Was it wrong to kill a jihadist if he also had U.S. citizenship?

The discussion on the killing of Anwar Al-Awlaki continues.

UPDATE: James P. has just added this comment to the thread, with information I didn’t know about. He writes:

Your readers are exercised about the issue of Awlaki’s citizenship. They are ignoring a number of pertinent additional facts: (1) He was not merely a rabble-rouser but had an operational role in planning and directing terror attacks. (2) Yemeni security forces made a two-year effort to capture him, but failed. (3) The U.S. government repeatedly invited him to surrender and assured him he would receive due process if he did so, but he publicly and repeatedly stated he would never surrender (see this).

In short, the government did not kill Awlaki on a “whim” when he was innocently standing on a corner in an American city. They killed him after he refused to surrender and while he was actively planning to kill more Americans. Any government that did not kill him under such circumstances would be completely worthless and would have failed in its basic duty to protect American citizens.

UPDATE: Ron Paul has written an op-ed on the Awlaki killing, and I reply.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at October 03, 2011 08:58 AM | Send