Really? Seems exactly like the kind of thing the US loves to do, to beat the shit out of a defenceless opponent.
Point taken.
Reminds me was reading more of
Justice for Some I mentioned earlier today.
She gets onto international law and extra judicial killings/ assassination by a state.
Israel in early 2000s took out a senior Hamas leader with a helicopter gunship. Blowing up the car he was in.
This at time caused uproar.
As it was a state doing an extra judicial killing. Publicly not even trying to hide it.
In international law Israel was the occupying power and if terrorism took place it was supposed to treat it as a policing matter.
Arrest trial etc. As behoves a western democratic state.
To cut a long story short 9/11 meant USA got very interested in these extra judicial killings. And worked with Israel to give justification of them.
Now as the author of the book says this counts as customary practise.
The argument now is the number of civilians to be killed when an extra judicial assassination takes place. Not that extra judicial killing is wrong.
This is how customary international law/ accepted practice changes over time.
Both US and Israel regard themselves as western democratic states not like the authoritarian states like Iran and Russia.
In the book she points out most extra judicial assassination were done during Obama time.
Sorry to digress. But what you said reminded me of what I read today.
www.independent.co.uk
novaramedia.com
www.declassifieduk.org
