[SkyDancer]

Waco and Ruby Ridge come to mind.

[Molon Labbie]

What nonsense. You can’t have trials for those you cannot bring into custody.

You commit crimes against US citizens, and remain in US lands, you will be arrested by law enforcement.

Al Alawki’s situation was much different.

[Revolting cat!]

Vince Foster?

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Any one he wants.

[cranked]

Simple answer: The next one that proclaims himself to be a terrorist head and operates in Yemen, Somalia, etc. =.=

[rawcatslyentist]

If they happily murder their own offspring, what makes you think they wont pay you the same respect?

[Mister Da]

I think it is ill advised to criticize Obama for killing these terrorists, American or otherwise. If an American conspires or acts with foreigners to attack Americans, he should be a legitimate target in the WOT. Either we kill our avowed enemies or they will kill us. This sort of criticism plays right into the hands of those who want to treat terrorism as a crime to handled by the justice system & the courts.

The real wrong is calling political opponents terrorists.

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

Actually, I have no problem with this at all. Any American citizen who leaves the country to join with an enemy to fight the US is an *enemy* combatant, which supersedes their right to trial as an American citizen, precisely because it comes under the rules of armed combat, *not* criminal offense.

Only if he is captured can he again be treated as a treasonous criminal, but there is no requirement that he be captured, if doing so would endanger the lives of US personnel.

And I would extend this even further. Enemy combatants that do not follow the rules of combat as described in the Geneva Conventions, and are thus subject to field trial and execution, deserve no right of criminal trial in the United States.

This goes all the way back to the days of the US Navy fighting the Barbary pirates. Though British policy was to try and hang pirates aboard their own slowly sinking ships, US federal judges were so egotistical that they demanded the US Navy return captured pirates to the US for criminal trial, so that the judge could order them hanged.

After feeding them and taking care of them for months while having to divert a warship from Africa to do so. A major pain in the rear end.

The US Navy instead hit on the idea that when it would capture pirates, it would “discover” that it had done so in British waters, so had to turn them over to the British, who would deal with them promptly.

But in any event, playing these stupid lawfare games put the US at such a disadvantage against the Barbary pirates that by 1800, payments in ransom and tribute to the Barbary states amounted to 20% of United States government annual expenditures.

So what should the US military be doing right now. Simply, to take “no great effort” in capturing al-Qaeda and Taliban terrorists, as their detention is not justified by their Geneva status. It does not matter if they are Afghans fighting in Afghanistan, or Pakistanis fighting in Pakistan.

If captured, the responsible officer should give them a field trial, and if they find them in violation, give them an opportunity to fully identify themselves for the record, which they may take or refuse, then summarily execute them by firing squad.

[PGalt]

Great thread. Thanks to all posters.

Drone-mail. Citizenship revoked.