No, I said a terrorist would know those things. Someone being targeted as a probable terrorist will be a terrorist some portion of the time, and someone completely ignorant of why they might be about to be killed - quite possibly ignorant that their home has been relabeled a war zone - the rest of the time. The second won’t have a chance to surrender or correct the mistake. They will simply be blown up one day by a robot plane because some army considered it likely enough in their interest.
You keep talking past the existence of those people. All the parallels you’ve made, talking about the rights of soldiers and what al Qaeda could do and so on, are only about actual terrorists. Or you’ve argued that there will not be many, that there because there are reasons not to target innocent people, the US - you know, the country that somehow allowed the abuses at Abu Ghraib for so long - would not allow that to happen. Well, there will still be some, and I think it is clear more often than you are crediting.
So what do you think of the case of these accidentally targeted innocents? Do you think it’s compatible with the right to due process, or do you actually anyone ever has a right to a trial? What do you think it is for, and when do you think it applies? Because in all you’ve written, I see lots about how armies have the right to make preemptive strikes and such, and nothing about what rights you think other people have that need respecting.
