Really, wasn't "the DC Sniper" a harbinger of drone strikes?
Primary tabs
WaPo has an interesting interview with convicted sniper Lee Boyd Malvo:
It has been 10 years since Malvo and Muhammad went on one of the most notorious killing sprees in the nation’s history. Over 21 days in October 2002, the pair ambushed 13 unsuspecting strangers, killing 10 of them, in the Washington area. They succeeded in terrorizing the region, as death could come anywhere, anytime: in gas stations and parking lots. They even shot and wounded a 13-year-old standing in front of a middle school. Sporting events were canceled. People cowered behind tarps as they filled their cars with gas. Parents kept their children home. After the two were caught, they were tied to at least 11 more shootings from Washington state to Alabama, five of them fatal.
How is "death could come from anywhere" different from what the people of Afghanistan experience when the drones are hovering?
And how, exactly, is Team Obama different from Malvo and Muhammad, killing from a distance by remote control?

- lambert's blog


- Log in or register to post comments
Comments
Not very different at all
My students and I have been trying to get a handle on the morality of drone strikes in several discussions; none of us has thought of this painfully illuminating comparison.
What do your students think?
(Nice to see this out-of-the blue comment from a handle I'm not so familiar with ;-)