Oops, turns out Arafat probably was murdered after all..

[Sava]

As I said, imagine it's the same thing in Boston rather than Afghanistan. It's just not acceptable is it? Although in the Boston case at least it has the justification of potentially stopping an imminent attack.

The use of drones overseas is done because US law enforcement simply does have have the same presence and capability in the mountains of Afghanistan as it does on the streets of Boston. You should know this.

[MikeH]

Not in their current form, no. Bombs and missiles are too indiscriminate for my tastes. If someone builds a drone that can be an effective platform for a rifle, I'd be in favor of using that in such an instance.

Remember, the guys in Boston were firing at police and throwing bombs at them. The doesn't matter if they get taken out by drone or a cop with a gun. If you have a problem with that, then the debate becomes about the use of lethal force in general. Crying about the use of drones is just a sideshow.

And I'm not really in favor of US drone policy overseas. But compared to counter-terror tactics of old, it seems to be far less lethal overall.

Not really sure what we're arguing about then. The whole point is about your current drone technology with its missiles.

[Sava]

Not necessarily. If they know civilians are present when a strike is ordered then that is murder.

No. It's not. Not morally. Not legally. Learn what words mean, please.

[MikeH]

The use of drones overseas is done because US law enforcement simply does have have the same presence and capability in the mountains of Afghanistan as it does on the streets of Boston. You should know this.

Police them if/when they come to the US not when they are overseas.

[Sava]

Not really sure what we're arguing about then.

I'm just expressing my opinion about the use of lethal force.

You are... wah wah wah america is evil.

[C0ckney]

Murder has a distinct definition. It's incorrect to use the term when discussing abortion. It's also incorrect to use it with regards to civilian casualties in military/counter-terror operations. It's pointless to discuss this topic with anyone who throws around the term so thoughtlessly.

poisoning, the subject of this thread, is usually treated as murder.

[C0ckney]

Murder has a distinct definition. It's incorrect to use the term when discussing abortion. It's also incorrect to use it with regards to civilian casualties in military/counter-terror operations. It's pointless to discuss this topic with anyone who throws around the term so thoughtlessly.

poisoning, the subject of this thread, is usually treated as murder.

[Ben Kenobi]

I hope no-one here is ever collateral damage in a botched assassination, but if you are, I'm glad you'll be comforted by the fact that whoever did it might get a bollocking.

Right, because my number one fear is that Mossad is going to perform a hit on me. Hey here's a clue. Don't make a career out of trying to kill every Jew and maybe, just maybe, Mossad will leave you alone.

Also - where's the collateral damage in rad poisoning Arafat?

[Sava]

Police them if/when they come to the US not when they are overseas.

I tend to agree.

Unfortunately, the scope of such a large scale attack as 9-11 prompts more of a response than "well shucks... let's put locks on cockpit doors and hope we get them next time!"

[MikeH]

No. It's not. Not morally. Not legally. Learn what words mean, please.

Morally is debatable, legally it's definitely illegal to assassinate people, outside of a legitimate war. The matter of civilian casualties doesn't come up.

[Ben Kenobi]

Anyone who understands a thing about what the people Israel kills did would immediately realize that the world is a better place with them gone.

Jews have a right to live in peace in Israel. If anybody else was subjected to constantly getting rockets dropped on your people, nobody would insist that they can't squash the folks dropping the rockets.

[MikeH]

I'm just expressing my opinion about the use of lethal force.

You are... wah wah wah america is evil.

No, I was very careful to say 'we' in my initial Rule of Law post so I was including the UK.

[Sava]

poisoning, the subject of this thread, is usually treated as murder.

Murder isn't applicable in war. War is a political exercise. Arafat's death, if murder, was political.

The discussion then becomes about whether or not political leaders are legitimate targets.

[C0ckney]

No. It's not. Not morally. Not legally. Learn what words mean, please.

legally, the drone strikes are murder, whether the victims are 'innocent' or not.

[MikeH]

If you are obsessed with legality, poisoning with radioactive material is either murder or a war crime for use of WMD, by the US definition