Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

Elijah Craig · (This post was last modified: 10-01-2011 09:42 PM by Elijah Craig.)

(10-01-2011 09:24 PM)RobMille Wrote: It's been pointed out before, but we aren't in a declared state of warfare with anyone,

It's a moot point. Paulistinians think there has to be a formal "declaration of war" with exactly that title, for a military action to be Constitutional; but the Constitution itself does not require such. I say that they read the Constitution like a KJBO reads the Bible, in that not only are they extremely literal, they take phrases out of context and assert that they mean things that are often opposite what the accepted, established meaning and original intent actually are.

Even if I were to accept that civilian criminal procedure were necessary against a combatant in a foreign threater of conflict-- a belief I hold as absurd but will briefly assume here-- there are still gaping holes in the claims made.

The Fifth Amendment makes no requirement that a U.S. court be involved-- if it's in there, I'ld love for you to quote it for me. It merely requires due process. Mr. al-Awalki was given due process in a Yemeni court. He was also fleeing an arrest warrant issued for him by a United States court. Killing him is not unlike killing a bandit in the Old West; the fact that he was never tried isn't material; he was a dangerous fugitive from justice wanted dead or alive.

There's no serious legal issue here at all.

greg · 10-02-2011, 07:21 AM

The President takes an oath to uphold the constitution against all enemies, both foreign and domestic. I submit that had he not taken out that Muslim terrorist swine that he would have been derelict in his duties.

Al-awlaki was an enemy combatant, engaged in ongoing terrorist activities against the USA, not to kill him would have been a dereliction of Obama's duties. (it feels almost foolish to have to explain this)

I complain alot about most presidents, as well as this one, but let me say again, great job President Obama, Leon Panetta and our armed forces on getting this murdering pig.

How about them drones, what a fantastic weapons system!!

**Scorpio** · 10-02-2011, 07:31 AM

When I heard the news I did a little fist pump. This guy was a danger to Americans. I was then appalled that someone (Ron Paul) would start crying about this guy's rights as an American citizen. He's an American citizen like I am Brad Pitt. He wanted to kill Americans. ALL AMERICANS. Women, children, it didn't matter to this guy.
Because of 9/11, it is a new world now. You want to incite your buddy jihadists to kill Americans? You can then expect to get tracked and hunted down like the animal you are.

What really frightens though, me is that I actually agree with greg on this!

DaisyDeadhead · 10-02-2011, 06:14 PM

(10-01-2011 07:22 PM)Elijah Craig Wrote:
(10-01-2011 07:15 PM)Donb123 Wrote: As tempting as it is to resort to name calling like you just did I'll just smack you down with the facts instead.

Still waiting on those facts. Please provide historical precedent for interpreting the Fifth Amendment to apply to wartime actions. Please provide quotes from the Founders that would indicate their original intent was to protect enemy combatants in a threatre of war.

I won't hold my breath.

I think he means, instead of a hit, should have been captured and tried for treason.

Example: Eddie Slovik was found on foreign soil and tried before execution.

Now, if you are saying, an army deserter is another class of person than
Al-Qaeda, I tend to agree with you... but then the Rosenbergs were tried under due process and executed. If you believe they were guilty (I don't, but that's another issue), then maybe you think they forfeited their right to due process when they decided to hang out with the Soviets. (It was NOT wartime, and they were still executed.)

Would you extend due process to those two cases, above? If so, are you saying Al-Qaeda is a special case? If so, the law has not been written to make any allowances for that.

Elijah Craig · 10-02-2011, 06:53 PM

I believe you treat al Qeuda like any other paramilitary band of mixed nationalities. Geneva Convention says irregular combatants caught out of uniform can be shot on site. Law of the sea says pirates can be hung by the naval vessel that captured them. In American history, there is precedent with the Barbary Pirates, Poncha Villa, just for starters.

The law here is neither complicated nor open to much debate.

Don · 10-02-2011, 07:58 PM

(10-02-2011 07:31 AM)Scorpio Wrote: When I heard the news I did a little fist pump. This guy was a danger to Americans. I was then appalled that someone (Ron Paul) would start crying about this guy's rights as an American citizen. He's an American citizen like I am Brad Pitt. He wanted to kill Americans. ALL AMERICANS. Women, children, it didn't matter to this guy.
Because of 9/11, it is a new world now. You want to incite your buddy jihadists to kill Americans? You can then expect to get tracked and hunted down like the animal you are.

What really frightens though, me is that I actually agree with greg on this!

I'll have to join this group as well. And while Paul may be ok in the financial arena I do not want his foreign policy. So I'll scratch him off of my list and concentrate on the rest of the field.

**RobMille** · 10-02-2011, 10:39 PM

I can name exactly what I don't like about Ron Paul's foreign policy: He believes in isolationism. If it doesn't happen here, it's not our problem according to Paul. I'm all for cutting back on the military. I wouldn't sign up for the having the air force hold bake sales idea, but Ron Paul goes a lot further than that, basically would eliminate any modern concept of the American military.

**RobMille** · 10-02-2011, 11:15 PM

It's off topic, but I'm fairly certain RP would still fit isolationist including economic. I think it'd be fairly shocking to see a positive number on his foreign aid proposal.

RP's suggestions always sound great that other countries can "take care of their own defense", except we've seen that has never been true in the known history, and clearly still is not true as most of the world is incapable of policing their own states.

DaisyDeadhead · 10-06-2011, 12:22 PM

Don, do you mind if I link that on my blog? WOW, have not seen that anywhere else.

If you have a blog, can link to it if you want (considered good manners) as a thank-you.

Want me to link to a Ron Paul site? Will be happy to do so. Just post it here.

greg · 10-07-2011, 02:55 PM

(10-06-2011 12:04 PM)Donb123 Wrote: Secret panel puts Americans on "kill list"

This explains all those black helocopters Texe Marrs has been talking about all these years.