It's not a matter of whether or not you agree with an action...

[geauxtohell]

That's an opinion. The fact is to order an assassination on an American without a trial is illegal. This is an interesting case and I am just as happy to see this asshole dead as anyone with intelligence, but it was done in the open, by the American government. I see a slippery slope here and it's kind of scary.

Congratulations to you for utilizing this boards "search" function like a pro!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The government can revoke the citizenship of a naturalized citizen. They cannot, as far as I know, revoke it for anyone born in this country.

I believe you are mistaken on that one. I recall reading a few SCOTUS cases somewhere along the way that pretty much said that once a person is naturalized a citizen their citizenship is just protected as a natural born citizen. I'm pretty sure naturalized citizens would be in the same boat, i.e. they'd only lose citizenship by renouncing it. Of course, if you have some specific information to share I'd be interested in reading it.

Vance v. Terrazas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[WorldWatcher]

Let me see if you understand your position.

All the government needs to do is declare war on a group, and authorize the president to take whatever actions are needed, and they can kill anyone they want. That means they can declare war on anyone and then kill them with impunity.

Not a very comforting thought.

Interesting, the use of "all the government..." instead of the correct "Congress needs...". No the Secretary of Agriculture cannot declare war and authorize use of military force, No the IRS cannot declare war and authorize use of military force, etc...

The Constitution in Article I Section 8 specifically grants that power to the Congress for authorizing the use of military force (beyond certain short term situations they have authorized in the War Powers Act). The Congress has access to and oversight of various intelligence sources from the NSA, CIA, and various military intelligence sources that are not available to the general public in weighing the decision to authorize the use of military force, then 535 members get to help decide the course of action.

If the implication for the use of "all government..." was to imply one man sitting in an office makes the decision on a whim, that would be incorrect.


>>>>

Congress did not declare a war on American citizens.

Correct, they authorized use of military force to combat international terrorism and the application of "All necessary force" not restricted by location or citizenship. If you were a terrorist, then you were subject to the application of military force.


>>>>

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Interesting, the use of "all the government..." instead of the correct "Congress needs...". No the Secretary of Agriculture cannot declare war and authorize use of military force, No the IRS cannot declare war and authorize use of military force, etc...

The Constitution in Article I Section 8 specifically grants that power to the Congress for authorizing the use of military force (beyond certain short term situations they have authorized in the War Powers Act). The Congress has access to and oversight of various intelligence sources from the NSA, CIA, and various military intelligence sources that are not available to the general public in weighing the decision to authorize the use of military force, then 535 members get to help decide the course of action.

If the implication for the use of "all government..." was to imply one man sitting in an office makes the decision on a whim, that would be incorrect.


>>>>

Congress did not declare a war on American citizens.

Correct, they authorized use of military force to combat international terrorism and the application of "All necessary force" not restricted by location or citizenship. If you were a terrorist, then you were subject to the application of military force.


>>>>

Then you agree that Obama can send missiles against people hiding in NYC?

 

[WorldWatcher]

Congress did not declare a war on American citizens.

Correct, they authorized use of military force to combat international terrorism and the application of "All necessary force" not restricted by location or citizenship. If you were a terrorist, then you were subject to the application of military force.


>>>>

Then you agree that Obama can send missiles against people hiding in NYC?

Different situation.

In NYC a terrorist is within the jurisdiction of many law enforcement agencies so **IF** a Terrorist were identified through either strategic or tactical intelligence gathering to be within New York City then there are options available to end the operations of such an individual on a "Kill or Capture" list:

1. They are in the jurisdiction of the New York City Police,

2. They are in the Jurisdiction of the New York State Police Bureau of Criminal Investigation (BCI), and

3. They are within the jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau of Investigation​

Part of the evaluation process (if one were to think logically) in deciding whether to "Kill" OR "Capture" the individual would be an evaluation of the potential dangers in conducting a the capture option including the possibility of potential danger to the "team" used to conduct the capture operations (whether it be law enforcement or military). Conducting a capture operation in New York City is a much, MUCH more feasible operation (measured in minutes or hours and not days or months) because within a very short time SWAT teams that specialize in such operation are possible because:

1. SWAT teams in that operational environment are familiar with the physical environment,

2. A SWAT team is by default operating with the assistance of other local law enforcement and governmental resources which can be used to minimize the danger to the capture team and the minimization of potential collateral damage to innocent civilians,

3. A SWAT team has the ability to apply overwhelming force in a "Contain to Capture" scenario unlike a surgical strike team overseas. In a contain to capture scenario overwhelming force is applied and the target is isolated within a confined space (such as a building) the surrounding area is secured and time then is on the side of the capture team to wait out the target - such a scenario depending on the resources available to the target can take hours or days to resolve. Surgical strike teams operating in foreign lands do not have that option normally available to them, especially in a country hostile to supporting the United States and has had a history of supporting terrorism. In such cases the team must enter the operational area quickly, complete the mission in minutes, and exit the area.

