3 ms·
I originally was going to make the distinction between executions for murder versus executions for acts of political dissidence. Then I remembered a high-profi
by linkregister 10y ago
I originally was going to make the distinction between executions for murder versus executions for acts of political dissidence. Then I remembered a high-profile UAV strike of a pro-terrorism speaker and recruiter. [1]
Anwar al-Awlaki was a conspirator for a deadly terrorist attack, so that would ordinarily meet the requirement for guilt of murder.
The UAV strike was actually an act of war against an Al-Qaeda officer; killing of enemy soldiers not carrying weapons (such as artillery spotters, etc) is permitted under the laws of war.
Anyway, it really muddies the waters and I think the criticism of both US and Saudi practices is appropriate.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki
- selimthegrim 10y agoSo in the eighties, would we (the US FBI) have been cool with MI6 assassinating all those people in Southie funding NORAID?
- linkregister 10y agoI would hope that the US would enforce rule of law within its own borders. Using terrorism funding criminal statutes, the extradition process, or enemy-prisoner-of-war exchange (that would be bizarre, but not unprecedented) to mollify the UK government would have been better solutions. That's another example of a really murky conflict without one side having a moral upper hand.
- selimthegrim 10y agoThose statutes didn't exist in 1985 when Peter King, their biggest cheerleader, was marching down Fifth Avenue with Nassau County's finest behind him.