First, let’s set the scene.

The U.S. is killing far more people than intended in some drone strikes, according to a report likely to raise new questions about the Obama administration’s reliance on drones in its battle against Islamic terrorists.

The Intercept, in a wide-ranging set of articles on the U.S. drone program, reported that in one five month-period, nearly 90 percent of people killed by strikes in an operation in northeastern Afghanistan were not the intended targets. The news outlet reports documents detailing Operation Haymaker show that the campaign, that lasted between January 2012 and February 2013, killed more than 200 people, but only 35 were the intended targets[*].

…Well, yes, that’s why the Bush administration limited the practice (less than fifty during his administration). Sure, it’s a cheap way to kill people without risking anybody who might have voting rights; but absent hard intelligence on the ground it’s also a great way to kill people that maybe you didn’t want to kill.  Needless to say,  Needless to say, that last part isn’t really all that important to the Obama administration; there’s a remarkable… callousness to their foreign policy methodology.  Or possibly it’s just a institutional unwillingness to admit when they’re wrong. Or kind of evil. At any rate, the Obama administration has vastly expanded the program, and they’re not particularly sorry about it, either.

But I find it mildly entertaining that The Intercept – which is run by the anti-American fanatic Glenn Greenwald – is so upset over drone strikes, given that it’s the antiwar movement’s fault that the Obama administration is using them. You see, the antiwar Left has made it impossible for a Democratic President to run a war in a coherent fashion; Barack Obama can’t simply send in ground troops to kill the Bad People.  But the Bad People are still there, and you leave them alone then they start building slave marts and sacrificial altars. So… Barack Obama abandoned the scalpel for the hand grenade.  Throw enough of them, and maybe you’ll keep the nascent terror regimes down to a dull roar.

As to why the antiwar movement lets Barack Obama get away with it – and make no mistake, they will – it’s simple: the people being droned aren’t white**.  If we ever blow up a couple of French or Canadian who have decided to embrace the jihadi tourist lifestyle, well, sure, then the antiwar movement will start freaking out and marching. But until then? …Don’t hold your breath.

Moe Lane (crosspost)

PS: If this sounds a lot like what happened with the antiwar movement and extraordinary rendition… well. Yeah. There’s a reason for that.

PPS: Revealing classified materials without permission is still a crime even when you don’t agree with either the policy it reveals, or the administration that started that policy.

*Mind you, that number does not address how many of them were people who we wouldn’t mind blowing up anyway, and how many were effective slaves of the people who we wouldn’t mind blowing up anyway.

**Although technically they are, as much as this particular designation actually means anything. Look, I don’t pretend to understand the race-obsessed lunatics that are currently steering the Democratic Party’s foreign policy. I’m just the guy being horrified at what they do on a regular basis.