[Bren]

Originally Posted by Dexters

You're right and you have a great idea there.

Take the Colorado movie shooter. Why go through all that trouble with charging and trying him.

Put him on a plane to Yemen, drone him, and tell people he was working with the enemy. Who would doubt it? His actions sure looked like a terrorist.

That is both silly and unrelated to what I said.

The difference is one was found in a place and condition where we could capture him and one was not.

Pretty much the opposite of what you said.

Like the terrorists - if the Colorado shooter was on a battlefield and gave up, as he did in Colorado, he'd have been captured, like Lindh. If he did not give up and couldn't be captured, he'd have been killed like Al Alwaki. In his case, deadly force would be legal (at least constitutionally, don't know about Co. state law) even if he was running away.

[Dexters]

Originally Posted by Bren

That is both silly and unrelated to what I said.

How so?

[Bren]

Originally Posted by Dexters

How so?

If you read more than the first sentence of the post, it is explained very simply. In fact, the remark you responded to was a pretty clear explanation of the same thing.

[Dexters]

Originally Posted by Dexters

You're right and you have a great idea there.

Take the Colorado movie shooter. Why go through all that trouble with charging and trying him.

Put him on a plane to Yemen, drone him, and tell people he was working with the enemy. Who would doubt it? His actions sure looked like a terrorist.

Originally Posted by Bren

T



Pretty much the opposite of what you said.

Don't quote my previous posts except for the one above.

You changed my mind. And I agree with you

"You're right and you have a great idea there." Tells you that.

So, again.

"How so?"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bren View Post

That is both silly and unrelated to what I said.

[Dexters]

deleted