Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Chilling legal memo from Obama DOJ justifies assassination of US citizens

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 166 posts

Re: Chilling legal memo from Obama DOJ justifies assassination of US citizens

#111

Post by jeroen94704 »

Yes, this is bad, as everybody has a right to a fair trial.

However, I think it is _far_ worse that it is EVER, in any way, shape or form, deemed acceptable that innocent bystanders get killed in order to get rid of a single individual, no matter how horrible their acts may have been.

It is frankly appalling that people get all upset about the fact that the target in question was a US citizen, and blatantly ignore the addition that "at least five other civilians" were killed in the same attack.

Re: Chilling legal memo from Obama DOJ justifies assassination of US citizens

#112

Post by prawn »

jfoster wrote: post #60
kubiiii wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A huge donwside is that it creates 10 potential terrorists seeking revenge for every suppressed potential threat.

That's a good point, it might do that. (haven't seen evidence, but it does sound plausible)

CIA analyst on al-Qaeda: "They hate us for what we do, not who we are."

Re: Chilling legal memo from Obama DOJ justifies assassination of US citizens

#113

Post by beedogs »

yapcguy wrote: post #61
grey-area wrote: post #47

Let's consider a specific example: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/18/opinion/the-drone-that-kil... The missile killed him, his teenage cousin and at least five other civilians on Oct. 14, 2011, while the boys were eating dinner at an open-air restaurant in southern Yemen...The attorney general, Eric H. Holder Jr., said only that Abdulrahman was not “specifically targeted,” raising more questions than he answered. The…

Good points except for... > an undefined and secret enemy Just this month alone... - Islamic terrorists gun down over 60 people in a shopping mall in Kenya. - Islamic terrorists blow up over 70 people in a church in Pakistan. - Islamic terrorists massacre over 160 travelers in Nigeria. - Islamic terrorists take hundreds hostage in a coastal city in the Philippines.

Last I checked, none of those were America.

Re: Chilling legal memo from Obama DOJ justifies assassination of US citizens

#114

Post by ams6110 »

Retric wrote: post #70
yapcguy wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good points except for... > an undefined and secret enemy Just this month alone... - Islamic terrorists gun down over 60 people in a shopping mall in Kenya. - Islamic terrorists blow up over 70 people in a church in Pakistan. - Islamic terrorists massacre over 160 travelers in Nigeria. - Islamic terrorists take hundreds hostage in a coastal city in the Philippines.

Over it's 200+ year history the US has killed more civilians than that in the average week. Does that make us 4x as bad as Islamic terrorists?

No, because even if that were true you need to look at motivations and intent.

Re: Chilling legal memo from Obama DOJ justifies assassination of US citizens

#115

Post by beedogs »

rob05c wrote: post #34
rhizome wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if it is simply how it does work, maybe that means it should be changed to something where the President doesn't have as much power.

IMO the real problem is America's Electoral system. Because there is no rank voting, the choices are the warmongering party, the slightly-less-warmongering party, or wasting your vote. Even if the President had more power than it does now, it couldn't get away with these things if citizens had the ability to relevantly vote for another person/party. They would simply vote for whoever else was closest to their beliefs…

Rank voting didn't help in Australia where the media is compromised.

Re: Chilling legal memo from Obama DOJ justifies assassination of US citizens

#116

Post by alephnil »

eitland wrote: post #106
ZoFreX wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know the global stats, but in Europe, 0.5% of terrorist attacks are committed by people who identify as Muslim. Christians and atheists commit way more.

Curious about the use of present tense. From the top of my mind: Madrid - London subway - Beslan (not sure if that is Europe) - All these are committed by people who claim to be Muslims aren't they? On the other hand you have Oslo/Utøya which was committed by an atheist / agnostic. Please don't misinterpret me: I have Muslim friends as well. I just want to stick to the facts. (and get my facts updated if necessary)

He is not an atheist or agnostic, but a christian. He stated multiple times in his manifest that one of his main motive for the terrorist attack was defending christian values.

Re: Chilling legal memo from Obama DOJ justifies assassination of US citizens

#117

Post by FatalBaboon »

grey-area wrote: post #47

Let's consider a specific example: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/18/opinion/the-drone-that-kil... The missile killed him, his teenage cousin and at least five other civilians on Oct. 14, 2011, while the boys were eating dinner at an open-air restaurant in southern Yemen...The attorney general, Eric H. Holder Jr., said only that Abdulrahman was not “specifically targeted,” raising more questions than he answered. The…

That sounds awkwardly a bit like the 1950s witch hunt and McCarthyism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Red_Scare)

Re: Chilling legal memo from Obama DOJ justifies assassination of US citizens

#118

Post by TheZenPsycho »

ams6110 wrote: post #114
Retric wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Over it's 200+ year history the US has killed more civilians than that in the average week. Does that make us 4x as bad as Islamic terrorists?

No, because even if that were true you need to look at motivations and intent.

Genocide, imperialism, establishing delivery routes through foreign owned land, oil, and racism? The list goes on.

Re: Chilling legal memo from Obama DOJ justifies assassination of US citizens

#119

Post by joshuaellinger »

steve19 wrote: post #87
yapcguy wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good points except for... > an undefined and secret enemy Just this month alone... - Islamic terrorists gun down over 60 people in a shopping mall in Kenya. - Islamic terrorists blow up over 70 people in a church in Pakistan. - Islamic terrorists massacre over 160 travelers in Nigeria. - Islamic terrorists take hundreds hostage in a coastal city in the Philippines.

Wow, this guy got downvoted fast and unfairly in my opinion. He stated a fact. I don't know what the Nigeria attack is, but in the three other attacks he listed the enemy is known and in two of those attacks they wore uniforms. Drones have been used against at least one of those groups. I think people don't like the term "Islamic" being used, but they were done by groups claiming to be Islamic, and reported in the me…

Replace the word "Islamic" with "Poor and Black/Brown" and you've selected the same group of people.

Imagine being in Northern Ireland 20 years ago and stating the fact that all of the terrorist attackers were performed by "Catholics". Or in the Deep South 40 years ago (or today) and saying that all of the people charged with stealing are "Black". Or that most of the people with AIDS are "Gay".

Unfortunately, the blanket targeting of a single group is really part of the problem. Pretending that it is tied to religion is just weakly hidden fear-of-the-other. The down-votes are just the quick-and-easy way to show that the community doesn't accept the cheap shot and sees it for what it really is.

Re: Chilling legal memo from Obama DOJ justifies assassination of US citizens

#120

Post by jfoster »

vdaniuk wrote: post #101
jfoster wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, that's one of the problems. You'd hope the agencies involved are only taking these actions where they have extreme certainty. And even if they do have that super-high certainty, it still is an execution without a trial, which makes a lot of people uneasy. Utmost transparency (probably has to be after-the-fact) into each case where this is done might help to put some people a little bit more at-ease about it. In…

Your argument to moderation is one of the classical fallacies. Maybe there are no reasonable compromises and one of the extreme views is correct.

Well, assuming there is a "correct" view. I can't see what it would be. Nothing will be perfect. My primary point is that the merits of each approach should be acknowledged. Anyone who claims that all of the merits are at one extreme is deliberately lying or blinded by their extremism.
Post reply on HN