We are talking Apples and Oranges. Congress has authorized military action against specific terrorist organizations. The military is selecting targets and 0bama as Commander-in-Chief is approving action. If an American is participating in that terrorist organization he may be killed as an enemy combatant.
What you have described is not a military action but a police action. While Americans participating in a terrorist organization may be breaking a law they are not being targeted as a criminals but as an enemy combatants. Thats a big difference. Drone strikes against Americans as a means of law enforcement is clearly illegal.
What if the military “selected” Obama as a target because he is a foreign enemy combatant (which he in truth is, unless he has naturalized) - and then Congress mandated military action against him at the recommendation of the military? Obama would have to ENFORCE what Congress had decided - in effect, a declaration of war against him.
Right?
Oh, and BTW, Denise Lind ruled in the court-martial against Terry Lakin that the lawfulness of combat orders are not dependent on approval by the Commander-in-Chief, so if one of the- oh, let’s say - LtCol’s ordered somebody to fire off a drone at an enemy combatant, it wouldn’t have to be authorized by anybody else up the chain.
That’s what Denise Lind ruled.
Right?