Article

2011-09-03 Home Front: WoT

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Bobby 2011-09-03 09:37|| || Front Page|| [4 views ] Top

#1 Critics charge that this individual man-hunting mission amounts to assassination, a practice prohibited by U.S. law.

No it isn't. US law, since Gerald Ford, prohibits the "assassination of foreign leaders". The interpretation being "political leaders".

Instigators, coordinators, financiers, propagandists, technicians, and all other non-political leaders are fair game.

In fact, I have long advocated that we be far more enthusiastic about taking out such individuals, with means ranging from the (plausible deniability) "looks like an accident", to "with extreme, grotesque, hideous, and inhuman depraved prejudice".

I will conclude by proposing that even under truly extraordinary circumstances, like former commerce secretary Ron Brown, who it has been alleged sold highest security NSA information to the Chinese, that even "US leaders" are not immune from assassination.

Posted by Anonymoose 2011-09-03 10:15|| 2011-09-03 10:15|| Front Page Top

#2 We don't do that, Anonymoose -- that's why we have courts.

Posted by trailing wife 2011-09-03 10:35|| 2011-09-03 10:35|| Front Page Top

#3 I realize that because I'm not a leftist I won't get this, but what's wrong with killing those who would kill us if only they had the opportunity?

Posted by Steve White 2011-09-03 10:37|| 2011-09-03 10:37|| Front Page Top

#4 We just don't admit we do that. The problem with extrajudicial killings & killings outside of warfare is that they can be perverted by insiders for their own evil ends - see the acts of Qadaffy & Saddam Hussein for starters.

Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2011-09-03 10:59|| 2011-09-03 10:59|| Front Page Top

#5 AH is correct. I'm ambivalent about this. I see nothing other than the honor code of the Military to prevent 'bumble and company, or similar follow on, from starting to use this domestically.

Given our current foreign policy and wars I can approve this against foreign targets, but.....

e.g. if there was enough evidence to get Brown wacked, there was enough to arrest and try him for treason.
Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat?

Posted by AlanC 2011-09-03 11:18|| 2011-09-03 11:18|| Front Page Top

#6 that's why we have courts.

Courts that empower themselves to impose personal views upon the people and state. Justice Kennedy et al ignored Yamashita v. Styer and impose civilian processes to what had already been establish by precedent as legitimate prosecution of those captured on the battlefield. He chose to ignore the very standards of the Geneva Convention on the responsibilities of those who seek its protection requires conforming to its rules. He granted status to illegal combatants.

Posted by Procopius2k 2011-09-03 11:19|| 2011-09-03 11:19|| Front Page Top

#7 10 years later, let's remember Senate Joint Resolution 23 which is still in effect -

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This joint resolution may be cited as the `Authorization for Use of Military Force'.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.

(b) War Powers Resolution Requirements-

(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.

(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS- Nothing in this resolution supercedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.

nb - Senate (place where the bill was initiate) Joint (that it passed both houses) Resolution

Posted by Procopius2k 2011-09-03 11:26|| 2011-09-03 11:26|| Front Page Top

#8 JSOC has grown from 1,800 troops prior to 9/11 to as many as 25,000. It has its own intelligence division, its own drones and reconnaissance planes, even its own dedicated satellites. It also has its own cyberwarriors, who, on Sept. 11, 2008, shut down every jihadist Web site they knew.

To give you an idea of the leathality of our operators, here is a Strategy Page article on the Rangers:

Rangers have kill ratio of 2,000:1

Posted by Glinese Big Foot2428 2011-09-03 11:34|| 2011-09-03 11:34|| Front Page Top

#9 Fixed it, Glinese Big Foot2428. You had a misplaced angle bracket.

Posted by trailing wife 2011-09-03 11:38|| 2011-09-03 11:38|| Front Page Top

#10 a preemptive strike across Petraeus's bow by the WaPo and CIA apparatchiks?

Posted by Frank G 2011-09-03 11:58|| 2011-09-03 11:58|| Front Page Top

#11 TW: Israel does it at intervals, and it works like a charm.

The difference between assassinating foreign terrorists and their supporters "over there", and any necessary assassinations "over here" is that over there, only a very limited and authorized chain of command is permitted to order hits.

Here, the process would be insanely hard, and only for the most grievous offenses. It would have to be initiated by (my guess) one of our intelligence agencies or the FBI. Likely it would have to then go to one of our intelligence courts for secret hearings.

