The definition of due process states "a fundamental, constitutional guarantee that all legal proceedings will be fair and that one will be given notice of the proceedings and an opportunity to be heard before the government acts to take away one's life, liberty, or property. Also, a constitutional guarantee that a law shall not be unreasonable.Due process and targeted killings are a debated topic. My feeling towards it is simple. I don't believe terrorists/targets should have due process applied. They are not citizens of the United States, so why should they be able to benefit from the rights that Americans do? This may seem cynical to some people, but it's what I believe.
As far as deciding whether or not soldiers can hit a target, evaluate the danger of the target. Is the target commiting an act of violence, planning to commit an act or violence or already commited an act of violence? I do not believe that soldiers can just perform raids on anyone, however, I also don't think there needs to be so many guidelines to follow. If there is evidence that supports that the target has acted violenty towards the United States, then the assault is justified. The enemy has no rules of engagement, why should we?
Many do argue that we should have rules of engagement because we (read the US or Western democracy) hold ourselves to a higher standard. We are not simply fighting to save lives (though this is part of it) but also to save lives while preserving the freedoms that we hold dear. Losing them, these people would say, in pursuit of mere security means that al Qaeda wins no matter what.
ReplyDeleteIn other words, should we really make security the first and foremost goal when we are fighting the War on Terror?
I agree with Cody's argument that terrorist targets should not be able to have due process applied. These are not U.S. citizens and they are clearly against the United States. At the same time, I think we should be more selective with the individuals we kill through targeted killing. It might be more beneficial for the War on Terror to capture these individuals than to just kill them right away.
ReplyDeleteI highly disagree that terrorists shouldn't be allowed due process. As a world leader, we should operate within our own laws towards our enemies. If we don't give our best effort to extend due process to our enemies, we are no better than them. Then the slippery slope of ethics starts to form.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the due process does not apply to terrorist. However, I do not think we should be so swift in trying to kill these individuals. When we use targeted killings we eliminate potential information that we could have had if we were to capture and interrogate them.
ReplyDeleteI agree that we should not be so quick to decide to kill a target. I think interrogating them for information is a much better plan. However, the high value targets that are extreme terrorist wanting to hurt the U.S.A by any means are going to be much more difficult to give up any information. Targeted killing or interrogating and then incarcerated; it doesn't matter to me. As long as they aren't able to harm Americans.
ReplyDelete