King of the Strawmen
You obviously do not know what that means.
he was most certainly not innocent
Not innocent of what exactly? How did you determine which laws he broke and how he broke them?
and you don't need a trial to demonstrate that
You obviously do not know what a trial is. And you obviously do not know what the 6th amendment to the constitution is.
He was an admitted member of Al Qaeda
Not illegal.
had called for war on the U.S.
Might be illegal, depends though.
had counseled those who committed acts of war against the U.S.
Depends on what he did. Do you have facts and evidence to support your allegation?
and was involved in the planning and executing of attacks on the U.S.
Which attacks?
he was fairly targeted as any belligerent in a war can be.
According to which convention regarding warfare?
ex-pats fighting for the Germans in WWII were fairly targeted
Under similar circumstances? Please list names and dates and how the circumstances are similar.
had Osama bin Laden been a U.S. citizen he could have been fairly targeted
How was he like Bin Laden? Please list all of the attacks on American soil that killed thousands of Americans that he directly helped carry out.
and if any U.S. citizens have joined up with ISIS they can be fairly targeted
Please list the date where the USA formally declared war against ISIS.
This comment is especially funny given the fact that your taking advantage of your right to free speech to criticize the government with your comment.
You obviously do not understand sarcasm. Your misunderstanding has lead you to passionately defend my assertion, yet your tone of disagreement is very awkward.
he was targeted for making war
Please list details of all the war he made that was not speech.
and expect no consequences for your actions
I am not arguing that there should not have been any consequences. I am arguing that there is a constitutional right to a process regarding the consequences that was denied to this citizen.
You have presented a false representation of my argument. If you knew what a straw man (notice how I managed to spell it right) argument was, you would have recognized it.
and yet, none of them are targeted in drone strikes
And if your mother didn’t drink while pregnant, you would not have to suffer the indignities that you do. So what.
and I know you don't want to do that, so I guess it made more sense for you to just build a quick Strawman and blast away at that, rather than the actual argument. Nicely done.
You just completely invented a scenario based entirely on your own baseless assumptions, put me in that scenario and then criticized me for doing something you imagined I did. If you want to have an argument with yourself, I would love to leave and let you do that. Because like this argument, you cannot win.
Actually, most people believe the way that he (and I) do
For someone who pretends to know one logical fallacy, you sure do use a lot of them. This is a new one. Can you guess which one it is?
mostly exists among the uninformed 17 year-old neckbeard population on Reddit
OK, we get it. You are among the informed 17 year old Reddit neckbeards.
because approaching the argument honestly
You entire argument has no facts, many and differing logical fallacies, and you demonstrate that you do not understand the basic concepts being discussed.
advocating for your asinine world view
The rule of law is an asinine world view.
Look, I get it. You are an angsty, contrarian teenager who derives self-worth from being “edgy”. Assuming your really are not developmentally disabled, you might grow out of this. But until you do, you need to stop and think before you behave like this. Because it makes you look retarded.
You have no actual facts to present, so do not bother trying. Do not reply. I will not read it because you already crammed a lot of stupidity in to one post and I have met my monthly quota for bullshit with your one post.