Is there ever a good reason to allow the killing of American citizens without due process?

Congressional intelligence committee members are going to find out today how the Justice Department has rationalized the killing of Americans by drone strike without due process. The Obama administration has authorized the release of a classified report that goes into detail about how DoJ arrived at their controversial conclusions on not only drone strikes, but rendition and certain "enhanced interrogation techniques."

Washington Post:

Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., a committee member who had pressed the administration to provide the opinion, left open the possibility he might still try to block Brennan's nomination. He said turning over the opinion was a good first step.
"I'm committed to making sure that we get all the facts," Wyden said on NBC's "Today" show. "Early this morning, I'm going to be going in to read the opinion. We'll go from there."
Wyden said "there are still substantial questions" about how the administration justifies and plans drone strikes. "The Founding Fathers thought the president should have significant power in the national security arena. But there have to be checks and balances," Wyden said. "You can't just skirt those checks and balances if you think it's inconvenient."
An unclassified memo leaked this week says it is legal for the government to kill U.S. citizens abroad if it believes they are senior al-Qaida leaders continually engaged in operations aimed at killing Americans, even if there is no evidence of a specific imminent attack.
That unclassified memo is based on classified advice from the Office of Legal Counsel that is being made available to the intelligence committees' members, the official said. The official was not authorized to speak publicly about the decision and requested anonymity.

You wouldn't hesitate to kill a fellow American if you were facing him on a battlefield.

SOME HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE:

* The Killing of Confederate Soldiers during the Civil War. Were they considered American Citizens then, or fighters from another country?

* There were a few instances in World War II where German American citizens, fighting for the Nazis were killed by American troops. Nobody was concerned then about whether the enemy’s constitutional rights had been respected.

Is there EVER a good reason?

Sure -

On the battlefield fighting against the US

When in the midst of any crime from treason to threatening the life of another.

Never for any political or ideological reason. Treason ONLY when it is in the act of being carried out and lethal force must be used.

I’m more worried about the use of drones over U.S. soil.

Just look at all those red light and speed cameras. Pretty soon they’ll be using drones to send you tickets for not wearing your seat belt.

More seriously, considering how the FBI overreacted a bit in arresting the Michigan Militia folks, imagine had they decided to perform a drone strike instead?

I’d say something like that is within the realm of possibility. After all, those no-knock warrant situations are very dangerous for the officers involved.

Killing someone on the battlefield is one thing. Killing them because you suspect they may be plotting something is a whole other ball game.

After all, we’re now one step away from doing this here in America. Think about it. The Hutaree were accused of plotting against America and all were acquitted.

A drone strike could have saved government of all the embarrassment of getting caught setting up American militia members.

There were a few instances in World War II where German American citizens, fighting for the Nazis were killed by American troops. Nobody was concerned then about whether the enemy’s constitutional rights had been respected.

Nobody was checking passports either. In combat/warfare all enemies on the field are fair game because of imminent danger and self defense.

What is the issue being discussed is kill lists targeting US citizens -joy stick killings in non combat areas where the only imminent danger is the loss of a drone.

I can accept executions as long as those executed are provided some form of due process that extends beyond just the Executive branch. I as well see no reason the enemy list should not be published like a most wanted list and I would even go so far as keeping score on who is killed and who remains at large. IF all is really above board then there is no reason to hide this US citizen kill list from the public to scrutinize or our enemies to fear.

In both of those examples, it was clearly a war zone, and it was man-to-man combat, so that’s one obvious difference of many that have been brought up in this discussion.

Here’s one that isn’t making the rounds yet: What if China, for example, gets a fleet of drones and decides to do the same thing, ‘cuz hey, the US says there’s no problem, right? How cool would any of us be with any number of drones from any number of countries raining down bombs on any number of people in any number of countries?

In both the cases you cited, those American citizens were part of an organized opposing force in the uniforms of an enemy power.

What Obama just gave himself is the power to target any American at any time anywhere who is deemed to be potentially involved in a future terror attack operation.

This... remember how in 2009, when the Tea Party came about, this administration determined libertarians, veterans and pro-lifers to be “potential extremists (read: Terrorists).”

Anyone who’s not alarmed by this isn’t paying attention.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.