Does Obama's green-light on assassination of Americans change your view

[fujiyama]

42. Al Qaeda is a pretty loose organization

and I think it could be argued that it's several organizations - making it more of an umbrella or clearinghouse of networks. I don't know how you defeat "Al Qaeda" itself - as you said, the problem is fanatical Islamist fundamentalism, which is an ideology, that cannot be defeated by force alone.

Now, don't get me wrong. Unlike a lot of others on this board, I'm actually not completely against the use of drones (I think they can be effective in limited use against only high ranking targets in areas with a low number of civilians). They beat the alternatives - which involves bribing corrupt and often devious local warlords (which often tip-off the targets), risking US troops either by invasion, bombing runs, or special forces raids - none of which are proven to be any more effective in avoiding civilian casualties.

The problem is when the government issues a memo that actually explicitly justifies the targeted killings of American citizens. It sets a disturbing precedent. Even if the suspect explicitly declares war on the US (and yes, I understand joining Al Qaeda means pretty much that), the idea of sending out a "death squad" (and the drone is essentially that) and "ordering a hit" on an American citizen (regardless of his or her physical location) just makes me feel uncomfortable, unless there is an imminent threat involved. This "war on terrorism" has the potential (and likelihood) of being never ending. Are we to remain in a state of war perpetually where we continually make exceptions to our Constitutional protections?