So it's OK to assassinate world heads-of-state now, right?

[DJ Synikus Makisimus]

I mean, as long as it's done by another head-of-state, or group of heads-of-state. Or a pair of them, in our present example. It had been considered bad form to "take out" such people in the past, occasionally even a war crime, but apparently that's changed. At least that's how I read it. It's precedent now.

And if one nation can do it, surely others will follow. There's probably no such thing as a war crime anymore either. One can only imagine the broader implications.

[RockRaven]

1. And not just current, but also former.

Maybe something to remember in three years...

[Klarkashton]

2. Only if the country hasn't got any nukes.

Otherwise it's hands off.

[Dave Bowman]

3. It was OK for Saddam Hussein and there were drone murders around the world so that's not something new. Unfortunately.

[DJ Synikus Makisimus]

5. They at least pretended to put Saddam on trial before hanging him.

That maintained a certain facade of jurisprudence. If you recall, Saddam was imprisoned from 13 December 2003 until his execution on 30 December 2006; during which time he gardened and developed a taste for Nacho Cheese Doritos™,

Drone strikes, to my knowledge, have not been directed (or at least have not been reported as having been directed) against heads-of-state.

So yeah, our new reality is a "wrinkle."

[Dave Bowman]

10. You're right about the drones, the U.S mostly used them to kill people who were considered terrorists, including

U.S citizens. A good example is Abdulrahman Anwar al-Awlaki (August 26, 1995 – October 14, 2011) who was a 16-year-old United States citizen who was killed by a U.S. drone strike in Yemen. He was the son of Anwar al-Awlaki.

[DJ Synikus Makisimus]

12. Yup. His dad, the target, was a US citizen too.

Dude was born in New Mexico, the son in Colorado. The event happened during the Obama administration and is a clear example of summary execution, whether one thinks it justified or not. Thing is that once a precedent is established, someone is likely to take it further, which is kinda the point of the original post.

[buzzycrumbhunger]

4. Welp...

Iran promised to attack ours—not the people, just the administration—but I suppose we can’t hang our hats on such a nebulous promise…

[Dave Bowman]

11. They should shoot Epstein Files with their canons. (that would make a great cartoon).

[Norbert]

6. If I were Carney I would beef up security

And be ready to intercept missiles. Seriously. We have a madman as president.

[progressoid]

7. It's been precedent for quite a while.

But we used to be a lot more clandestine about it.

[DJ Synikus Makisimus]

9. True. I should have said "overt assassination."

Trujillo, Diem and Lumumba being prime examples. One difference, other than the covert aspect, is that those three were done in by proxies rather than targeted military action.

Also, it wasn't exactly considered OK for the aforementioned three. If it had been, the would not have been covert. It's taken years to begin to untangle the assassination attempts by the incompetent bunch that tried to kill Castro (see Mafia Spies by Thomas Maier, for example) with CIA assistance. With this one, it's "boom, there it is."

Trump never was subtle. Neither is Bibi.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

8. .