Jamal Khashoggi

This is the single dumbest position you have taken. Side note: If Trump were the first POTUS to do this, as supposed to Obama, you would be screaming for an impeachment.
From the link you provided......

he was centrally involved in planning terrorist operations for the Islamist militant group al-Qaeda

and the legal conclusion.......

https://www.vanderbilt.edu/olli/class-materials/warfarechesney.pdf (written prior to strike)


The al-Awlaki scenario is a powerful device for coming to grips with international law principles governing lethal force, bringing us face-to-face with that which is determinate and that which is not. As we have seen, a substantial number of important questions fall into the latter camp, though not so many as to preclude the conclusion that the US government most likely could use lethal force against alAwlaki without violating international law.
 
Last edited:
From the link you provided......

he was centrally involved in planning terrorist operations for the Islamist militant group al-Qaeda

and the legal conclusion.......

https://www.vanderbilt.edu/olli/class-materials/warfarechesney.pdf

The al-Awlaki scenario is a powerful device for coming to grips with international law principles governing lethal force, bringing us face-to-face with that which is determinate and that which is not. As we have seen, a substantial number of important questions fall into the latter camp, though not so many as to preclude the conclusion that the US government most likely could use lethal force against alAwlaki without violating international law.
DNGAF about international law. My problem is with his guaranteed constitutional rights being ignored. Highly dangerous and poorly thought out.
 
I see it more as the cops shooting a guy who is raising his gun. No trial, no due process.....bang. That is justifiable.

If they shoot an unarmed man walking away, different story.

A person's actions can negate their right to due process.
This is a horrible analogy. Anwar al-Awlaki was in hiding when he was killed by a targeted drone strike, not in the act of committing a crime. Before that, Obama had him put on the CIA "Kill List" without benefit of due process. Argue you think he got what he deserved if you want, but his Constitutional rights were absolutely violated.

More sad to me was that his 16 year old son, also a U.S. citizen was killed two weeks after his father in another drone strike ordered by Obama. And I just recently read that his 8 year old daughter, also a U.S. citizen, was killed in a U.S. commando attack ordered by Trump in 2017.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
But you agree a cop can shoot a suspect who is raising a gun?

You do realize the way the Justice Department rationalized it was that they had the power to do this outside the country to citizen but not if the citizen was inside the boarders. No judicial review was even done to determine if this citizen should be placed on the kill list. It was just determined to be so by the admin. You are way too comfortable giving up people's rights to your God POTUS's. And I stand by my assessment that you would be screaming bloody murder if Trump were the first to do this. And to answer your question, it's not the same thing.


Whom Can the President Kill?
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol
You do realize the way the Justice Department rationalized it was that they had the power to do this outside the country to citizen but not if the citizen was inside the boarders. No judicial review was even done to determine if this citizen should be placed on the kill list. It was just determined to be so by the admin. You are way too comfortable giving up people's rights to your God POTUS's. And I stand by my assessment that you would be screaming bloody murder if Trump were the first to do this. And to answer your question, it's not the same thing.


Whom Can the President Kill?

Yeah, why is Luther so upset? Shouldn’t the Saudi Prince have the same power to kill his citizens?
 
Yeah, why is Luther so upset? Shouldn’t the Saudi Prince have the same power to kill his citizens?
I am half tempted to see what level of outrage Luther had when Trump droned that Iranian General to death. Bet he was far more upset about that then he was learning a US President intentionally assassinated a US citizen without due process. Funny priorities.
 
Last edited:
If his kids are citizens simply by virtue of having been born here, then they shouldn't be US citizens anyway; we need to end that idiocy like most of the world, including all of Europe, has done.

You do realize this is how 99% of people are citizens right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: clarksvol00
This is a horrible analogy. Anwar al-Awlaki was in hiding when he was killed by a targeted drone strike, not in the act of committing a crime. Before that, Obama had him put on the CIA "Kill List" without benefit of due process. Argue you think he got what he deserved if you want, but his Constitutional rights were absolutely violated.

More sad to me was that his 16 year old son, also a U.S. citizen was killed two weeks after his father in another drone strike ordered by Obama. And I just recently read that his 8 year old daughter, also a U.S. citizen, was killed in a U.S. commando attack ordered by Trump in 2017.
A couple of legal opinions:

The conclusion is that he can be (targeted) if he is in fact an operational leader within AQAP, as this role would render him a functional combatant in an organized armed group.

‘I don’t think that the ‘‘imminence’’ rule would require the US to show that an al Qaeda planner was literally on his way to the airport to put a bomb on a plane to Chicago before launching a strike. But it would require an individualized determination that the target is actively involved in planning future attacks (as against simply having been involved in terrorism in the past).’231
 
A couple of legal opinions:

The conclusion is that he can be (targeted) if he is in fact an operational leader within AQAP, as this role would render him a functional combatant in an organized armed group.

‘I don’t think that the ‘‘imminence’’ rule would require the US to show that an al Qaeda planner was literally on his way to the airport to put a bomb on a plane to Chicago before launching a strike. But it would require an individualized determination that the target is actively involved in planning future attacks (as against simply having been involved in terrorism in the past).’231
You realize the government never once provided evidence to back up their claims, right? They just said "he's al-Qaeda" and that was the extent of their proof.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
It's not. Read what I posted above about the concept of imminent threat.
Send in a commando squad to capture him, and if he's killed fighting back, you have a point. He was killed in a drone strike, making your assertion invalid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
I am half tempted to see what level of outrage Luther had when Trump droned that Iranian General to death. Bet he was far more upset about that then he was learning a US President intentionally assassinated a US citizen without sue process. Funny priorities.

It would be interesting, I’m sure there are some hypocritical posts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
Send in a commando squad to capture him, and if he's killed fighting back, you have a point. He was killed in a drone strike, making your assertion invalid.
How's it different from dropping a bomb out of a plane?
 

VN Store



Back
Top