Assassinating American Citizens ... for or against?

[Xchel]

I dunno that your sources saying no is right...ever seen the MS 13 or Cribs and Bloods in action? I would say one could make a pretty good argument that they are indeed terrorists...oh and what about the cartel? member of it..no need for trial we just send a drone in to take you out.

 

[Katzndogz]

Have we really become so destroyed that we can't tell anymore who the enemies are? Seriously? Is that how bad off we are now?

 

[Ravi]

Have we really become so destroyed that we can't tell anymore who the enemies are? Seriously? Is that how bad off we are now?

No, we haven't. Enemies are people that want to kill Americans.

Sucks to be you.

 

[Big Fitz]

Their kid is an American citizen no matter what he has done is still protected by the Constitution period.

How abouit those L.A. gang bangers should the police shoot them on sight because an informate gave the police intell of something they may have done? After all they are in the true sense terrorist and they kill people, and we still have that war on drugs thing going on.

If those gangbangers are doing the cop killing in the theater of battle, then of course they're fair game. It is a WAR over there. American due process is suspended in a war zone. I never thought we'd be on the opposite sides of a discussion Bigreb. So needless to say, I'm surprised you're siding with Code Pink on this one.

Yemen is not a warzone.

You keep saying that but we keep finding enemy combatants there. So I guess what you say doesn't make it so.

 

[Big Fitz]

So the police can now target L.A. gang bangers because they are terrorist. They kill people






OK then my answer is no, no they can't.

Is LA officially a war zone and are gangbangers recognized as REAL terrorists?

LOL... then I guess we won't be having Predator Drone strikes on gang convoys or hangouts in Compton any time soon then, will we? Besides, what's the rule for the military acting inside the borders of the United States proper?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

So the police can now target L.A. gang bangers because they are terrorist. They kill people

So this post won't be over looked or forgotten I'll quote it again

So let me know if that happens la la la and then we'll talk...

Is that the best answer you can give? Surely you can do better.

So the police can now target L.A. gang bangers because they are terrorist. They kill people






OK then my answer is no, no they can't.

Why not they are terrorist and they kill people.
Brown and Delgadillo File Lawsuit Seeking Injunction that Creates 1.4 Square-Mile Gang-Free Zone Around L.A. School

Los Angeles -- Fighting to protect the rights of students who have been "indiscriminately terrorized" by gang violence, Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. and Los Angeles City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo today announced that they have filed a lawsuit seeking an injunction that creates a 1.4 square-mile gang-free zone around Fremont High School in Los Angeles.

Press Release | State of California - Department of Justice - Kamala D. Harris Attorney General


What about Mexican gangs?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stlEMIzN9RA]Racist Latino gang targeting Black people - YouTube[/ame]

According to obama they should all be shot on sight. because they are terrorist.

 

[idb]

So this post won't be over looked or forgotten I'll quote it again

Is that the best answer you can give? Surely you can do better.

So the police can now target L.A. gang bangers because they are terrorist. They kill people






OK then my answer is no, no they can't.

Why not they are terrorist and they kill people.
Brown and Delgadillo File Lawsuit Seeking Injunction that Creates 1.4 Square-Mile Gang-Free Zone Around L.A. School

Los Angeles -- Fighting to protect the rights of students who have been "indiscriminately terrorized" by gang violence, Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. and Los Angeles City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo today announced that they have filed a lawsuit seeking an injunction that creates a 1.4 square-mile gang-free zone around Fremont High School in Los Angeles.

Press Release | State of California - Department of Justice - Kamala D. Harris Attorney General


What about Mexican gangs?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stlEMIzN9RA]Racist Latino gang targeting Black people - YouTube[/ame]

According to obama they should all be shot on sight. because they are terrorist.

According to obama they should all be shot on sight. because they are terrorist.

Link please?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

So the police can now target L.A. gang bangers because they are terrorist. They kill people






OK then my answer is no, no they can't.

Why not they are terrorist and they kill people.
Brown and Delgadillo File Lawsuit Seeking Injunction that Creates 1.4 Square-Mile Gang-Free Zone Around L.A. School

Los Angeles -- Fighting to protect the rights of students who have been "indiscriminately terrorized" by gang violence, Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. and Los Angeles City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo today announced that they have filed a lawsuit seeking an injunction that creates a 1.4 square-mile gang-free zone around Fremont High School in Los Angeles.

Press Release | State of California - Department of Justice - Kamala D. Harris Attorney General


What about Mexican gangs?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stlEMIzN9RA]Racist Latino gang targeting Black people - YouTube[/ame]

According to obama they should all be shot on sight. because they are terrorist.

According to obama they should all be shot on sight. because they are terrorist.

Link please?

If obama wasn't wanting terrorist killed on sight he never would have a hit list or send in drones to do the job. gang members are terrorist they terrorize people. So they do not deserve any rights according to the action of obama

You can't have it both ways, but being you're not American citizen you would never understand what due process is.

