be right on track.

'course, now, we have added hubris in the form of Fukishima.
Because apparently Chernobyl taught us nothing.

his predators and reapers holsters.

Strange, isn't it, that just 10 years ago the US criticised Israel for these types extra-judicial killings that were against established international rules, but now the administration finds armed drone strikes as a perverted delightful way to deliver death and destruction.

The legal definition of a targeted killing is the intentional, premeditated, and deliberate use of lethal force, by a state or its agents acting under color of law, or by an organized armed group in armed conflict, against a specific individual who is not in the perpetrator’s custody. By expanding the right to target and kill individuals anywhere in the world, the US has completely undermined the rules it helped create that were designed to prevent other states from carrying out extra-judicial killings. If the US can change these rules to suit its desires, why won't Iran, Syria, China, Russia or any country be able to do the same, and the US become the "beneficiary" of such extra-judicial killings of Americans by armed drones?