[piytar]

I have no problem with this. Enemy combatants on the ground I unreachable by LEOs. That is completely different from on US soil.

[God luvs America]

i have a problem with the hypocrisy

A group of men who had just finished breakfast scrambled to get to their trucks. One was Anwar al-Awlaki, the firebrand preacher, born in New Mexico, who had evolved from a peddler of Internet hatred to a senior operative in Al Qaeda’s branch in Yemen. Another was Samir Khan, another American citizen who had moved to Yemen from North Carolina and was the creative force behind Inspire, the militant group’s English-language Internet magazine.

If Bush was in office he would not be a "peddler of internet hatred" rather the d-bags at the NYSlimes would consider it legitimate gripes against America....

[cripplecreek]

I think we could use a bit of restraint with the drone strikes overseas as well. Obama has been completely out of control with them.

[USNBandit]

Looks like a valid military target. Just happened to be Americans. Unfortunately, 12 years into this we still don’t have a clear policy of what happens to these freaks if they are captured, or are in the U.S. that will always leave it a political football which misses the main issue. These people want to kill us.

[Carry_Okie]

Enemy combatants on the ground I unreachable by LEOs. That is completely different from on US soil.

Let's see what the article says:

One was Anwar al-Awlaki, the firebrand preacher, born in New Mexico, who had evolved from a peddler of Internet hatred to a senior operative in Al Qaeda’s branch in Yemen.

OK, "senior operative" whatever that is. What is in question is if he was a direct combatant posing an imminent threat to US citizens, which is the standard of the law. In my opinion, UNLESS he had direct means to make good on that threat, there should have been a finding by a court which is also the standard of the law. On the other hand...

Another was Samir Khan, another American citizen who had moved to Yemen from North Carolina and was the creative force behind Inspire, the militant group’s English-language Internet magazine.

A propagandist is not a combatant who poses an imminent threat to US citizens, not even close.

I have no problem killing these clowns, but unless they pose said threat, they should be killed only after a death warrant from a US court, perhaps analogous to a FISA court. Without clear lines of responsibility with checks on administrative overreach, you could find yourself on a video screen with your executioner 2,000 miles away, perhaps even in another country.

Killing Al Awlaki's kid was another matter. As a minor, there should be separate grounds for his death. As far as I am concerned, it was borderline murder, no matter what the little creep might have believed.

[nickcarraway]

They’d just assume kill some innocent guy walking down the street and claim that person deserved it. Who knows.

[MrB]

D*mn... there it is...
I couldn’t put my finger on it, but you nailed it, sir.

The only reason to use a drone is when our law enforcement is not capable of reaching the accused.

And law enforcement in our own nation, on our own soil, should be much closer to Sheriff Andy than it is to Special Forces Ninja Bob.

[OneWingedShark]

I have no problem with this. Enemy combatants on the ground I unreachable by LEOs. That is completely different from on US soil.

The term "enemy combatants" is a horrible one that only recently came into use* and is essentially the granting of rights/privileges to the terrorist class. You see in the Geneva and Hague [conventions] there are "lawful" and "unlawful" combatants; Al Queda and the like are "unlawful combatants" [one thing is they are not uniformed soldiers] and therefore are not entitled to *any* of the the POW guarantees.