Explain why Obama couldn't legally use a targeted drone strike here in the US..

[lumberjack_jeff]

Pursuant to the AUMF to execute those they suspect of terrorism?

Section 1 - Short Title
This joint resolution may be cited as the 'Authorization for Use of Military Force'.

Section 2 - Authorization For Use of United States Armed Forces
(a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.
(b) War Powers Resolution Requirements-
(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.
(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS- Nothing in this resolution supercedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.

The only check on this behavior are practical and political considerations.

[YellowCosmicSun]

1. For the same reason he can't deploy the regular Army in US Cities or along the border.

It's against the law.

[lumberjack_jeff]

3. Except when it's not

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/09/army_homeland_090708w/

[YellowCosmicSun]

9. They haven't been deployed anywhere, now have they?

Wouldn't you agree it's a far cry from attacking people in the US with drones?

[elleng]

2. Right, practical/tactical considerations prevail.

[lumberjack_jeff]

4. It won't happen here because the targeted neighborhood has voters in it?

[ixion]

5. with only a mere pretext of a 'threat' posse comitatus goes out the window

and the practical and political considerations with it, not that those things are much of a barrier anyway.

[lumberjack_jeff]

6. The political considerations obviously aren't much of a barrier.

People cheer the bodycount. It's a way of keeping score.

[ixion]

8. as Henry Kissenger said:

"If it's illegal, we do it immediately. If it's unconstitutional, it takes a while longer."

Kissenger was a boy scout by today's standards.

[treestar]

7. I'd have to read a lot more than just that

Looking at just that, it appears, yes he could. If OBL had somehow been in the US, say. But then it would not be worth the political price and the bother. If the person were in the US, we could pick him up more easily.

In Yeman is another thing. It's not our country. We need some cooperation from them, or just superior military power we are willing to use. Also he is subjected to the law of Yemen while there. None of the experts on DU have considered that. Possibly Yemen does execute people without trial.

[TomClash]

10. Posse Comitatus would probably still apply

Though your point is well-taken. A conflict between Posse Comitatus and this resolution is well visible on the horizon.

[nineteen50]

11. The war powers act is not constitutional

U.S. Constitution sections 7 through 10 of Article I
Declaring War. Clause 11 gives Congress — not the president — the power to declare war. The framers did not trust the president to declare war; they feared that the power could easily be abused. No where does it say congress can give this authority away. Giving this authority away would be violating their oath of office to uphold the Constitution.

[gulliver]

12. Inside the borders, a SWAT team would take al-Alwaki out.

They wouldn't need the President or even a sargeant. They would not need a trial. If the killer is not stoppable without risking the lives of law enforcement or potential victims, then the killer goes. A sniper rifle is just a machine, so I don't think there is a point in differentiating it from a drone. The only issue that is material is the degree of risk to innocents and the available alternatives for stopping the offender.

[saras]

13. What does "legally" have to do with it? Does that matter if we WANT it badly enough?