<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Law and Policy of Targeted Killing</title>
	<atom:link href="http://harvardnsj.org/2010/06/law-and-policy-of-targeted-killing/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://harvardnsj.org/2010/06/law-and-policy-of-targeted-killing/</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress site</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 15:04:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dylan</title>
		<link>http://harvardnsj.org/2010/06/law-and-policy-of-targeted-killing/#comment-353</link>
		<dc:creator>Dylan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 03:07:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.harvardnsj.com/?p=1248#comment-353</guid>
		<description>I agree with Sanderson.  In many instances an individual targeted by the U.S. is a terrorist leader who has the capability and intent to murder innocent civilians.  I don&#039;t think that terrorism is an &quot;excuse,&quot; because the ends justify the means.  In this instance, the end is saving lives while the means, or how the end was achieved, was taking the life a a terrorist.  There may be collateral damage, but there are only two other choices; one is allowing the terrorist to continue plotting his genocides, which, of course, is a very bad idea.  The other option is to send troops in to kill the terrorist, but this causes more collateral damage than sending in a drone, and it provides the chance that American lives would be taken, as well as surrounding innocent peoples.  However, I thought this was a great article!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with Sanderson.  In many instances an individual targeted by the U.S. is a terrorist leader who has the capability and intent to murder innocent civilians.  I don&#8217;t think that terrorism is an &#8220;excuse,&#8221; because the ends justify the means.  In this instance, the end is saving lives while the means, or how the end was achieved, was taking the life a a terrorist.  There may be collateral damage, but there are only two other choices; one is allowing the terrorist to continue plotting his genocides, which, of course, is a very bad idea.  The other option is to send troops in to kill the terrorist, but this causes more collateral damage than sending in a drone, and it provides the chance that American lives would be taken, as well as surrounding innocent peoples.  However, I thought this was a great article!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JM Sanderson</title>
		<link>http://harvardnsj.org/2010/06/law-and-policy-of-targeted-killing/#comment-300</link>
		<dc:creator>JM Sanderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 Dec 2011 18:30:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.harvardnsj.com/?p=1248#comment-300</guid>
		<description>A lawful killing in a war is not murder. You aren&#039;t really engaging with the real question here: under what conditions can the State lawfully use force outside a &#039;hot&#039; battlefield? Is there a conflict going on? Or an imminent threat to innocent life? Is the target directly participating in the hostilities? Could killing the target (as opposed to, say, capturing him or her) reasonably be said to advance the legitimate military objectives? Were precautions against collateral casualties taken? And so on...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A lawful killing in a war is not murder. You aren&#8217;t really engaging with the real question here: under what conditions can the State lawfully use force outside a &#8216;hot&#8217; battlefield? Is there a conflict going on? Or an imminent threat to innocent life? Is the target directly participating in the hostilities? Could killing the target (as opposed to, say, capturing him or her) reasonably be said to advance the legitimate military objectives? Were precautions against collateral casualties taken? And so on&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: john chaussures</title>
		<link>http://harvardnsj.org/2010/06/law-and-policy-of-targeted-killing/#comment-62</link>
		<dc:creator>john chaussures</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Nov 2011 12:08:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.harvardnsj.com/?p=1248#comment-62</guid>
		<description>Thanks for this article.
In my opinion, this is a murder, nobody could decide alone of who can live or not ...
Terrorism is the excuse of all nowadays ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for this article.<br />
In my opinion, this is a murder, nobody could decide alone of who can live or not &#8230;<br />
Terrorism is the excuse of all nowadays &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: De la légalité des assassinats ciblés &#124; Actu Internationale</title>
		<link>http://harvardnsj.org/2010/06/law-and-policy-of-targeted-killing/#comment-61</link>
		<dc:creator>De la légalité des assassinats ciblés &#124; Actu Internationale</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011 14:28:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.harvardnsj.com/?p=1248#comment-61</guid>
		<description>[...] Israël a utilisé de manière plus ou moins intensive l&#8217;assassinat ciblé au cours des dernières années, notamment pendant la seconde Intifada. Sauf erreur, il n&#8217;existe pas à ce jour de chiffre qui fasse l&#8217;unanimité. Les ONG parlent de plusieurs centaines. La Russie, dans une moindre mesure, a également eu recours aux assassinats ciblés, notamment en Tchétchénie. Plus de détails sur l&#8217;histoire de l&#8217;usage des assassinats ciblés par Israël et les Etats-Unis ici. [...] </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Israël a utilisé de manière plus ou moins intensive l&#8217;assassinat ciblé au cours des dernières années, notamment pendant la seconde Intifada. Sauf erreur, il n&#8217;existe pas à ce jour de chiffre qui fasse l&#8217;unanimité. Les ONG parlent de plusieurs centaines. La Russie, dans une moindre mesure, a également eu recours aux assassinats ciblés, notamment en Tchétchénie. Plus de détails sur l&#8217;histoire de l&#8217;usage des assassinats ciblés par Israël et les Etats-Unis ici. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sandra bulls</title>
		<link>http://harvardnsj.org/2010/06/law-and-policy-of-targeted-killing/#comment-60</link>
		<dc:creator>sandra bulls</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jul 2011 23:47:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.harvardnsj.com/?p=1248#comment-60</guid>
		<description>thanks for that great article!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>thanks for that great article!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joseph</title>
		<link>http://harvardnsj.org/2010/06/law-and-policy-of-targeted-killing/#comment-59</link>
		<dc:creator>Joseph</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 May 2011 23:43:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.harvardnsj.com/?p=1248#comment-59</guid>
		<description>The definition of war , as perscribed by the constitution ....
Section 8 - Powers of Congress