3. A SWAT teams are available to attempt to capture a terrorist and are able to operate within its jurisdiction​

This is a very different situation then a terrorist who has fled the country and risen to a leadership position in an organization associated with the slaughter of thousands of American citizens and who is therefore outside of the jurisdiction of ALL United States of American law enforcement agencies providing no possibility of direct law enforcement action.

We have no idea of the classified intelligence developed from a wide range of HUMINT, SIGINT, ELINT, and overheas reconnaissance assets. The ability of the general public does not exist for the general public as were are unaware of the tactical intelligence involved. For example, news reports have indicated that once Bin Ladin was located, it was understood that he was holed up in a specially constructed compound for his use, that he had been there for a long time, and that there were no indications that Bin Ladin was using mobility as a means of thwarting capture because he was staying on one place. This allowed SEAL Team Six the opportunity to augment their already considerable training with additional specialized training on the specifics of the physical environment they would encounter to the point where they practiced the raid for 1-2 MONTHS in a mock-up constructed for just that purpose. However **IF** al Awlaki had learned from the Bin Ladin raid and was now using mobility as part of his personal defense strategy then that would exponentially increase the threat factor to any team attempting to capture because of the inability to plan and rehearse such an action.



>>>>

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Correct, they authorized use of military force to combat international terrorism and the application of "All necessary force" not restricted by location or citizenship. If you were a terrorist, then you were subject to the application of military force.


>>>>

Then you agree that Obama can send missiles against people hiding in NYC?

Different situation.

In NYC a terrorist is within the jurisdiction of many law enforcement agencies so **IF** a Terrorist were identified through either strategic or tactical intelligence gathering to be within New York City then there are options available to end the operations of such an individual on a "Kill or Capture" list:

1. They are in the jurisdiction of the New York City Police,

2. They are in the Jurisdiction of the New York State Police Bureau of Criminal Investigation (BCI), and

3. They are within the jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau of Investigation​

Part of the evaluation process (if one were to think logically) in deciding whether to "Kill" OR "Capture" the individual would be an evaluation of the potential dangers in conducting a the capture option including the possibility of potential danger to the "team" used to conduct the capture operations (whether it be law enforcement or military). Conducting a capture operation in New York City is a much, MUCH more feasible operation (measured in minutes or hours and not days or months) because within a very short time SWAT teams that specialize in such operation are possible because:

1. SWAT teams in that operational environment are familiar with the physical environment,

2. A SWAT team is by default operating with the assistance of other local law enforcement and governmental resources which can be used to minimize the danger to the capture team and the minimization of potential collateral damage to innocent civilians,

3. A SWAT team has the ability to apply overwhelming force in a "Contain to Capture" scenario unlike a surgical strike team overseas. In a contain to capture scenario overwhelming force is applied and the target is isolated within a confined space (such as a building) the surrounding area is secured and time then is on the side of the capture team to wait out the target - such a scenario depending on the resources available to the target can take hours or days to resolve. Surgical strike teams operating in foreign lands do not have that option normally available to them, especially in a country hostile to supporting the United States and has had a history of supporting terrorism. In such cases the team must enter the operational area quickly, complete the mission in minutes, and exit the area.

3. A SWAT teams are available to attempt to capture a terrorist and are able to operate within its jurisdiction​

This is a very different situation then a terrorist who has fled the country and risen to a leadership position in an organization associated with the slaughter of thousands of American citizens and who is therefore outside of the jurisdiction of ALL United States of American law enforcement agencies providing no possibility of direct law enforcement action.

We have no idea of the classified intelligence developed from a wide range of HUMINT, SIGINT, ELINT, and overheas reconnaissance assets. The ability of the general public does not exist for the general public as were are unaware of the tactical intelligence involved. For example, news reports have indicated that once Bin Ladin was located, it was understood that he was holed up in a specially constructed compound for his use, that he had been there for a long time, and that there were no indications that Bin Ladin was using mobility as a means of thwarting capture because he was staying on one place. This allowed SEAL Team Six the opportunity to augment their already considerable training with additional specialized training on the specifics of the physical environment they would encounter to the point where they practiced the raid for 1-2 MONTHS in a mock-up constructed for just that purpose. However **IF** al Awlaki had learned from the Bin Ladin raid and was now using mobility as part of his personal defense strategy then that would exponentially increase the threat factor to any team attempting to capture because of the inability to plan and rehearse such an action.