 

[idb]

Why not they are terrorist and they kill people.
Brown and Delgadillo File Lawsuit Seeking Injunction that Creates 1.4 Square-Mile Gang-Free Zone Around L.A. School

Los Angeles -- Fighting to protect the rights of students who have been "indiscriminately terrorized" by gang violence, Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. and Los Angeles City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo today announced that they have filed a lawsuit seeking an injunction that creates a 1.4 square-mile gang-free zone around Fremont High School in Los Angeles.

Press Release | State of California - Department of Justice - Kamala D. Harris Attorney General


What about Mexican gangs?

Racist Latino gang targeting Black people - YouTube

According to obama they should all be shot on sight. because they are terrorist.

According to obama they should all be shot on sight. because they are terrorist.

Link please?

If obama wasn't wanting terrorist killed on sight he never would have a hit list or send in drones to do the job. gang members are terrorist they terrorize people. So they do not deserve any rights according to the action of obama

You can't have it both ways, but being you're not American citizen you would never understand what due process is.

Sooo...what you are saying in more words than you needed to use is "Actually, I have nothing".

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Link please?

If obama wasn't wanting terrorist killed on sight he never would have a hit list or send in drones to do the job. gang members are terrorist they terrorize people. So they do not deserve any rights according to the action of obama

You can't have it both ways, but being you're not American citizen you would never understand what due process is.

Sooo...what you are saying in more words than you needed to use is "Actually, I have nothing".

Why have a list is yoiu aren't going to use it? Why use drones unless it's not your intent to kill?

 

[idb]

If obama wasn't wanting terrorist killed on sight he never would have a hit list or send in drones to do the job. gang members are terrorist they terrorize people. So they do not deserve any rights according to the action of obama

You can't have it both ways, but being you're not American citizen you would never understand what due process is.

Sooo...what you are saying in more words than you needed to use is "Actually, I have nothing".

Why have a list is yoiu aren't going to use it? Why use drones unless it's not your intent to kill?

Wait right there big boy.
You said

According to obama they should all be shot on sight. because they are terrorist

I asked you to provide a link justifying that claim.
Now you're saying that because the CIA has a Kill Or Capture list and uses drones then Obama must want to kill LA gang members?

Your leaps of logic are able to clear tall buildings in a single bound.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Sooo...what you are saying in more words than you needed to use is "Actually, I have nothing".

Why have a list is yoiu aren't going to use it? Why use drones unless it's not your intent to kill?

Wait right there big boy.
You said

According to obama they should all be shot on sight. because they are terrorist

I asked you to provide a link justifying that claim.
Now you're saying that because the CIA has a Kill Or Capture list and uses drones then Obama must want to kill LA gang members?

Your leaps of logic are able to clear tall buildings in a single bound.

According to his action of having a hit list and using drones new zealander. You really haven't a clue.

Does that 3rd world country of New zealand have due process?

 

[Dune]

If those gangbangers are doing the cop killing in the theater of battle, then of course they're fair game. It is a WAR over there. American due process is suspended in a war zone. I never thought we'd be on the opposite sides of a discussion Bigreb. So needless to say, I'm surprised you're siding with Code Pink on this one.

Yemen is not a warzone.

Nor is Pakistan. But we still keep killing terrorists there too. KNOWN terrorists. Admitted terrorists. You've obviously mistaken me as someone who gives a **** about splitting hairs over the imagined rights of our enemies and traitors.

Nixon had to bomb in cambodia to stop the Viet Cong from bringing supplies to their troops in country. Why do you expect terrorists to respect the rules of war when they violate almost every one of them to begin with? They are not entitled to, nor should receive any civilized protections that civilized nations give each other in war.

Unlike you, I get the fact that if you admit you assisted in trying to kill innocent Americans or have been shown to be a part of the plot, you effectively are a traitor and deserve death on sight. You're not going to change my mind on this one.

No one is going to change your mind on anything, that much is clear.
Comparing killing a terrorist in Pakistan to killing an american accused of terrorism in Yemen is apples to oranges.
The 5th ammendment applies to one and not the other.

 

[Dune]

Is LA officially a war zone and are gangbangers recognized as REAL terrorists?

LOL... then I guess we won't be having Predator Drone strikes on gang convoys or hangouts in Compton any time soon then, will we? Besides, what's the rule for the military acting inside the borders of the United States proper?

Posse comitatus? Sorry, your boy BushII disabled that. Try again.

The Myth of Posse Comitatus

 

[Liability]

Yemen is not a warzone.

Nor is Pakistan. But we still keep killing terrorists there too. KNOWN terrorists. Admitted terrorists. You've obviously mistaken me as someone who gives a **** about splitting hairs over the imagined rights of our enemies and traitors.

