General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Remember how FDR executed American Nazi sympathizers? [View all]leveymg
(36,418 posts)immediate threats.
This is the worst part of the legacy of the first Obama Administration, so far, and like some other policies, such as regime change operations against Syria and Iran, need to be reconsidered if the U.S. is going to regain the moral imperative and high-ground, which in the end will determine how history views Obama and the outcome of wars conducted during this period.
I have no inherent problem with killing armed combatants engaged in hostilities against the U.S., whether by drones or other airstrikes, there is little difference, really. Same goes for criminals. Those who are engaged in violence against lawful authority put themselves at risk of being killed, whether they are in California or Karachi.
While I doubt that Mr. al-Alwaki's speech is constitutionally protected, so long as he is not armed or does not present an imminent danger to another person, the law says he should be captured. Like every other American, his person is protected, and he has a right to trial before punishment, regardless of whether he's inside the U.S. or abroad. It was not lawful to intentionally target him for execution by remote robot assassination without trial. Even less so his 16 year old son. The execution of the boy was appalling and the sort of lawless violence that we have in the past accused our enemies of doing. We rightly call them terrorists, who have committed crimes against humanity, when our enemies do it.
We cannot allow ourselves to behave as enemies of humanity, no matter how expedient it might seem. This sort of injustice is how nations fall into ruin.