Skip to main content

View Diary: Targeted Killing: "A Unique and Extraordinary Case" (222 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Yes because it's a binary choice (7+ / 0-)

    assassinate people without due process, or allow them to operate with impunity and without interference.

    Now passing 1,000 Choi Units into the Obama administration.

    by Scott Wooledge on Tue Dec 07, 2010 at 06:26:20 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  In this case, yes. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      seanwright

      That option has to be on the table.

      "[R]ather high-minded, if not a bit self-referential"--The Washington Post.

      by Geekesque on Tue Dec 07, 2010 at 07:39:37 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  It is on the table (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        neroden, Akire, JesseCW

        But not without judicial review to assure that standards are followed. The President should not have authority without review.

        "It's better to lose fighting the right fight, than to lose fighting the wrong fight." Rev. Jesse Jackson 12/07/2010 -RE: tax cuts for the rich

        by ZhenRen on Tue Dec 07, 2010 at 07:42:29 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Target selection in a military conflict (0+ / 0-)

          is not a justiciable matter.  It is committed to the political branches and is beyond the competence of courts to decide.

          "[R]ather high-minded, if not a bit self-referential"--The Washington Post.

          by Geekesque on Tue Dec 07, 2010 at 09:16:03 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  You just jumped to the right of Rummy. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            neroden, Akire

            Good show.

            Sherrod Brown "We would have gotten Unemployment benefits extended anyway".

            by JesseCW on Tue Dec 07, 2010 at 09:59:26 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  No, I'm stating the law as upheld by every (0+ / 0-)

              federal court that has had an opportunity to weigh on it.

              No court has ever or will ever declare jurisdiction over target selectio in a military conflict taking place under an authorization from Congress.

              "[R]ather high-minded, if not a bit self-referential"--The Washington Post.

              by Geekesque on Tue Dec 07, 2010 at 10:24:58 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  What military conflict? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            JVolvo

            Next you're gonna declare that anywhere the President says is a battlefield, is one.

            The courts rejected your view during the Civil War when Lincoln suggested it, you crazy right-winger.

            Even on a battlefield, assassination orders are and always have been a justiciable matter.  But thanks for showing us that there are deranged right-wing pro-dictatorship goons even on DailyKos.

            Unless you're trying to establish a false history so you can go undercover in a future fascist administration, in which case good show.  ;-)

            Read pp. 1-7 of Krugman's _The Great Unraveling_ (available from Google Books). NOW.

            by neroden on Tue Dec 07, 2010 at 10:07:44 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Lots of ranting and drooling, no links. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              seanwright

              AUMF of 2001 explicitly authorizes lethal force against members of AQ.

              "[R]ather high-minded, if not a bit self-referential"--The Washington Post.

              by Geekesque on Tue Dec 07, 2010 at 10:27:46 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  But what if membership in AQ is mistaken? (0+ / 0-)

                If we can just label a person as an enemy, why can't I be labeled an enemy, and put on a hit list?

                No, if we allow the executive branch sole authority over this, they can circumvent the constitutional protections too easily by merely designating anyone they choose to be someone we're at war with. That's wrong. Not buying your rationale. My god, what totalitarian authoritarianism.

                "It's better to lose fighting the right fight, than to lose fighting the wrong fight." Rev. Jesse Jackson 12/07/2010 -RE: tax cuts for the rich

                by ZhenRen on Tue Dec 07, 2010 at 11:06:02 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Congress granted the executive this authority. (0+ / 0-)

                  Cops shoot innocent people every week, and courts convict the innocent every day.
                  I do think that the process for determining such targets should be more transparent, but I am not worried about the precedent because this is such an unusual case on so many levels that it is Sui generis.

                  "[R]ather high-minded, if not a bit self-referential"--The Washington Post.

                  by Geekesque on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 04:49:07 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site