Guess what. If you want to make this about “hypocrisy,” at least stay with the actual facts. This episode looks nothing like the (still heavily contested) legal framework the Obama administration used in certain targeted killings. Those relied on DOJ memos and the AUMF and were openly challenged in court, not casually waved through. And for the record, I’ve always supported any ruling that limits executive power or holds a president legally accountable.
I don’t care if it’s Obama or Trump. A president swears an oath, and that makes following the law non-negotiable. If they cross the line, I want accountability, period.
You, on the other hand, seem to think presidents should get a free pass as long as they’re on your team. That’s a you problem, not a principle.
And now to the actual point: this Trinidad strike is a different animal entirely. It appears to involve ordering lethal force against survivors in the water, that’s extrajudicial killing, plain and simple. An appeal to hypocrisy doesn’t answer whether the conduct violated international law or basic human decency. At best it embarrasses both sides. At worst it tries to bury whether a war crime was committed.
Accountability isn’t “lawfare.” It’s the rule of law.
www.independent.co.uk
taskandpurpose.com
