From: Denver Colorado
Here is a pretty definitive essay on the legality of the OBL strike (written by a law professor):
It includes this summary:
So, to say what the US Attorney General should have said : It is
- okay to enter a country that is “unable or unwilling,”
- okay to use lethal force,
- okay to attack without warning,
- okay to attack an unarmed, unthreatening, but still lawful target,
- okay to attack without inviting surrender,
- okay to press the attack with lethal force and without pause, the exception being if the target were to succeed in completing the act of surrender — which, in this case, is likely to be never, because there will not be enough time, and
- okay not to give the target time to make an attempt at surrender, even if inclined or even attempting, by pausing or slowing the attack.
Note that he also talks about "completion" of a surrender and how that is different than someone merely being unarmed or throwing up their hands or waving a white flag.
Yes, this is the US enterpetation. NOT the Opinion of the World however.
This is because the UN has made it crystal clare, that there are no such thing as "war on Terror". Terrorism is by International law considered criminal activery, not an act of war.
> Fortunately, Sir, the United Nation's opinion - fine organization that it may be - seems not to have stopped us from giving Mr. bin Laden the good old double tap.
This means shooting a unarmed individual, on forigen soil is by Pakestani law considered Murder. and by international law considered "Act of Agression" and "Supression of Civil and Human Rights and a serius thret to a individuals freedom"
> It would seem that Seal Team Six - and the other supporting Services involved, were not particularly concerned with what the Pakastani's thought - that would be my take, Sir.
> Perhaps it would be appropriate if the rest of Mr. bin Laden's on site entourage should give gratitude that they were not on The List?
It basically makes the entire rapport useless as it is made under the "US Point of Wiev" and thus has no mirit or value when looking on the facts from the perspective used by the United Nations or Rome Statue of International Criminals Court.
> I would respectfully submit, Sir, that it appears - at least as of last Monday, that most of the fine Citizens of the USA (not to mention other good people in foreign lands - just a guess) did not give a rat's behind about the UN or Rome Statute of International whosaida whatsa Court's opinion.
Your Nation just murdered a criminal on forigen soil, I hope you are proud.
> Beyond measure, Sir.
I am actually happy you did it because it is making it evan more clare what you are capable of doing, and it is showing the world what kind of a thret you actually are to the world society. I hope it gives Al-Queda a serius boost in manpower and contributers! I am actually Neutral in the conflict between you and them,
> Let us hope, for your sake, that you remain so, Sir. We do not forget, and have a rather long reach.
but after your last stunt here I am actually starting to lean in favour of them,
> I would prefer to opine - "a first class example of operational planning and how to do it right".
I look forward to see their next move...
> In the Not So Distant Future, one would hope. No doubt there are a number of Al Q leaders who have recently changed residence and are not sleeping as well as they used to. Sir.
Well - Gents - will you look at this, good old polite Mac actually got a burr under his saddle.