[phasma proeliator]

So you would proport only a strict "fire if fired upon" stance?

If I am understanding your position and your statement - then no individual enemy should be engaged until they have fired upon (or acted agressively) toward us?

Are you being so individualistic as to think that there were German (or japanese, or chinese, or Korean, or Somalian)soldiers who should not have been killed because they had never fired a shot of agression?

[Persuasion]

If there was enought reasonable evidence to support a claim that a muslim had plotted to cause harm to an innocent American or American friend, fine.

But if there is absolutely no evidence. If that muslim
has never in his life been guilty of any such plot,
then there is absolutely no reason to kill him.

The same applies to any other person. If there is
reason enough to suspect him, fine. Put him through
a trial or tribunal. Kill him if it's necessary. But
if it is not and there is nothing to suggest he
has ever been involved in any plot, for goodness sake,
he has the right to life.