Snowden is a poopy head

[ConservativeDemocrat]

113. Hey Manny, you clearly didn't read the link I gave you

It explains the reasoning pretty clearly. But here's the TL/DR version: just like we didn't actually need to catch a NAZIs attacking the US soldiers before we shot them, we don't have to catch an Al-Qa'ida operative directly planting a bomb. Open warfare, as existed between the U.S. and NAZI Germany, and between the U.S. and Al-Qa'ida, makes the entire situation "active".

When we ask other countries to extradite (a.k.a. ordinary rendition) U.S. citizens to the US for crimes, typically US judges are not part of the process. Foreign judges are.

As far as your other question, I'm not sure why you think being deliberately obtuse is getting you anywhere. Police are expected to use the minimal amount of force necessary to accomplish an arrest. But courts have never considered it necessary for police to endanger themselves, and they are authorized to use deadly force if they ever feel threatened. Organized attacks on U.S. soil are rarely necessary, except for situations like David Koresh's cult in Waco, Texas. When shooting situations occur, they're typically more spontaneous.

So here are a couple of questions for you:

- Will you vote for the Democratic Nominee for President in 2016? Yes or No?

- Do you see Janet Reno and the ATF as being violators of the constitution for attacking the Waco compound, days after their officers were shot trying to make an arrest?

- Do you think we should risk more US military casualties when we go after Al-Qa'ida by fighting "fair"?

- Conversely, do you think that Al-Qa'ida should be allowed to murder Americans with impunity, so long as they retreat to safe-havens after their commit their terrorist acts?

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community