Reply to Obama Murders an American Citizen

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Obama Murders an American Citizen"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=jsteele][quote=Anonymous]
Also, I think it is wrong to call this murder, and due process is not the right frame of reference.  Suppose a U.S. citizen defected during WWII and took up arms for the Germans.  He would have been a legitimate military target and could be killed without any form of due process under U.S. law.  This would also be the case if he were not on the front lines, but serving in the German command as a staff officer working on planning, logistics, etc.  I'm not an expert on Mr. al-Awlaki, but what I have read suggests that he was involved in operational planning of terrorist attacks on U.S. interests.  Those are acts of war under international law--which governs as he is outside of the U.S.--and he is therefore a legitimate military target.  (It is likely a different issue if he were on U.S. soil, or if he was captured by U.S forces.)

Obviously if the Administration is lying about all this, it's a different issue.  But what do you really think?  If he were out there setting up IEDs in Afganistan, you'd argue the U.S. could not take him out without a grand jury subpoena and an attempt to capture him?  That's nonsensical.  [/quote]

The same analogy to a citizen defecting during WWII was made in the previous discussion and I didn't get around to addressing it. So, I'll do it now. There are two issues with what you say. First, I have no problem with a US citizen who is fighting against the US being killed in battle. However, I reject the broad definition of "battle" that includes simply breathing. Al-Awlaki was specifically targeted for assassination. Nobody believes that he was directly engaged in taking up arms against the US. He would be more comparable to an American of German origin that decided to leave the US at the outbreak of WWII and return to Germany where he became a political official in the NAZI party (note, I am not calling Islamicists NAZIs). Second, and related to what I just said, it is quite disputable whether al-Awlaki had any involvement in operational planning of terrorist attacks. Anything that US officials have to say on this matter is tainted by their repeated and continued mischaracterization of his importance. Al-Awlaki was a propagandist and his value to AQAP was his ability to inspire English-speaking Muslims. That reminds me. Al-Awlaki is involved with al-Qaidi of the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). Today, all we hear about is that he was a high-ranking al-Qaida member. Those are two completely different organizations.

For a view of al-Awlaki by someone who actually knows what he is talking about, see:

http://bigthink.com/ideas/40448

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics