Back in the 1990s we passed up the opportunity to get bin Laden because the Clinton Administration was concerned with due process and the legal basis to hold him. Clearly these individuals are colluding with the enemy and operating as enemy combatants with the goal to kill Americans. I’m not going to lose a lot of sleep over this one.
“I’m not going to lose a lot of sleep over this one.”
What next? Why can’t obama drop bombs on a “domestic terrorist” in Montana? What’s the difference? Geography? When people finally ask why the feds just say, “the guy was making bombs and threatening the president. We have it all on his hard drive. Yes, he’s dead and unfortunately he cannot say otherwise”.
I have to agree with you. If an American defected to Germany during WW2 and engaged in combat against American Troops would it be OK to kill him in a military strike?
Just because liberals are hypocrites doesn’t mean it’s Ok for conservatives to act the same way.
Well, certainly some of history’s most prominent leaders would agree with you - Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot and such.
It’s comforting to know that the-ends-justify-the-means reasoning is alive and well here on FR amongst all these rule-of-law, checks-and-balances neanderthals.
/sarc