[Bruce Campbells Chin]

Told you. It's a war crime. Even National Review says it out loud.

Morally, I personally don't have a problem with this. I view these guys as more morally culpable than opposing soldiers in a war.

That being said, it may well be illegal under U.S. laws and/or treaties to which we are a signatory.

[No.6]

>I view these guys as more morally culpable than opposing soldiers in a war.

Yes, not just “you view” but all the conventions of war distinguish between uniformed soldiers and un-uniformed combatants.

The former get the protection of the rules of war because they’re clearly distinguished from civilians.

The latter are given exactly no protection and deserve none because by conducting war while appearing as civilians they endanger every ordinary person in conflicts.

The left and whiney RINOs (and Rand fans, obviously) want to give terrorists and drug runners conducting asymmetrical warfare against us both the protections of civilians under law AND the protections of soldiers in war.

Not only does 30 seconds reading the various conventions dispel that, but lo, do anyone with two working brain cells think we’d *broadcast* this footage if there was any doubt?

[MortMan]

That being said, it may well be illegal under U.S. laws and/or treaties to which we are a signatory.

I'm curious what treaty we have signed that applies to non-uniformed combatants - which terrorists (and narco-terrorists) clearly are.