Yemen Defense Ministry: Anwar Al-Awlaki, Dead

[Belmont31R]

Civlian courts should not be litigating war.

This is an issue of war not shoplifting. He is 100% a member of an organization at war with the United States, and guilty of the greatest act of terror in American history, by his own admission.

The instant you become an enemy combatant, you are subject to the full might and wrath of the American military until you surrender, get captured, or get injured and then captured...or you could end up dead.

We've never declared war on AQ.


Whats the standard for being declared an enemy combatant, and what are the checks and balances on those decisions?


And Im fully aware of who he is, and what he has done. No one is denying he is not a shit bag who did deserve the ending he got. But we just need to be aware of what powers our government has, and where they can lead to. I mean if we can just assassinate people with no due process and without any balances whats to stop them from taking people 20 miles off shore and putting a bullet in their head? The problem with broad powers like this is they are not always used on the people we all thought they would be, and then what?

[Sensei]

I mean if we can just assassinate people with no due process...

Could you please define your use of the term "assassinate." I think this term carries a specific criminal connotation that, when used, has consequences for the airman piloting that drone. It also implies an element of innocesnce for the person who was unjustly killed. For example, I do not consider myself an assassin when I perform my duties as a US soldier. I also do not consider police officers to be assassins when they are forced to kill a citizen who has not been given "due process" in order to prevent further loss of innocent life (something that many of us consider analgous to the killing of Al-Awlaki).

As for the checks and balances question that you ask, the answer is simple - impeachment. If enough people feel that Obama committed a high crime by assassinating Al-Awlaki, they will muster enough votes in the House to impeach him, and then enough votes in the Senate to convict. Meanwhile, all of the service members who participated in the attack would face UCMJ for following the unlawful order that resulted in the murder of an innocent civilian.

This is why I object to and challenge anyone using the term assassinate.

[Sensei]

Absentia trials are a waste of time and money.

We have Marines for dealing with enemy combatants. Don't want to face them, don't be an enemy combatant.

Trials held in absentia are also deemed to be unconstitutional which highlights the irony of the claim that a court proceeding is needed prior to any action against a citizen enemy combatant.

We just disagree on which military branch is best at dispatching enemy combatants

[variablebinary]

Trials held in absentia are also deemed to be unconstitutional which highlights the irony of the claim that a court proceeding is needed prior to any action against a citizen enemy combatant.

We just disagree on which military branch is best at dispatching enemy combatants

Technically, as our expeditionary force, that would be their job, but I get where you are coming from

[J8127]

Could you please define your use of the term "assassinate." I think this term carries a specific criminal connotation that, when used, has consequences for the airman piloting that drone. It also implies an element of innocesnce for the person who was unjustly killed. For example, I do not consider myself an assassin when I perform my duties as a US soldier. I also do not consider police officers to be assassins when they are forced to kill a citizen who has not been given "due process" in order to prevent further loss of innocent life (something that many of us consider analgous to the killing of Al-Awlaki).

As for the checks and balances question that you ask, the answer is simple - impeachment. If enough people feel that Obama committed a high crime by assassinating Al-Awlaki, they will muster enough votes in the House to impeach him, and then enough votes in the Senate to convict. Meanwhile, all of the service members who participated in the attack would face UCMJ for following the unlawful order that resulted in the murder of an innocent civilian.

This is why I object to and challenge anyone using the term assassinate.

There is a presumption of innocence because, I don't know, he's innocent until proven guilty by a jury of his peers in a court of law?

There were SOF personnel on helos loaded up ready to go roll him up and bring him in, instead they just killed him.

[Honu]

Somewhere in Yemen there is a goat in mourning.

Rot in hell asshole.

and about 200 more thinking AHHH my a$$ is safe again

[Honu]

We've never declared war on AQ.


Whats the standard for being declared an enemy combatant, and what are the checks and balances on those decisions?


And Im fully aware of who he is, and what he has done. No one is denying he is not a shit bag who did deserve the ending he got. But we just need to be aware of what powers our government has, and where they can lead to. I mean if we can just assassinate people with no due process and without any balances whats to stop them from taking people 20 miles off shore and putting a bullet in their head? The problem with broad powers like this is they are not always used on the people we all thought they would be, and then what?

I have to agree !!!

with the hate and rhetoric against gun toting conservatives what happens if they decide they are the problem ! and certain leaders should be taken out for the greater good !!!


again i am also glad he is gone but they should declare war on these F^@#ing pigs and say OK open season on any of the members

then again the current admin wont do that !!!! he wants it both ways

[variablebinary]

There is a presumption of innocence because, I don't know, he's innocent until proven guilty by a jury of his peers in a court of law?

There were SOF personnel on helos loaded up ready to go roll him up and bring him in, instead they just killed him.

There is no presumption of innocence for enemy combatants.

You want a trial, walk up to the nearest American Embassy, or military installation with a white flag, identify yourself as a traitorous citizen, and turn yourself in.

Fail to do so, and you'll get treated like every other enemy combatant, meaning you are fair game for killing by whatever means we can reach you with.

Tell me the METT-TC specifics that would determine if it made more sense to send SOF over a drone hit. How many Yemeni AQ loyalists were in the enemy's AO? And very simply, why risk another BHD scenario?

As it stands we killed a high ranking officer in the opposing forces ranks. That's how wars are won, not by dicking around and sending the local flat-foot with an arrest warrant to knock on the bad guys's front door.

And lets not forget we got two so-called Americans in the strike. Don't forget about this other AQ asshole from Queens, NYC Samir Kahn. **** him too.

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

He was an American plant and this was his exfil - at least it would make a better movie than Lions for Lambs.


I frankly don't give a crap if every misguided youth, ex-con come to Muhammed, camel felating American citizen gets a pass on a Hellfire BBQ if it removes one way for the government to stifle American's freedom by going around and targeting Americans. My citizenship is a shield that means that no one gets to **** with me with out due process. Nothing has carried as much weight since the ability to wield a Roman Citizenship.

This arguement was made and lost in the 60s in regards to citizens rights here in America. Frankly, this is the only real 'War Crime' that I have seen the US commit in the last 30 years. Sure this guy was the baddest of the bad- but where does it end?

If he is actively fighting or even plotting and you can get him in a bomb factory or in a room with known bad guys who are legit targets, I have no problems taking out that building- but when you put an American face in the cross hairs you'd better have something more than Barry the Kenyan said it was OK. We give third-world despots more consideration than that.

'But, but -- these are bad guys and we won't use it against us good guys.' Sure, security measures never creap- have fun getting fondled by security at the football game tomorrow.

[variablebinary]

My citizenship is a shield that means that no one gets to **** with me with out due process.

The USA has clearly defined what an enemy combatant is as it pertains to AQ

An enemy combatant has been defined as

"an individual who was part of or supporting the Taliban or al Qaida forces, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners. This includes any person who committed a belligerent act or has directly supported hostilities in aid of enemy armed forces."

Anwar met the definition of a enemy combatant. I wouldn't hesitate to put a bullet in his brain for even second.

Any suggestion that is some type of slippery slope where anyone that buys a Glock and joins the tea party can get a JDAM dropped on their minivan while going to wal-mart has been listening to Alex Jones for too long.

Obama made the right choice.