http://www.propublica.org/article/dissecting-obamas-standard-on-drone-strike-deaths

“And in the last few days alone, 27 “suspected militants” have been killed in three drone strikes in Pakistan, including the reported No. 2 of al Qaeda.”

-The use of militant is politically correct term that basically covers the administration’s ass.

-Unfortunately, militant to the rest of ‘us’ means civilians who happen to be in he general vicinity.

“As a general matter, it [the Times report] is not wrong that if a group of fighting age males are in a home where we know they are constructing explosives or plotting an attack, it’s assumed that all of them are in on that effort,”

-What age is considered suitable for “militant”? These “fighting age males” are most likely under the age of eighteen; which is frowned upon in american society.

-It is “assumed” that the males who live in these areas are all in on the effort, but what exactly is this so called effort? Are all of these people terrorists simply because they live in the same area where bombs are being made?

“We’re talking about some of the most remote places in the world, and some of the most paranoid organizations on the planet. If you’re there with them, they know you, they trust you, there’s a reason [you’re] there.”

-What organization are we talking about? There a dozens of  “organization” whom the United Stated considers to be terrorists. This basically tells me that any group of people who happen to get killed in an attack automatically get the word terrorist slapped across their name.

-Who is them and you? Is them those “organizations” that are so paranoid? What about you; who the hell is you? I hope they don’t mean me the reader.

Overall I feel like the author did a good job of relaying the issue of drone strikes to many people. Of the three quotes that I pulled from the article, the definitions of some of these terms were vague. We don’t know exactly who these so called terrorist are, or what it is that they are doing for them to be attacked.