The slope is not slippery at all.
The only thing slippery or a better term would be"slimy". is your bending over backwards to equate personal freedom with criminal predatory actions.
Perhaps the FBI should have just informed their counterparts in the foreign country destination of the rape plans of certain USA citizens to target their nations children, and wash their(our) hands of the whole repugnant incident?
I could live with that, as long as the rape plans were squashed prior to implementation, and you don't also demand the USA "do something" to help these noxious citizens avoid the cruel and unusual punishment the foreign country deems fit to meet out.
Is that a deal?
Perhaps the FBI should have just informed their counterparts in the foreign country destination of the rape plans of certain USA citizens to target their nations children, and wash their(our) hands of the whole repugnant incident?Absolutely that would be the right way to do things. They would have been refused entry to the country in question.
The simple fact is that US jurisdiction, does NOT extend outside the borders of the USA and its protectorates, territories, or areas that are under military control; and that is the way it should be.
Perhaps I should give you another example: the SEC claims that any stock or bond issue, issued anywhere in the world, that could conceivably be owned by an American, falls under their jurisdiction. So an Italian bond issue, that an American purchased on the Italian bond market, even if he was living in Tuscany, the SEC claims jurisdiction over. Is that acceptable to you? Is that the way a limited government operates?