Now that Americans are among targets, an overdue debate begins

I DON’T often agree with John E. Sununu, but his Feb. 19 op-ed, “For Obama, a license to kill,” made many good points.

Only now that four US citizens have been targeted has the debate intensified. 

The issue is whether the president has the legal and ethical right to identify, target, and execute US citizens who he and his support staff have decided are enemies of the state. It is only now feeling more real, given that someon targeted could be “one of our own.”


What disturbs me is that the debate was relatively silent when we thought we were only dealing with foreign insurgents. There were few questions regarding the lack of transparency, the vague definition of imminent threat, and tolerance for “collateral damage.” 

Get Arguable in your inbox:
Jeff Jacoby on everything from politics to pet peeves to the passions of the day.
Thank you for signing up! Sign up for more newsletters here

Does it really matter if these targets are US citizens or not? The technology and the policy is new and, I believe, deeply disturbing.

Mark Golden