Obama announcement at 10:30 p.m. - Bin Laden Dead

Yeah, he's on faculty there, though many are not happy about it, including my oldest brother who's a graduate & a huge liberal.

 

There are laws against torture. I don't remember any laws against killing enemy combatants you have declared war against.

 

If bin Laden had been killed in a capture mission, there wouldn't be a lot of questions about the orders given.

But, I think you have to at least question a "kill order".

In as much as it's illegal for a Navy SEAL to carry out an illegal order, they would need a legal authorization for such an order, otherwise that SEAL could be open to criminal prosecution.

 

http://www.abc.net.au/local/audio/2011/05/04/3207676.htm?site=newcastle

"I would rather have seen him captured and dealt with under the law," Greg says.
"Under the Geneva Convention international humanitarian law applies to anyone who is in the context of a conflict.
"And that means that the sort of style of killing that we saw of Osama bin Laden is generally not permissible, that is, that a person should be captured where possible."

 

So, killing an unarmed enemy combatant is always ok as long as we're at war?

 

The mastermind of combat against us? Hell yes. And anyway, this is all blahblahblah from you. You were all for the taking out of Osama a few dozen pages ago, until Bush and torture apparently didn't get enough props for your liking.

 

Aussies must have a different style. In the second reference, they refer to "Greg" by his first name, not his last name.

 

So, no rules for OBL then?

Who else does "no rules" apply to.

I'm fine with it, but I assume there's a legal ruling.

But, even a legal ruling wasn't enough for GWB.

 

Andrea Mitchell says the Administration is "very frustrated" by all the questions being asked?

What questions?

Give me a break. There should be no questions?

 

Well, it was just a DOJ interpretation of the law. That's not exactly a "legal ruling," right? What I mean is, that's probably a factor in a determination of whether the rule of law was followed, but it's not determinative.

 

Um, the rule that you kill enemy combatants and their leadership in war covers this just fine. And holy fuck, Obama himself credited Bush. Bush never had a date at the Hague and never will. Get over it.

 

So, hypothetically speaking, if I land a helicopter in the middle of Zhari District, Kandahar Province on 4 July 2010 at approximately 1400 to evacuate a U.S casualty, order two of my Soldiers out of the helicopter into a firefight, and in the process of evacuating said casualty, one of my Soldiers kills an enemy combatant, is there to be an investigation? I mean, hypothetically speaking, you know.