• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. Approves Targeted Killing of American Cleric

Tashah said:
The problem is... it's nigh impossible to serve him with an arrest warrant in Yemen. Pity the poor FBI agent who draws this crappy assignment.
Click to expand...

That's probably why smart criminals who which to evade capture make their way to countries which do not have extradition treaties with the United States.

That doesn't mean we get to go mow them down instead.
 
Arch Enemy said:
Kind of hard to determine if a person is a criminal without a trial, huh.
Click to expand...

Yea, it all gets complicated, doesn't it? But we are America, and we will do what is right. If this guy does a suicide attack, then let's invade Tajikistan this time. :mrgreen:
 
Arcana XV said:
Osama Bin Laden has nothing to do with this discussion seeing as he's not a US citizen.
Click to expand...
He was given as an example to an active threat, an active threat that you believed would only exist once he would strap a bomb to his chest and explode in a massive crowd.
As long as due process is followed I have no problem with the removal of active threats.
Click to expand...
And due process has been followed.
When a citizen of the US is opening fire on federal police officers, he is an active threat to them, and they are allowed to return fire.

When a citizen of the US plans the murder of innocent American civilians, he is an active threat to the American nation, and it is allowed to take him down.
 
danarhea said:
Yea, it all gets complicated, doesn't it? But we are America, and we will do what is right. If this guy does a suicide attack, then let's invade Tajikistan this time. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...


The point is that someone who knowingly violates other's natural rights, and then flees the law, is not protected under the law.
 
Apocalypse said:
And due process has been followed.
Click to expand...

Is that right? You should have no problem listing the relevant steps taken by the US Government to give this citizen due process, then.

When a citizen of the US plans the murder of innocent American civilians, he is an active threat to the American nation, and it is allowed to take him down.
Click to expand...

What about the 5th Amendment?
 
Gander said:
Article Six: This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
Click to expand...

That doesn't state that treaties are made a part of the Constitution.

Also, did you notice that Article Six lists those three things in order of supremacy: Constitution, Laws of the United States, Treaties.

The quoted portion also clearly states that laws which contradict treaties supersede those treaties.
 
Arcana XV said:
Is that right? You should have no problem listing the relevant steps taken by the US Government to give this citizen due process, then.
Click to expand...
Locate the citizen, determine if he's an active threat to the American nation or not, determine if it is logical to attempt an arrest, if not, destroy citizen.
End of process.
What about the 5th Amendment?
Click to expand...
What about it?
 
Also, it is PAINFULLY HILARIOUS that the Geneva Convention was brought up as a justification for executing this guy.

When the Geneva Convention was brought up as a good reason not to detain illegal combatants indefinitely, laughter was the response.

Now it's being cited as a justification for exexcuting someone?

Oh, brother. :lol:
 
Apocalypse said:
Locate the citizen, determine if he's an active threat to the American nation or not, determine if it is logical to attempt an arrest, if not, destroy citizen.
Click to expand...

Let's try that again, according to American law:

  1. Ascertain as to whether or not there is sufficient evidence to suspect someone in the comission of a crime
  2. Obtain arrest warrant
  3. Locate the citizen
  4. Attempt to arrest the citizen without bloodshed -- if he resists with lethal force, take care of business
  5. Take the citizen into custody
  6. Remand citizen and let the courts do their thing

Ta da.
 
Apocalypse said:
What about it?
Click to expand...

Also, what about the 5th Amendment?

It says the government can't deprive someone of life, liberty or property without due process of law:

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution]Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
Let's try that again, according to American law:

  1. Ascertain as to whether or not there is sufficient evidence to suspect someone in the comission of a crime
  2. Obtain arrest warrant
  3. Locate the citizen
  4. Attempt to arrest the citizen without bloodshed -- if he resists with lethal force, take care of business
  5. Take the citizen into custody
  6. Remand citizen and let the courts do their thing

Ta da.
Click to expand...
That's certainly the better way, if one is living in lala-land and believes that US law enforcement bodies can operate freely in Yemen.
 
Apocalypse said:
That's certainly the better way, if one is living in lala-land and believes that US law enforcement bodies can operate freely in Yemen.
Click to expand...

That's certainly the only way, if one is speaking of American authority.

If American authorities can't operate freely in Yemen, they're out of luck.

Legally speaking, of course.
 
Arch Enemy said:
The PATRIOT ACT denies a terrorist due process.
Click to expand...

So we must read terrorist from other countries miranda rights and give them trials in NY but a citizen can be assassinated? It just seems that muslims from other countries have more rights here then we do according to Obama
 
Last edited:
ptif219 said:
So we must read terrorist from other countries miranda rights and give them trials in NY but a citizen can be assassinated?
Click to expand...

I think he was just commenting on how it's being applied, not saying it was right and just.

As he mentioned a few posts ago.

ptif219 said:
It just seems that muslims from other countries have more rights here then we do according to Obama
Click to expand...

It does seem a topsy-turvy way of dealing with a citizen perceived to be a threat to our security, don't it?
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
I think he was just commenting on how it's being applied, not saying it was right and just.

As he mentioned a few posts ago.



It does seem a topsy-turvy way of dealing with a citizen perceived to be a threat to our security, don't it?
Click to expand...

Obama is a hypocrite the way he treats enemy combatants from gitmo and then wants to assassinate a citizen
 
ptif219 said:
So we must read terrorist from other countries miranda rights and give them trials in NY but a citizen can be assassinated? It just seems that muslims from other countries have more rights here then we do according to Obama
Click to expand...

When in reality you agree with killing Anwar, right?
 
I'd hate to think that any eventual downfall was the result of Americans being top notch and overly fair. There needs to be some degree of ruthlessness to assure our continued success.
 
Arch Enemy said:
When in reality you agree with killing Anwar, right?
Click to expand...

Does not matter what I believe. The point is Obama holds Muslim terrorist in a higher light then he does US citizens. Obama gives the foreign terrorist more rights than US citizens
 
sazerac said:
I'd hate to think that any eventual downfall was the result of Americans being top notch and overly fair. There needs to be some degree of ruthlessness to assure our continued success.
Click to expand...

Like the treaty Obama went to sign with Russia?
JC-hysterical.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom