Anwar al-Awlaki killed in Yemen (again!)

[kyoukan]

CNN is reporting that Anwar al-Awlaki, the US born muslim Imam has been killed by Yemenese military Friday.

You might remember, Yemen and the US claimed they bagged him around the same day they bagged bin Laden but apparently he managed to escape his bagging then and has been on the run from the CIA and the Yemen government since that day. Right now they are claiming that he was killed in another missile strike in a car he was in so we'll see. There has not been many other details than that.

Although al-Awlaki isn't the diabolical mastermind the media likes to paint him as, he was pretty high up and, because of the media, has been a main figurehead of al-Queda for a few years now. He was also an adept recruiter and was responsible for radicalizing a lot of young men into doing stupid things in the name of Islam.

[Sueven]

Sucks to be excited about death, but I'd be pretty happy if they really got him this time.

[Spang]

I think assassinating U.S. citizens is a great idea.

[Aabidano]

I think assassinating U.S. citizens is a great idea.

It's called retirement.

[Xouqoa]

I think assassinating U.S. citizens is a great idea.

I had mixed thoughts about it as well, but then I realized that he publicly called for the death of American soldiers and citizens, which is treason.

The punishment for treason is death.

It would have been ideal to give him a trial, but when there are numerous videos of you saying "death to America!" is it really necessary?

[Spang]

I think assassinating U.S. citizens is a great idea.

I had mixed thoughts about it as well, but then I realized that he publicly called for the death of American soldiers and citizens, which is treason.

The punishment for treason is death.

It would have been ideal to give him a trial, but when there are numerous videos of you saying "death to America!" is it really necessary?

There hasn't been a declaration of war since World War II, and without a declaration of war, a president can't go around assassinating American citizens. There must be due process.

[masteen]

It's hard to feel justified about this, given that it's our treatment of civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq that radicalized this guy.

[Aslanna]

I don't see a problem with it. But I also eat animals so obviously I am all for torture and murder.

[miir]

How the fuck can he be american with a name like that???

[Spang]

But I also eat animals so obviously I am all for torture and murder.

That's the most accurate thing you've said on the subject.

[kyoukan]

It's hard to feel justified about this, given that it's our treatment of civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq that radicalized this guy.

It was technically Yemen that assassinated him. It's definitely a murky area though. Executive Order 12333 expressly forbids any US agent acting on behalf of the country to engage in or be part of an attempt to assassinate someone. Prior to that, Ford and Carter had their own EO's against assassinations. I think it was Clinton who first started rescinding that rule, which is his prerogative I guess, and there hasn't been once since.

It is still an area I'd be uncomfortable dealing with. I know how the united states would react if another government declared a US citizen an international criminal and just fired a missile at his car. Although to be perfectly honest I wouldn't mind so much if someone put a couple of hellfires into Cheney or Rumsfeld's SUV.

[Kilmoll the Sexy]

I can't begin to imagine the backlash if this had happened under Bush.

[Spang]

I can't begin to imagine the backlash if this had happened under Bush.

It did happen under Bush in 2002. Kamal Derwish of Buffalo was killed in a drone strike in Yemen.

[Aabidano]

I can't begin to imagine the backlash if this had happened under Bush.

It wouldn't have even made it to the news

[Aslanna]

I can't begin to imagine the backlash if this had happened under Bush.

I believe Bush has been the worst president I can think of (or at least in my lifetime). Having said that I'd have no issues with the same result under his reign.

But I also eat animals so obviously I am all for torture and murder.

That's the most accurate thing you've said on the subject.

Yep. And there's not a single thing you can do about it except whine some more and post made up "facts". So enjoy that because I wont lose a minute of sleep over it whereas I think you cry into your pillow every night.

Which is now the second most accurate think I've said on the subject. Good day, sir!

[miir]

I can't begin to imagine the backlash if this had happened under Bush.

Swing and a miss!

[kyoukan]

I'll take more failed, transparent neocon attempts at trying to garner sympathy for zero dollars Alex. This is what fox news does to people who's minds are already weak and susceptible. They start to parrot what they see all day on their talking head programs.

[Kaldaur]

When I was going through my visa process to live in Great Britain for a year, I signed documents that told me how I would lose my citizenship. The standard 'don't serve in the military of any country' stuff, but I distinctly recall something about not engaging in acts of terror or violence against my country. Does someone with a better understanding of the process know if his citizenship was rescinded when he attacked us or advocated attacks against us?

Despite any executive order, I don't think there are many people out there who doubt that we do assassinations. bin Laden's raid was designed to kill one man. Does the fact that it took a squad of Seals to do it mean that it wasn't an assassination? What about the troops we killed on the way to the second floor? Or any enemy we've engaged in the past ten years? How high up does a target have to be before it's considered an assassination?

I'm not advocating assassinations, though I won't shed a tear over the death of someone who called for the deaths of our soldiers. I'm just saying that any president is going to have a wide latitude, and doesn't have much to fear from any previous executive order regarding the topic.

[Aabidano]

I suspect like the other non-aligned combatants all over SW Asia he placed himself in a category of persons with few legal protections. Similar to (other) terrorists, pirates, etc. If the US doesn't have a policy not to kill someone like him, and the host country doesn't care, well....

Hope he's enjoying his virgins.

[Sueven]

The argument against the legality of this action (or, at least, the argument that this is different than a similar attack against a non-US citizen) is built on technicalities.

Technically, he's a U.S. citizen, despite the fact that he doesn't live in the US, will never come back to the US, and has functionally devoted his life to waging war against the US. It's true that we haven't convicted him of treason. How would you expect us to do that? Invade Yemen, capture him, and bring him back to America for trial? Convict him in asbentia, in a proceeding in which he could not appear or defend himself?

Technically this was an assassination and not an act of war because we're not at war against Al Qaeda, despite the fact that we no longer make formal declarations of war, the current system of international law doesn't reflect wars against non-state organizations, and we've functionally been at war against Al Qaeda for a decade.

It's probably technically illegal, but really it falls more in the "unprecedented" than the "illegal" category. I too have trouble fitting it into typical bright-line rules, but law, believe it or not, is rarely a bright-line process. I would be disturbed if the government started killing domestic criminals, but this is simply a much different situation.