I called the people being targeted traitors, when they are enemy fighters trying to kill people from afar, in their own self declared war on the country of their citizenship. ( Which also makes them a traitor ).
But enemy fighters above all. On their own field of battle.
So no, no trial.
From what I understand, there are many, many 'American citizens' scheming against the American government.
Those people are Not on a 'hit list' that I am aware of. Though I am sure that they are being watched.
So I must disagree with your statement of the U.S. government asserting that it's allowed to 'arbirtarily' (sic) kill its own citizens.
These people of various citizenships are at war with America. Making themselves the enemy.
And this field of battle is almost worldwide.
All of which is leading this administration to publicly determine whether this enemy soldier/warrior/traitor should be hunted down across borders into his own battlefield and eliminated.
I know, the last administration, as well as this one at first, just went ahead and blew these enemies up by drone wherever they were hiding, without any kind of public notice or oversight. We the People reacted to that strongly and negatively, and apparently they've learned that lesson, at least. They are at least making the public aware that there is a debate going on. Which should lead to many mixed feelings and input about the situation.
My feeling ?
Someone just accused of being a traitor, then yes, a trial to decide if that is fact or not.
An enemy soldier trying to kill Americans, then yeah, they are fair game. No matter how widespread the battlefield, no matter what country the enemy has his citizenship. No trial needed.
When the American south went to war against the American government in the civil war, no soldier on the battlefield expected a trial before he was allowed to be shot in battle.
Same deal here. Attack us, then it is war. And you will be a target. No matter what country you came from.
So, I apologize.
That was where I went wrong in my first reply to you. I simply called these 'targeted Americans' traitors. But they are more than that, they are enemy fighters actively trying to kill Americans in a war they started.
As for having to drone bomb them from afar, well, I don't like the idea because of the uncertainty, and the risk of bombing civilians or even the wrong people, as this article points out.
I also see how the situation can leave not a lot of choice here, without invading a lot of other countries just find all the enemy soldiers.
In the case of the last few conflicts, there are no clearly drawn battle lines.
In times past, an army marched across land and sea and air and met in battle with usually clearly drawn lines of battle, under their banners, or in their uniforms, and fighting it out, with the winners moving the battleline forward.
Now, this enemy is hiding in homes and caves, holes or basements, across vast areas of several other countries, persuading, or forcing, other men and women to blow up groups of unarmed American civilians at work or at play, thousands of miles away, and sacrificing their own lives in the process ( since the bombs are strapped to them, or they are wearing the thing ).
They do this Not to claim land or to free the people, but apparently just to make a statement, since they can't possibly hope to take over the United States by doing this.
There is no real battlefield. No battlelines. No front. The enemy is not with his army marching across the field of battle. He can't be shot, wounded or killed in the battle, because he is no where near the battle.
He has to be hunted down in his hidey hole.
So, as enemy soldiers, I think that these people have forfeited any right to a trial, regardless of their citizenship.
I see that the U.S. government is trying to target the most dangerous enemy soldiers in their hidey holes, and not just any American with a grudge and a opinion, living abroad or at home.
So I see nothing arbitrary about the U.S. chasing down enemy soldiers and their leaders in this particular new type of war with such a widespread enemy in hiding.
Back to the actual subject, I do not like the idea of targeting a cell phone location from afar and lobbing a missile in and hoping they hit the one and only person that they were hoping to hit.
To me, that is akin to lobbing grenades blindly into a village hoping to hit some warriors.
I Strongly disagree with that idea. like -5.
I understand the need to beat the enemy down, but not at the cost of killing the innocent.
Use special ops.
Locate the enemy, track, send in our warriors, and finish the enemy off.
Leave the civilians out of it.
We don't need to be like them.