They would determine if the actions were not just treasonous, and so damaging to the United States, and that the individual involved was effectively "above the law", for some reasons, not just that they could not be tried without causing other major harm.

From there, the execution order would likely go to a subcommittee of the senate Intelligence committee, who would likely have the final say, and designate who will carry out the order, and to some extent, with consultations, how it will be carried out.

How did Ron Brown qualify? In short, he sold the details of NSA listening posts around China and who manned them to the Chinese. And he did so for just a few hundred thousand dollars.

Thus he compromised most NSA monitoring of China, and put the lives of hundreds of NSA personnel, and their families, at grave risk.

He also committed several other criminal acts, but nothing came anywhere close to this. It should be noted that others at the commerce department, seen as complicit in this crime, on the US side, are also deceased, but known Chinese agents involved were just quietly deported or charged with lesser offenses.

This shows the clear difference: spies are just doing their job, and nobody wants to start a nation to nation assassination war. But traitors are a local problem, so can be killed without consequence.

Many do not "make the cut", like traitorous spies like Walker, Pollard, and Bradley Manning, so their destination is a federal Maximum Security prison.

Posted by Anonymoose 2011-09-03 12:51|| 2011-09-03 12:51|| Front Page Top

#12 Makes me think once again about JFK.

Posted by Abu Uluque 2011-09-03 13:22|| 2011-09-03 13:22|| Front Page Top

#13 All I will say is that I know quite well from my past work that "consequences imposed" have quite a good record at driving home how accountability works and wonderfully clarifies the mind as to the personal cost of a specific act, especially when someone is at a decision point of whether or not to commit a particularly evil act directly or even via support of such a thing. Not only for the ones the consequences are imposed upon, but for those "in the know" who are related or working closely with him/her.

Posted by OldSpook 2011-09-03 14:44|| 2011-09-03 14:44|| Front Page Top

#14 #12 Makes me think once again about JFK.
Posted by Abu Uluque

Or Vince Foster.....

Posted by Besoeker 2011-09-03 16:23|| 2011-09-03 16:23|| Front Page Top

#15 Here now Abu. We all know that it was the Smoking Man that did the deed.

Posted by whitecollar redneck 2011-09-03 17:22|| 2011-09-03 17:22|| Front Page Top

#16 I wonder if bin Laden's name was on the list? Was it OK to assassinate him? Why is it always reported as "killing of bin Laden? Fortunately, Obooboo didn't take a poll to see if the Seals should wack binny.

The reason Obama never asked is because he knew the SEALS would ignore him and blast Bin Laden anyway. Never a question whether it was a kill mission to our Finest.

Posted by Charles 2011-09-03 18:32|| 2011-09-03 18:32|| Front Page Top

#17 Panetta told the SEALS it was a kill mission. President Obama may not have been able to make up his mind or wanted credible deniability, but the White House staff didn't want the circus of a trial. If the president wanted bin Laden alive, he and his brood would be the guests of Quantico Brig at this minute.

Posted by Eohippus Phater7165 2011-09-03 21:52|| 2011-09-03 21:52|| Front Page Top

#18 a preemptive strike across Petraeus's bow by the WaPo and CIA apparatchiks?

And/or State Department.

Posted by Pappy 2011-09-03 21:54|| 2011-09-03 21:54|| Front Page Top

#19 The best thing Petraeus could do is weed out the leaking self-agenda assholes at the CIA bureaucracy. A 50% turnover in the first year sounds about right

Posted by Frank G 2011-09-03 21:59|| 2011-09-03 21:59|| Front Page Top

#20 Rather see Petraeus bust the silos and roll the heads of the fiefdoms that have built them.

Posted by OldSpook 2011-09-03 23:42|| 2011-09-03 23:42|| Front Page Top

23:42 OldSpook
23:20 JosephMendiola
23:14 Barbara
23:11 Barbara
23:05 JosephMendiola
22:53 JosephMendiola
22:32 JosephMendiola
22:21 Eohippus Phater7165
22:20 CrazyFool
22:19 CrazyFool
22:14 Pappy
22:11 DarthVader
22:09 Eohippus Phater7165
22:07 Eohippus Phater7165
22:02 Pappy
22:00 JosephMendiola
21:59 Frank G
21:57 JosephMendiola
21:55 Eohippus Phater7165
21:54 Pappy
21:52 Shieldwolf
21:52 Eohippus Phater7165
21:12 Uncle Phester
21:04 trailing wife