Yamamoto was a valid military target.
Yamamoto was a valid military target.
I seem to recall from my history lessons in high school that there was a quaint old document created called a "Declaration of War", passed by the Congress on December 8, 1941. After that declaration, any member of Japan's military was a legitimate target for attack.
He was. "Assassination" is arguably more of a term of art than anything else. Even the Church Commission, concluded that the intentional targeting of a plainly military leader during armed conflict was legal even in the face of prohibition of assassination. And, EO 12333 doesn't preclude targeted killing in an armed conflict though it does prohibit political assassination.
I think the word assassination is valid for the planned killing of any person of power and notoriety. This isn’t a legal document. I am not a lawyer.
I think the word is generally, and aptly, descriptive in this case.