Nixon had to bomb in cambodia to stop the Viet Cong from bringing supplies to their troops in country. Why do you expect terrorists to respect the rules of war when they violate almost every one of them to begin with? They are not entitled to, nor should receive any civilized protections that civilized nations give each other in war.

Unlike you, I get the fact that if you admit you assisted in trying to kill innocent Americans or have been shown to be a part of the plot, you effectively are a traitor and deserve death on sight. You're not going to change my mind on this one.

No one is going to change your mind on anything, that much is clear.
Comparing killing a terrorist in Pakistan to killing an american accused of terrorism in Yemen is apples to oranges.
The 5th ammendment applies to one and not the other.

Nope.

Properly understood, the 5th Amendment applies to neither.

 

[Dune]

Link please?

If obama wasn't wanting terrorist killed on sight he never would have a hit list or send in drones to do the job. gang members are terrorist they terrorize people. So they do not deserve any rights according to the action of obama

You can't have it both ways, but being you're not American citizen you would never understand what due process is.

Sooo...what you are saying in more words than you needed to use is "Actually, I have nothing".

No, that is what you are saying.

What he is saying is true and that is the whole point of this thread.

If it is O.K. for the president to order the death of an american, without due process in Yemen, than it is O.K. here as well. There is no difference.

 

[Dune]

Nor is Pakistan. But we still keep killing terrorists there too. KNOWN terrorists. Admitted terrorists. You've obviously mistaken me as someone who gives a **** about splitting hairs over the imagined rights of our enemies and traitors.

Nixon had to bomb in cambodia to stop the Viet Cong from bringing supplies to their troops in country. Why do you expect terrorists to respect the rules of war when they violate almost every one of them to begin with? They are not entitled to, nor should receive any civilized protections that civilized nations give each other in war.

Unlike you, I get the fact that if you admit you assisted in trying to kill innocent Americans or have been shown to be a part of the plot, you effectively are a traitor and deserve death on sight. You're not going to change my mind on this one.

No one is going to change your mind on anything, that much is clear.
Comparing killing a terrorist in Pakistan to killing an american accused of terrorism in Yemen is apples to oranges.
The 5th ammendment applies to one and not the other.

Nope.

Properly understood, the 5th Amendment applies to neither.

School me bigboy.

 

[Liability]

If obama wasn't wanting terrorist killed on sight he never would have a hit list or send in drones to do the job. gang members are terrorist they terrorize people. So they do not deserve any rights according to the action of obama

You can't have it both ways, but being you're not American citizen you would never understand what due process is.

Sooo...what you are saying in more words than you needed to use is "Actually, I have nothing".

No, that is what you are saying.

What he is saying is true and that is the whole point of this thread.

If it is O.K. for the president to order the death of an american, without due process in Yemen, than it is O.K. here as well. There is no difference.

There is, of course, a huge difference.

If the American is accused or strongly suspected of mere criminality, he cannot properly be ordered to be killed under ANY circumstances.

But, when the American is engaging in efforts to assist our enemy in time of war, and he is not here to capture, and we have no particular ability to go and "arrest" him for any theoretical "crime" over in Yemen, the President MAY permissibly order the enemy leader to be taken out in Yemen.

Pretending otherwise avails you no bonus points. We arrest people suspected of criminal acts. We do not arrest our enemies in time of war. We target them and very frequently seek to kill them (which seems only fitting since these particular enemies are targeting Americans for death without regard to status as warriors or civilians).

 

[Liability]

No one is going to change your mind on anything, that much is clear.
Comparing killing a terrorist in Pakistan to killing an american accused of terrorism in Yemen is apples to oranges.
The 5th ammendment applies to one and not the other.

Nope.

Properly understood, the 5th Amendment applies to neither.

School me bigboy.

Why? Is your mind even open to the notion that you could be wrong?

 

[idb]

Why have a list is yoiu aren't going to use it? Why use drones unless it's not your intent to kill?

Wait right there big boy.
You said

According to obama they should all be shot on sight. because they are terrorist

I asked you to provide a link justifying that claim.
Now you're saying that because the CIA has a Kill Or Capture list and uses drones then Obama must want to kill LA gang members?

Your leaps of logic are able to clear tall buildings in a single bound.

According to his action of having a hit list and using drones new zealander. You really haven't a clue.

Does that 3rd world country of New zealand have due process?

It's interesting to me that you are prepared to shoot a couple of cops dead when your life isn't in clear and present danger and without due process.
Yet you object to this action because there was no 'due process'.

As an aside, I said earlier that I agree that, technically, the killing was probably illegal but I still think - based on what I've read of this guy - it was a good result.
He clearly had no problem carrying out indiscriminate killings (as opposed to the targetted killing on him) so, personally, I would be prepared to accept that it was pragmatic and justified.
Terrorists rely on their targets not being as ruthless as they are.