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

Congress declairs war no one else and it doesnt matter  “where  the theater of war is?&quot; the fact of the matter is this Congress never declaired war so the rules dont apply, lets put ourselves in the other shoe, Lets just say we were the tyrents going to other countries and forceing our way of life on others forceing them to take democracy , would they then declare war on us and have the right to just say attack us on our soil by any means they could , (enter 911) Now I am not saying it was right and I am a true red white and blue american but our foreign policy need to be reviewed the people we attack so strongly for their so called oppression on mimic us and ours. 
sorry truth hurts</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The definition of war , as perscribed by the constitution &#8230;.<br />
Section 8 &#8211; Powers of Congress</p>
<p>The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;</p>
<p>To borrow money on the credit of the United States;</p>
<p>To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;</p>
<p>To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;</p>
<p>To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;</p>
<p>To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;</p>
<p>To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;</p>
<p>To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;</p>
<p>To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;</p>
<p>To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;</p>
<p>To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;</p>
<p>To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;</p>
<p>To provide and maintain a Navy;</p>
<p>To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;</p>
<p>To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;</p>
<p>To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;</p>
<p>To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And</p>
<p>To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.</p>
<p>Congress declairs war no one else and it doesnt matter  “where  the theater of war is?&#8221; the fact of the matter is this Congress never declaired war so the rules dont apply, lets put ourselves in the other shoe, Lets just say we were the tyrents going to other countries and forceing our way of life on others forceing them to take democracy , would they then declare war on us and have the right to just say attack us on our soil by any means they could , (enter 911) Now I am not saying it was right and I am a true red white and blue american but our foreign policy need to be reviewed the people we attack so strongly for their so called oppression on mimic us and ours.<br />
sorry truth hurts</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rafael</title>
		<link>http://harvardnsj.org/2010/06/law-and-policy-of-targeted-killing/#comment-58</link>
		<dc:creator>Rafael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 May 2011 21:15:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.harvardnsj.com/?p=1248#comment-58</guid>
		<description>thank you for answering some questions i had in the legality of the capture and/or assassination of Osama Bin Laden. I really was torn on the activities described as an old fashioned Government mandated Hit Job, but the information provided here seems to have clarified this. I truly appreciate your efforts, and now feel that the U.S would not try these same tactics on its own population considering our recent approval of said behavior.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>thank you for answering some questions i had in the legality of the capture and/or assassination of Osama Bin Laden. I really was torn on the activities described as an old fashioned Government mandated Hit Job, but the information provided here seems to have clarified this. I truly appreciate your efforts, and now feel that the U.S would not try these same tactics on its own population considering our recent approval of said behavior.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kathy Kelly: Banning Slaughter &#124; Active Duty Military &#38; Veterans</title>
		<link>http://harvardnsj.org/2010/06/law-and-policy-of-targeted-killing/#comment-57</link>
		<dc:creator>Kathy Kelly: Banning Slaughter &#124; Active Duty Military &#38; Veterans</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Sep 2010 16:00:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.harvardnsj.com/?p=1248#comment-57</guid>
		<description>[...] The United States isn&#8217;t at war with Pakistan. U.S. leaders repeatedly stress that Pakistan is our ally. Nevertheless, U.S. operated drones are used for targeted killing in North and South Waziristan. &#8220;Targeted killing is the most coercive tactic employed in the war on terrorism,&#8221; according to the Harvard Journal. &#8220;Unlike detention or interrogation, it is not designed to capture the terrorist, monitor his or her actions, or extract information; simply put, it is designed to eliminate the terrorist.&#8221; [...] </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The United States isn&#8217;t at war with Pakistan. U.S. leaders repeatedly stress that Pakistan is our ally. Nevertheless, U.S. operated drones are used for targeted killing in North and South Waziristan. &#8220;Targeted killing is the most coercive tactic employed in the war on terrorism,&#8221; according to the Harvard Journal. &#8220;Unlike detention or interrogation, it is not designed to capture the terrorist, monitor his or her actions, or extract information; simply put, it is designed to eliminate the terrorist.&#8221; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jose Amoros</title>
		<link>http://harvardnsj.org/2010/06/law-and-policy-of-targeted-killing/#comment-56</link>
		<dc:creator>Jose Amoros</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Aug 2010 07:37:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.harvardnsj.com/?p=1248#comment-56</guid>
		<description>Maj. McNeil has hit the nail on the head: &quot;The 21st Century questions are “what constitutes a war” and “where is the theater of war?”&quot; For a few years I have been exploring those questions, and how to lead the debate (www.washingtonmarshall.org), I welcome interaction.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maj. McNeil has hit the nail on the head: &#8220;The 21st Century questions are “what constitutes a war” and “where is the theater of war?”&#8221; For a few years I have been exploring those questions, and how to lead the debate (www.washingtonmarshall.org), I welcome interaction.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Major (Retired) Craig McNeil</title>
		<link>http://harvardnsj.org/2010/06/law-and-policy-of-targeted-killing/#comment-55</link>
		<dc:creator>Major (Retired) Craig McNeil</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Aug 2010 18:15:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.harvardnsj.com/?p=1248#comment-55</guid>
		<description>In war, an enemy may be killed at any time so long as he is not wounded and incapable of resisting, in the act of surrendering, or actually being held as a prisoner.

The 21st Century questions are &quot;what constitutes a war&quot; and &quot;where is the theater of war?&quot;

I applaud your efforts to answer, among others, those questions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In war, an enemy may be killed at any time so long as he is not wounded and incapable of resisting, in the act of surrendering, or actually being held as a prisoner.</p>
<p>The 21st Century questions are &#8220;what constitutes a war&#8221; and &#8220;where is the theater of war?&#8221;</p>
<p>I applaud your efforts to answer, among others, those questions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

