....the GOP is about al Awlaki for this reason and how up in arms they are about Bergdahl for the opposite reason.

Spinning like a top.

They'll never get it, and they didn't care about al Awlaki until they decided his death was a tool to go after Obama. He had quite a life:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki#Later_life.2C_and_ties_to_terrorism

Bergdahl is just one of their Benghazis. They'd blame Obama for not getting him. When PBO got him, now it's a bad thing. Because... ODS.

the torture of foreign nationals but a memo justifying killing a US citizen doesn't seem a big deal.

For why it was okay to kill his teenage son!

this comes out at a time when we are going to drone strike in Iraq.

funny how that is.

"The fact that the operation occurs in a new location might alter the way in which the military must apply
the relevant principles of the Jaws of war-for example, requiring greater care in some locations in order to abide by
the principles of distinction and proportionality that protect civilians from the use of military force. But that
possible distinction should not affect the question of whether the laws of war govern the conflict in that new location
in the ftrst instance."

Thanks for making that crystal clear!!

to authorities it should be legal.

Al Awlaki could always have gone to the nearest US embassy and asked for a lawyer to represent him. Instead, he continued his illegal activities and posed a threat to society.

US citizens are killed by cops every day when they refuse to drop their weapons and allow themselves to be arrested. This is the same situation in my opinion.

In some corners of DU, there is a lot of sympathy and support for Islamic terrorists but not many complain about people subjected to deadly force by cops in cities and towns right here in the USA.

[[blockquote
In some corners of DU, there is a lot of sympathy and support for Islamic terrorists but not many complain about people subjected to deadly force by cops in cities and towns right here in the USA.

I would dispute both those claims. I've seen few posters here advocate "sympathy and support for Islamic terrorists" but I regularly see people here complain about police using deadly force.

Odd that our experience here would be so dramatically different.

You know, the ones who actually massacre Muslims. So anything short of that looks like hug a mullah appeasement to him.

His posts about the missing airplane were a riot- he managed to blame every Muslim nation from Pakistan to Somalia. He'd have blamed Dearborn, MI if it stayed in the news much longer.

your sympathies compell you to see any and every anti-terrorist statement as Islamophobia.

The world is not against muslims - the world hates terrorism and a vast majority of terrorism is caused by people who happen to be muslims under a misguided notion that Islam requires them to do so.

The fact that mainstream and peaceful muslims don't speak out loudly against terrorism is not very helpful either.

Your accusation that hindu nationalists massacre muslims is patently false and an extreme hyperbole.

Name misspelled and all. Such an expert.... this should be fun.