"the U.S. government can order the killing of American citizens if they are believed to be “senior operational leaders” of al-Qaida or “an associated force” -- even if there is no intelligence indicating they are engaged in an active plot to attack the US"
The article implies it's talking about within the US, but according to the first sentence in the white paper, this refers to 'in a foreign country outside the area of active hostilities'.
At any rate, it's just vague enough to make one wonder, considering all the shenanigans taking place.
"No intelligence" -- indeed.
Works for me.
Al Quaeda has declared war on the United States. As far as I'm concerned, this makes any and all attacks on it and its members legitimate acts of war.
I wonder why it shouldn't be possible to declare war on a non-governmental organization. They act more and more like states, so why shouldn't they be treated as such? Let everybody in the world know that being in the vicinity of those who are at war with the USA is severely hazardous to their health.
Can this principle be misused or misapplied? Of course, just as any other legal principle can be. But we don't throw principles away because they are potentially subject to abuse. If we did, we wouldn't be able to fight back at all.