<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
xmlns:rawvoice="http://www.rawvoice.com/rawvoiceRssModule/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Increase in the use of Drones Raise Legal Concerns</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.theworld.org/2011/10/drone-legal-concerns-unmanned-aerial-aircraft/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.theworld.org/2011/10/drone-legal-concerns-unmanned-aerial-aircraft/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=drone-legal-concerns-unmanned-aerial-aircraft</link>
	<description>Global Perspectives for an American Audience</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Feb 2013 14:49:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lydia Kelemen Felber</title>
		<link>http://www.theworld.org/2011/10/drone-legal-concerns-unmanned-aerial-aircraft/comment-page-1/#comment-21836</link>
		<dc:creator>Lydia Kelemen Felber</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Oct 2011 23:50:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theworld.org/?p=89874#comment-21836</guid>
		<description>Professor O&#039;Connell on the illegal use of drones</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Professor O&#8217;Connell on the illegal use of drones</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David</title>
		<link>http://www.theworld.org/2011/10/drone-legal-concerns-unmanned-aerial-aircraft/comment-page-1/#comment-21678</link>
		<dc:creator>David</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Oct 2011 16:52:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theworld.org/?p=89874#comment-21678</guid>
		<description>Professor O&#039;Connell rejected without explanation the first and best reason for using UAV attacks against non-nation state terroristic targets; the war has no classic battlefield lines.  If the front lines of the defense is in Anytown, her reliance on standard policing techniques are unrealistic, if not impossible, to apply to harboring nations infiltrated by sympathetic, if not cooperative, officials.  
In practical effect, isn&#039;t a mind numbed religious suicide bomber merely a drone too?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Professor O&#8217;Connell rejected without explanation the first and best reason for using UAV attacks against non-nation state terroristic targets; the war has no classic battlefield lines.  If the front lines of the defense is in Anytown, her reliance on standard policing techniques are unrealistic, if not impossible, to apply to harboring nations infiltrated by sympathetic, if not cooperative, officials. <br />
In practical effect, isn&#8217;t a mind numbed religious suicide bomber merely a drone too?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.theworld.org/2011/10/drone-legal-concerns-unmanned-aerial-aircraft/comment-page-1/#comment-21671</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Oct 2011 01:10:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theworld.org/?p=89874#comment-21671</guid>
		<description>You have no contact with the real world.  Your suggestions are not realistic.  For example, Pakistan harbors these criminals and are apparently not interested in giving them up.  Are we to send the NYPD into Yemen?  </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You have no contact with the real world.  Your suggestions are not realistic.  For example, Pakistan harbors these criminals and are apparently not interested in giving them up.  Are we to send the NYPD into Yemen?  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>