Holder: US can legally kill Americans in terror groups

Started by jimmy olsen, March 05, 2012, 06:36:53 PM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
User actions

katmai

#45
March 05, 2012, 10:38:58 PM
No he's the other black guy.
Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son

Ed Anger

#46
March 05, 2012, 10:42:04 PM
They all look alike.
Stay Alive...Let the Man Drive

Hansmeister

#47
March 06, 2012, 04:49:25 AM
If Ashcroft had said this JR and the other hacks would've been crying Bushitler and other nonsense, yet as long as it is a Democrat we get only silence.  Good thing to know they were always unprincipled partisans.

The laws of war are applicable here, the Constitution places that power chiefly in the executive (with legislative oversight), there is no room at all for the courts in this, which is why I've always objected to attempts to bring Al Qaeda to court.  The only proceedings similar to legal proceedings (but not the same) we should indulge are hearings in front of Military Tribunals.  Unfortunately Bush started the slipprey slope of co-mingling civil law and law of war on an ad hoc basis whenever it was convenient.

Tamas

#48
March 06, 2012, 04:59:28 AM
Honest question: who has the power to label an organization "terrorist" in the US?

Admiral Yi

#49
March 06, 2012, 05:01:08 AM
Quote from: Tamas on March 06, 2012, 04:59:28 AM
Honest question: who has the power to label an organization "terrorist" in the US?

State Department.

Martinus

#50
March 06, 2012, 05:06:16 AM
Quote from: Tonitrus on March 05, 2012, 09:34:23 PM
I'd think smoking dope would be as bad for you lungs as smoking tobacco.

I think there studies that show otherwise, but the biggest issue there is frequency. I don't think many people smoke 40-50 joints a day, and a lot of people do that with cigarettes.

Tamas

#51
March 06, 2012, 05:06:48 AM
Well there you go then. Indirectly, you have given the State Department power to mark Americans for execution without trial.

Good going.

Razgovory

#52
March 06, 2012, 05:12:56 AM
Quote from: Hansmeister on March 06, 2012, 04:49:25 AM
If Ashcroft had said this JR and the other hacks would've been crying Bushitler and other nonsense, yet as long as it is a Democrat we get only silence.  Good thing to know they were always unprincipled partisans.

The laws of war are applicable here, the Constitution places that power chiefly in the executive (with legislative oversight), there is no room at all for the courts in this, which is why I've always objected to attempts to bring Al Qaeda to court.  The only proceedings similar to legal proceedings (but not the same) we should indulge are hearings in front of Military Tribunals.  Unfortunately Bush started the slipprey slope of co-mingling civil law and law of war on an ad hoc basis whenever it was convenient.

Yes, I'm quoting one of the unprincipled partisans right now.  You never did respond to comment about blasting Democratic obstructionism back in the Bush administration.  As far as I know JR hasn't even posted in this thread.
I've given it serious thought. I must scorn the ways of my family, and seek a Japanese woman to yield me my progeny. He shall live in the lands of the east, and be well tutored in his sacred trust to weave the best traditions of Japan and the Sacred South together, until such time as he (or, indeed his house, which will periodically require infusion of both Southern and Japanese bloodlines of note) can deliver to the South it's independence, either in this world or in space.  -Lettow April of 2011

Raz is right. -MadImmortalMan March of 2017

Darth Wagtaros

#53
March 06, 2012, 08:00:30 AM
Quote from: Iormlund on March 05, 2012, 06:44:44 PM
:frusty:

I love how the West is trying its best to lose the War on Terror.
I'd hate it myself.
PDH!

