Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: skinowski who wrote (494712)	7/8/2012 9:00:32 AM
From: unclewest	10 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793991

So, if an al Qaeda fighter, who is under arrest, throws a piece of concrete at you, and then jumps you, trying to take away your gun -- you are not allowed to defend yourself? To say that this logic sounds weak would be an obscene understatement. When a recognized enemy soldier attacks a US Army Infantry soldier, killing that enemy has always been a legitimate option. It is so stated in the US Army Infantry mission which is to close with, kill, and destroy the enemy. It goes beyond that. We attack and kill enemy soldiers who are not even attacking us. IMO this ruling should put Obama's UAV program in criminal courts. Obama singles out those suspects who are to be killed from a DC office. He doesn't even refer to them as enemy soldiers. They are merely suspects.