>>>>

Different how? You said "Correct, they authorized use of military force to combat international terrorism and the application of "All necessary force" not restricted by location or citizenship. If you were a terrorist, then you were subject to the application of military force." Now you want to restrict it by location.

Your position is absurd, just go hide under your bed and stop making a fool of yourself.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Then you agree that Obama can send missiles against people hiding in NYC?

Different situation.

In NYC a terrorist is within the jurisdiction of many law enforcement agencies so **IF** a Terrorist were identified through either strategic or tactical intelligence gathering to be within New York City then there are options available to end the operations of such an individual on a "Kill or Capture" list:

1. They are in the jurisdiction of the New York City Police,

2. They are in the Jurisdiction of the New York State Police Bureau of Criminal Investigation (BCI), and

3. They are within the jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau of Investigation​

Part of the evaluation process (if one were to think logically) in deciding whether to "Kill" OR "Capture" the individual would be an evaluation of the potential dangers in conducting a the capture option including the possibility of potential danger to the "team" used to conduct the capture operations (whether it be law enforcement or military). Conducting a capture operation in New York City is a much, MUCH more feasible operation (measured in minutes or hours and not days or months) because within a very short time SWAT teams that specialize in such operation are possible because:

1. SWAT teams in that operational environment are familiar with the physical environment,

2. A SWAT team is by default operating with the assistance of other local law enforcement and governmental resources which can be used to minimize the danger to the capture team and the minimization of potential collateral damage to innocent civilians,

3. A SWAT team has the ability to apply overwhelming force in a "Contain to Capture" scenario unlike a surgical strike team overseas. In a contain to capture scenario overwhelming force is applied and the target is isolated within a confined space (such as a building) the surrounding area is secured and time then is on the side of the capture team to wait out the target - such a scenario depending on the resources available to the target can take hours or days to resolve. Surgical strike teams operating in foreign lands do not have that option normally available to them, especially in a country hostile to supporting the United States and has had a history of supporting terrorism. In such cases the team must enter the operational area quickly, complete the mission in minutes, and exit the area.

3. A SWAT teams are available to attempt to capture a terrorist and are able to operate within its jurisdiction​

This is a very different situation then a terrorist who has fled the country and risen to a leadership position in an organization associated with the slaughter of thousands of American citizens and who is therefore outside of the jurisdiction of ALL United States of American law enforcement agencies providing no possibility of direct law enforcement action.

We have no idea of the classified intelligence developed from a wide range of HUMINT, SIGINT, ELINT, and overheas reconnaissance assets. The ability of the general public does not exist for the general public as were are unaware of the tactical intelligence involved. For example, news reports have indicated that once Bin Ladin was located, it was understood that he was holed up in a specially constructed compound for his use, that he had been there for a long time, and that there were no indications that Bin Ladin was using mobility as a means of thwarting capture because he was staying on one place. This allowed SEAL Team Six the opportunity to augment their already considerable training with additional specialized training on the specifics of the physical environment they would encounter to the point where they practiced the raid for 1-2 MONTHS in a mock-up constructed for just that purpose. However **IF** al Awlaki had learned from the Bin Ladin raid and was now using mobility as part of his personal defense strategy then that would exponentially increase the threat factor to any team attempting to capture because of the inability to plan and rehearse such an action.



>>>>

Different how? You said "Correct, they authorized use of military force to combat international terrorism and the application of "All necessary force" not restricted by location or citizenship. If you were a terrorist, then you were subject to the application of military force." Now you want to restrict it by location.

International terrorism means those across international boarders. An American citizen committing acts of terrorism in New York City would be an act of domestic terrorism as it relates to the American citizen. When the American citizen conducts and or assumes a leadership position of an international terrorist organization and then hides in a country outside the bounds of the United States, then they become an international terrorist.

The September 18, 2001 Authorization of Military Force passed by the United States Congress clearly authorizes the use of military force against international terrorists, not domestic terrorist. If you are an American citizen inside the borders of the United States you are a domestic terrorist, if you are an American citizen outside the boarders of the United States your are in international terrorist.

Your position is absurd, just go hide under your bed and stop making a fool of yourself.

Actually my position makes sense and the difference between an American citizen operating in New York verses one where a strike team must operate thousands of miles from home is well reasoned and practical based on military experience.


The comparison of an American born terrorist (with the implication it can just be some random citizen based on a whim) in New York being bombed by the government and one hiding in a foreign country after assuming a leadership position of an organization responsible for the slaughter of thousands of innocent Americans is the one that is absurd.


>>>>