I'm not sure you and I are disagreeing.
If a state of war exists, and if Congress has recognized that a state of war exists, by whatever means, then the gloves are off, and anyone considered an enemy combatant is fair game. Whether this is a good thing or not becomes moot. This is reality.
Mistakes will be made, innocent people will be killed alongside the guilty, and we will all have to live with whatever we have done. And the historians will sort it out later.
If Congress has already recognized a state of war exists through it's war powers and military action authorization last year, then the remaining point is moot.
To: mhking
"...If a state of war exists, and if Congress has recognized that a state of war exists, by whatever means, then the gloves are off, and anyone considered an enemy combatant is fair game..."
# 105 by marron
Congress HAS NOT recognized that a State of War exists.
Official Congressional recognition of war would require a Declaration of War. Congress hasn't done that.
Congress authorised the use of force against terrorists. That's not the same as a war.
We are embroiled in a police action, not a war.