Props to the Military, CIA and, yes, to Obama

I dont think thats what hes asking. of course you can kill him but why did he still have his citizenship if he was a known terrorist.

quit getting hung up on his agenda.

 

Well, technically, it isn't war. Don't know if you understand that, but technically we're not. We're using military force against terrorism until terrorism is annihlated (forever). If we're going to be in perpetual war from now on, there are a lot less restrictions on our government, which I don't agree with. There is also a "war" on drugs, should the government have a right to assassinate all people in possession of pot? And aren't we in a "war" against obesity? Should we smart bomb every McDonalds?

I am much more sympathetic to the "war" on terror, but we've had 9 years to strike this guy's citizenship. WTF? If we don't have enough info to strike his citizenship, do we have enough to assassinate? Puts into question the strength of what we've alleged.

All that said, if I felt good about the intelligence, I don't know if I wouldn't have done the same. Sometimes leaders have to pull the trigger. I'd have to feel really good about the intelligence, though.

 

Hahahahahah

 

Because our national security was threatened? Umm... to fight communism... because there weren't the votes to actually declare war?

 

right. i think the point here might be that our national security has been threatened by al qaeda (which i am gonna start spelling qaeda from now on). i dunno if you watch the news or whatever, but there was a big attack by those guys, and it happened in new york. i actually remember it.

if you are not aware of the attack on america that was carried out by al qaeda, i can tell you about it. it is the reason we are at war with them. its like pearl harbor, yunno. except it was in new york. yunno who did it? al qaeda? yunno who that is? its a terrorist group. bin laden was in it. now bin laden never actually came to america and killed anyone. thats weird right? i know this is complicated. because bin laden was a leader ina group that we are in a war with, we killed him. ok now remember that logic. this other dude, alwaki or whatever, also a leader in al qaeda. and we are at war with them.

ok, lets back up for a second. there is a thing called "war". this is when people are having some terrible disagreement and they start just killing each other. there have been lots of these "wars" even our nation, which is called the united states of america get into wars sometimes. sometimes people attack us and we go to war with them. if you understand this much i can explain further, but first i want to be sure you are with me this far.

 

because it doesnt matter if you are a citizen if you are allied with the enemy in a war. again, i have mentioned the part about the war before.

i feel like i am repeating myself. see post 80: "because we are war and we can kill our enemies regardless of paperwork"

 

are you retarded?

its clear any of them can be killed. hes not asking if an al qaeda member can be killed on the spot.

hes asking why did a known terrorist still have citizenship.

 

yes

correct, even american citizens

\

i am telling you it doesnt matter if he does or he doesnt because we kill enemies regardless of where they were born. revoking citizenship is not required for killing. it just isnt relvant. enemies are killed without referencing the paperwork. revoking citizenship would be a symbolic act, a waste of time, wholly unnecessary. yunno, war is hell. somtimes even terrorists are killed without citizenship procedures being carried out to the liking of lsu-i-like

asking me why they didnt revoke his citizenship is like asking why the obama wore a certain color tie. it has nothing to do with anything. its like if you keep asking why obama wore a green tie when his favorite color is blue (suspicious!, it doesnt add up, he loves blue!). the answer is that it doesnt matter relative to other things. in this case the overwhelmingly important issue is that we are at war and that means we kill enemies, even if they happedn to be born on american soil and are therefore technically american citizens. if you ask me the technical answer is that allegiance to AQ makes you a non-citizen, regardless of rubber stamps and paperwork*.


* = none of this is relevant

so to review, the citizenship is not an issue related in the slightest to whether a guy is killable. the guys at cia are not like "hey get state dept on the phone we better have this guy un-citizened before we blow him up". because citizenship has not a single thing to do with whether you can kill enemies in war.

 

But Kenneth Anderson, an international law scholar at American University's Washington College of Law, said U.S. citizens, who take up arms with an enemy force, have been considered legitimate targets through two world wars, even if they are outside what is traditionally considered the battlefield.

"Where hostiles go, there is the possibility of hostilities," Anderson said. "The U.S. has never accepted the proposition that if you leave the active battlefield, suddenly you are no longer targetable."

Robert Chesney, an expert on international law at the University of Texas School of law, concluded in a recently written law review article that al-Awlaki could be legally killed "if he is in fact an operational leader within AQAP, as this role would render him a functional combatant in an organized armed group."

First Read - Can the U.S. kill an American citizen without charge or conviction?

 

Oh we are at war with AQD now! So it's not just terrorism? What about the Taliban? Isn't Iran bad too? What about Libya or Yemen or Egypt? Wait wait Iraq was the one. No No it was Afghanistan. NOOOO it's Pakistan.... But wait it could be Saudi..

And ahhhhh did someone call the Tea Party people Terrorists!!!