Bill To End US Extrajudicial Killings

[Gunny]

It appears that Kucinich likes the Imam in Yemen that is technically a US citizen, but is now focused on recruiting people for terror attacks in the US.

I'm a firm believer in trying criminals, but unlike Denny here, I know the difference between a war and a crime scene. Killing unlawful enemy combatants should be the rule no matter their country of origin.

There is no such thing as an unlawful enemy combatant. ANYONE with the word "combatant" attached to it is legal. It IS illegal to kill unlawful NONcombatants. Well, except for everyone but extremist Muslim terrorists.

 

[Gunny]

Sorry, folks, but I think there's a fundamental flaw with this whole story. First of all, I don't believe there is any law or directive that legally permits the President of the United States to knowingly kill a US citizen without due process. I think too many folks in here have been watching too many government conspiracy movies like Enemy of the State, Shooter, The Bourne Identity or any number of movies that seem to take it for granted that this is how the Government acts.

There is a fundamental difference between taking out a legitimate target whether or not a US citizen happens to be there and specifically marking a US citizen for assassination. In the first instance, the target is a location (e.g. terrorist training camp, bio-weapons development facility, enemy headquarters, etc.) and all persons located there run the risk of being blown up by a smart bomb or being taken out by a team of commandos. However, in the second case, the President or other government official would have to deliberately bypass the Constitution and essentially commit murder. Sorry, but that just doesn't happen no matter what you see in the movies.

Makes for great conspiracy theories. Makes for even better action movies, especially with Jason Statham, Jet Li, Clive Owen or other similar action star in it. But it does not happen in the real world.

I'm surprised that Kucinich would swallow the bait into believing that there needs to be a bill introduced in Congress when he should call for an investigation to determine if it's happening at all. If it is, there are already laws in place to press criminal charges against those involved.

Exactly.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

This won't sound all that civilized, but really, don't we hire assasins in the CIA to carry out killings essential to national security? Why the fuck would I want to tie their hands if, by definition, the person getting smoked is a threat to my country? I could give a fuck whether they are US citizens; if they are flying here with a suitcase bomb, then please kill them.

What happened to make this a hot issue? Did the US get drug into a court of international law? I'm not seeing any breaking news; just that Iman in Yemen who was raised in New Mexico. Why's he still a US citizen anyway?

U.S. Approves Targeted Killing of American Cleric - NYTimes.com

The Obama administration has taken the extraordinary step of authorizing the targeted killing of an American citizen, the radical Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, who is believed to have shifted from encouraging attacks on the United States to directly participating in them, intelligence and counterterrorism officials said Tuesday.

Mr. Awlaki, who was born in New Mexico and spent years in the United States as an imam, is in hiding in Yemen. He has been the focus of intense scrutiny since he was linked to Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the Army psychiatrist accused of killing 13 people at Fort Hood, Tex., in November, and then to Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian man charged with trying to blow up a Detroit-bound airliner on Dec. 25.

Your assumption about the CIA is incorrect...President Ford put an end to CIA assasination squads.

 

[Tech_Esq]

It appears that Kucinich likes the Imam in Yemen that is technically a US citizen, but is now focused on recruiting people for terror attacks in the US.

I'm a firm believer in trying criminals, but unlike Denny here, I know the difference between a war and a crime scene. Killing unlawful enemy combatants should be the rule no matter their country of origin.

There is no such thing as an unlawful enemy combatant. ANYONE with the word "combatant" attached to it is legal. It IS illegal to kill unlawful NONcombatants. Well, except for everyone but extremist Muslim terrorists.

Geneva III would seem to disagree. A JAG officer explains the classifications:

Under Geneva III, there are three basic categories for classifying someone during a war: a) civilians; 2) lawful enemy combatants (also known as POWs), and; 3) unlawful enemy combatants. The status determination hearing is where a “regularly constituted tribunal” is supposed to decide which of the three categories the evidence shows you belong to as a detainee.

Unlawful enemy combatants are those who engaged in armed conflict but who didn’t follow the rules (note, though that this means that they weren’t following the rules when they were caught).

Being an unlawful combatant has consequences, .... Rather, the biggest consequence is that you can be prosecuted for engaging in the armed conflict. That is to say, lawful combatants are allowed to shoot at enemy soldiers – that’s the point of war. Because they don’t follow the rules, unlawful combatants aren’t allowed to shoot at soldiers and can be prosecuted for attempted or completed murder if they do.

http://www.samefacts.com/2009/07/te...combatants-what-the-law-of-war-actually-says/

Hardly a dispositive citation, but given that it is a JAG officer and and it's on-point and it covers Geneva III quickly and to the point, I'm going with it for now. I can find an original source later if I need to.

There is a link in there but it's not showing up for some reason.

 

[Toome]

Sorry, folks, but I think there's a fundamental flaw with this whole story. First of all, I don't believe there is any law or directive that legally permits the President of the United States to knowingly kill a US citizen without due process. I think too many folks in here have been watching too many government conspiracy movies like Enemy of the State, Shooter, The Bourne Identity or any number of movies that seem to take it for granted that this is how the Government acts.

There is a fundamental difference between taking out a legitimate target whether or not a US citizen happens to be there and specifically marking a US citizen for assassination. In the first instance, the target is a location (e.g. terrorist training camp, bio-weapons development facility, enemy headquarters, etc.) and all persons located there run the risk of being blown up by a smart bomb or being taken out by a team of commandos. However, in the second case, the President or other government official would have to deliberately bypass the Constitution and essentially commit murder. Sorry, but that just doesn't happen no matter what you see in the movies.

Makes for great conspiracy theories. Makes for even better action movies, especially with Jason Statham, Jet Li, Clive Owen or other similar action star in it. But it does not happen in the real world.

I'm surprised that Kucinich would swallow the bait into believing that there needs to be a bill introduced in Congress when he should call for an investigation to determine if it's happening at all. If it is, there are already laws in place to press criminal charges against those involved.

It is happening toome and it is not a movie. From what I gather, he is heading a recruiting op overseas. It is that position, heading the recruiting op, that marks him as a valid military target and his nationality is not the point or even a factor in that regard.

Well, I think you're missing the point. If we're talking about targeting a terrorist training camp, that's one thing. If we're talking about targeting a US citizen, that's murder. That's the law.

If someone is trying to be cute by mixing the two situations; in other words, pretending to be ignorant that he was there when that was the intent all along, well, I'd like to see how that would play out in court.

The only person who is a valid military target is the poor son of a bitch dumb enough to point a weapon at a US infantryman. Beyond that, like it or not, it gets all tangled up in legalities. That's why we have rules of engagement. It's also why US troops get killed, but I digress.