[–] Light_Guard ago
Obama's administration used to deliberately target weddings and funerals, murdering innocent men, women and children to take out one suspected terrorist. That is not acceptable collateral damage and should not be part of the game.
[–] Are_we_sure 1 point -1 points 0 points (+0|-1) ago (edited ago)
Your analysis is puerile and facile and dishonest. It's not a hit list at all and it doesn't apply to American citizens. It only applies to
The document is actually a serious attempt wrestle with a very serious issue: what do you do when an American leads a stateless terror group like Al Qaida and is seriously threatening the US and is beyond the reach of US law. It's an attempt to construct a moral and legal framework around the drone program and the threat of terrorists operating in fiefdoms or failed states. It's actually an attempt to place limits on drone warfare and ensure it follows the laws of war.
In fact the document is titled
This does not apply to American citizens in general.
and the US has to keep monitoring to see this changes and they can be captured. This can't happen in the US and only applies to war zones and failed states and terrorist fiefdoms
Here's what the document says
Here the Department of Justice concludes only that where the following three conditions are met, a U.S. operation using lethal force in a foreign country against a U.S. citizen who is a senior operational leader of al-Qa'ida or an associated force would be lawful: (1) an informed, high-level official of the U.S. government has determined that the targeted individual poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States; (2) capture is infeasible, and the United States continues to monitor whether capture becomes feasible; and (3) the operation would be conducted in a manner consistent with applicable law of war principles. This conclusion is reached with recognition of the extraordinary seriousness of a lethal operation by the United States against a U.S. citizen, and also of the extraordinary seriousness of the threat posed by senior operational al Qa'ida members and the loss of life that would result were their operations successful.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/74/020413_DOJ_White_Paper.pdf
I don't consider killing a terrorist who poses active threat to the US because they can't be arrested to evil and who has joined a group that has declared war on America and I'm sure a lot of other folks agree with that.
You can debate the morality/ethics/limitations of this policy, but ignoring the complexities of the problem it is trying to address is morally dishonest.
[–] jdpent 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Let Obama first on the DOJ LIST