In response to:
the target of the drone was an unlawful combatant, not a US citizen; the hamdi decision does not apply. The hamdi decision does not apply to targeting unlawful combatants, only to their ability to challenge their combatant status in a court while detained. Therefore, that decision does not apply to targeting in the field. The CINC has he power to target combatants as he sees fit, regardless of nationality, and unlawful combatants are targets, regardless of nationality. Terrorists are not US citizens when they take up arms against us.
A leaked memo from the Department of Justice lays out the explicit justifications that the Obama Administration believes authorizes the targeted assassination of American citizens on foreign soil.
NBC News obtained and reported on the memo last night, which explains that drone strikes that have been conducted in the past that have killed American citizens are legitimate and legal operations.
[A]n “informed, high-level” official of the U.S. government may determine that the targeted American has been “recently” involved in “activities” posing a threat of a violent attack and “there is no evidence suggesting that...
oops is yipyippuppy aka bigdog really fubarack?
i said so and thats that!
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0317_0001_ZS.html
They were American citizens UNDER CURRENT LAW IN THE UNITED STATES.
Have a nice day.
Hamdi only applies to persons IN CUSTODY,"detainees",not in the combat arena,not active fighters,which Awlaki truly was.("aiding and abetting",giving aid and comfort to the enemy,etc.)
If an American citizen is killed on the battlefield, that is not a problem. It is the TARGETING ASSASSINATION of American citizens that have not been convicted of anything that is.
No law supports the position that either of you takes and I would hope that you could see the slippery slope considering that high-ranking members of this government have called the Tea Party "terrorists."