The killing of Anwar al-Awlaki on Friday in Yemen by American drones is being questioned as to its constitutionality. An American was killed without the benefit of a trial.
Al-Awlaki was an American by reason of birth on American soil. Is an American committed to Jihad really an American? One could make the argument that such a person is an American traitor and because of his responsibility in the taking of American lives and his admitted guilt thereof he convicted himself without the formality of a trial. I’m sure it is not quite that simple and the argument over the constitutionality of last Friday’s action will go on ad infinitum.
Before anyone is tempted to raise his voice in anger or shed any tears over the killing of an Anwar al-Awlaki , let them consider the loss of American lives in Afghanistan and Iraq, the loss of American lives on 9/11, the loss of lives at Fort Hood. Muslim extremists are dedicated to Jihad and the taking of American lives. They have loyalty only to a bloody version of their religion. They have no loyalty to a nation. If an American life is taken by our counter terrorism efforts as in the case of al-Awlaki, let's remember that it was the life of a practising Jihadist not a practising American.
Perhaps it would help if Washington formally clarifies what is meant by the War on Terror and to what extent we are prepared to go in order to protect our national security. Both the President and Congress need to formally approve such a declaration. Any war worth fighting warrants a Declaration of War.