In a “Washington Post” story today it was reported that under President Obama there are more targeted killings than captures in counter-terrorism efforts. Senator Bond (R, Mo) says: “Over a year after taking office, the administration has still failed to answer the hard questions about what to do if we have the opportunity to capture and detain a terrorist overseas, which has made our terror-fighters reluctant to capture and left our allies confused.”
I’m confused too. If terrorism is going to be treated by this administration as a crime rather than an act of war, and if those captured are going to be treated as criminals rather than enemy combatants, then isn’t it a crime, the crime of murder, to just kill them without a trial? Let me get this straight. We kill them so that we don’t have to worry about Mirandizing them and finding a place to hold a trial if we capture them?
How long can we maintain this kind of cognitive dissonance? If the Left wants to try G.W. Bush for war crimes, does that mean we would try President Obama for murder?