Drone strike on U.S. citizen raises alarming questions

A few weeks ago, a U.S. drone strike in rural Yemen killed several members of al-Qaida, including an English speaking mid-level propagandist who's been implicated in inspiring several "lone wolf" style terrorist attacks on American soil in recent years and the English-speaking editor of "Inspire," al-Qaida's English language magazine. While drone strikes occur on several different continents every week, this one was different. This strike killed Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan, both American citizens.

There are pros and cons to the drone strikes being carried out on several different continents by the Obama administration. The goal of these strikes, to cripple terrorist networks and prevent large-scale operations like the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, seems to be moral and just. It's hard to argue against going after al-Qaida and their peers, because of the pain and death they've wrought throughout the world. The U.S. has an obligation to protect its citizens against these vile acts, and prevent these attacks from destroying infrastructure, the economy and lives. There are consequences, however, to waging war around the world. The strikes, which frequently kill civilians, are used by groups like al-Qaida and the Taliban for propaganda to recruit the next wave of jihadists. Resentment continues to grow in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia as a result of these strikes, where it can least be afforded. The killing of an American citizen only complicates the issue further.

Make no mistake, al-Awlaki and Khan were not victims. Al-Awlaki recruited young people and misguided followers to commit acts of violence against scores of innocent civilians. He is an example of the worst humanity has to offer. Devising plans to blow-up airliners and kill innocent people walking around county fairs, as they had proposed in an English-language al-Qaida publication, is despicable in the strongest sense of the word. They both were guilty of extreme treason, had they been charged.

The problem lies, however, in that they were never charged with anything. Al-Awlaki was added to a CIA's "kill-or-capture" list in April 2010, when President Obama authorized targeting him. This was met with lawsuits and protest from human rights organizations, as an American citizen had never been targeted for assassination before. The Obama administration argued that it would be difficult to bring al-Awlaki in alive, therefore justifying placing him on the list.

The killings of al-Awlaki and Khan are a complicated issue. To say otherwise is to not think about the circumstances. Would it have been worth risking the lives of American servicemen and women to get al-Awlaki and bring him to justice? What about the precedent the Obama administration has set, killing an American citizen with an unmanned drone in a sovereign country? If one American citizen can be killed like that, can others? What if they live in this country? How comfortable are we, as a nation, with our president exerting that much power? Despite our feelings on the War on Terror, serious questions need to be asked.

Michael Canfield can be reached by email at canfield.record@live.com.