Quote:
Originally Posted by Billy L-bach
Sticking to my guns on this one... off with his head, Mr Awlaki he would surely provide any one of us with the same level of respect.
|
Awlaki is not, at least in my opinion, the problem. To use a classic Southern phrase, he needs killin'. Feed him, while still alive and aware, to the pigs for all I care.
The difficulty lies in the precedent. When a police officer uses deadly force, he personally faces the full consequences of his actions. It is less likely that any POTUS will face such sanctions for applying the terrorist label. I cannot help but wonder who we will see as terrorists 25 years in the future. The political landscape was different back in 1985. What will it be in 2035? And who will we label as terrorists then?
I would only ask that we consider how some hypothetical president in 2018 or beyond might use this power. It offers the possibility of abuse, IMO. If men were perfect, we would not need checks and balances. However, the founders seemed to believe that men were imperfect - and I hesitate to argue with their conclusion.