Razgovory

#54
March 06, 2012, 08:03:42 AM
Oh and for the record I think this is a bad position.  I don't deny that the US government should have the power to kill citizens who have taken up arms against it.  No Government can survive without that power.  But looking for the power to do so through due process is silly.  It's trying to have it both ways.  They are either enemy combatants or criminals.  You can't be both.
I've given it serious thought. I must scorn the ways of my family, and seek a Japanese woman to yield me my progeny. He shall live in the lands of the east, and be well tutored in his sacred trust to weave the best traditions of Japan and the Sacred South together, until such time as he (or, indeed his house, which will periodically require infusion of both Southern and Japanese bloodlines of note) can deliver to the South it's independence, either in this world or in space.  -Lettow April of 2011

Raz is right. -MadImmortalMan March of 2017

KRonn

#55
March 06, 2012, 08:32:52 AM
If a US citizen takes up arms against the US and is in a foreign nation among others, or in a group that is fighting the US, it seems the legal and logical action is to take him out, just as the US would take out others of his group. Taking him out could mean capture or kill, depending on circumstances, just as with any other similar combatants who aren't US citizens. I'll listen to arguments otherwise by the courts, see where this goes, but I'd find it ludicrous that such individuals couldn't be targeted, but allowed to remain free to carry out attacks on US citizens. That instead would seem to me to be an illegal act, to allow him to operate.

Berkut

#56
March 06, 2012, 08:46:31 AM
Quote from: Tamas on March 06, 2012, 05:06:48 AM
Well there you go then. Indirectly, you have given the State Department power to mark Americans for execution without trial.

Good going.

Could someone correct me here, but hasn't it always been the case that the US government has killed US citizens without "due process" in wars?

I mean, surely this is not the first time this issue has come up, right? I don't recall the US holding any due process everytime they shot a enemy civil war soldier, or a US citizen was killed while serving in a foreign army. Why is this a constitutional issue now and was not then?
"If you think this has a happy ending, then you haven't been paying attention."

select * from users where clue > 0
0 rows returned

Admiral Yi

#57
March 06, 2012, 08:48:34 AM
Quote from: Berkut on March 06, 2012, 08:46:31 AM
Could someone correct me here, but hasn't it always been the case that the US government has killed US citizens without "due process" in wars?

I mean, surely this is not the first time this issue has come up, right? I don't recall the US holding any due process everytime they shot a enemy civil war soldier, or a US citizen was killed while serving in a foreign army. Why is this a constitutional issue now and was not then?

Because this is the first case of an individual being specifically targetted.

Razgovory

#58
March 06, 2012, 08:51:17 AM
Quote from: Berkut on March 06, 2012, 08:46:31 AM
Quote from: Tamas on March 06, 2012, 05:06:48 AM
Well there you go then. Indirectly, you have given the State Department power to mark Americans for execution without trial.

Good going.

Could someone correct me here, but hasn't it always been the case that the US government has killed US citizens without "due process" in wars?

I mean, surely this is not the first time this issue has come up, right? I don't recall the US holding any due process everytime they shot a enemy civil war soldier, or a US citizen was killed while serving in a foreign army. Why is this a constitutional issue now and was not then?

Actually it did come up the Civil War, or at least similar issues did.  The big difference was that US government regarded captured Confederate soldiers as POWs rather then criminals.  Criminals and POWs are afforded different protections and rights.
I've given it serious thought. I must scorn the ways of my family, and seek a Japanese woman to yield me my progeny. He shall live in the lands of the east, and be well tutored in his sacred trust to weave the best traditions of Japan and the Sacred South together, until such time as he (or, indeed his house, which will periodically require infusion of both Southern and Japanese bloodlines of note) can deliver to the South it's independence, either in this world or in space.  -Lettow April of 2011

Raz is right. -MadImmortalMan March of 2017

Berkut

#59
March 06, 2012, 08:52:20 AM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on March 06, 2012, 08:48:34 AM
Quote from: Berkut on March 06, 2012, 08:46:31 AM
Could someone correct me here, but hasn't it always been the case that the US government has killed US citizens without "due process" in wars?

I mean, surely this is not the first time this issue has come up, right? I don't recall the US holding any due process everytime they shot a enemy civil war soldier, or a US citizen was killed while serving in a foreign army. Why is this a constitutional issue now and was not then?

Because this is the first case of an individual being specifically targetted.

Ahhh, so the issue is not so much that the US is killing US citizens retail, but that they are doing so retail?
"If you think this has a happy ending, then you haven't been paying attention."

select * from users where clue > 0
0 rows returned
Print
Go Up Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
User actions