Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> rather than the fact that he went to Yemen and took up arms against the United States while inciting violence against the country.

It is difficult to call it a fact since there was no trial, no due process, nor evidence cited by US government in the killing of its citizen. Perhaps there was secret evidence presented in secret to a secret court, but that's rather grim consolation.

Also the concept of law should absolutely insert itself into matters of foreign military matters. WWI and WWII were both horror shows, Western civilization rightly decided to do their best not to repeat the worst of the atrocities committed therein. You seem all to eager to return to a world where Western governments kill millions without consequence.



> It is difficult to call it a fact since there was no trial, no due process, nor evidence cited by US government in the killing of its citizen.

Trials, due process, evidence, these are domestic legal concepts. They don't apply to military actions on foreign soil.

> Also the concept of law should absolutely insert itself into matters of foreign military matters.

Rule of law depends on the institutional capital of the judiciary. The judiciary inserting itself into diplomatic and military matters costs institutional capital. The more the judiciary stays out of the foreign affairs of the military, the easier it is to keep the military out of the domestic affairs of the judiciary. And ultimately when you make politically necessary things illegal, you set the rule of law up for failure.


They don't apply to military actions on foreign soil.

Assassination by drone is (or should be) considered a political act, not a military one.


All military acts are political.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: