Yes

killing people is morally wrong no matter when anyone has done as well as strategically a bad idea and missed opportunity for interogation or anything of the sort

The assassination of someone in a Foreign can bring a lot of bad to the United States, and even war. This can result in bad blood between countries and even hurt those we are allied with.

We came up with rights because we are all human and we should keep the rules the same for everyone in our country and not discriminate.

The United States should not get involved in another country's domestic affairs. Keeping them out is our affair, but tracking them down and killing them is overreach.

That this would be a bad idea. Putting our troops at risk sending them to assasinate someone,which can kead to revoltes from Foreign powers.

The suspect will still be alive and will have acquaintances that’ll contact and still commit terrorist crimes.

nobody has a right to singlehandedly be judge jury and executioner on another person's life, any sentence should be carried out by trial unless absolutely impossible

This would place the US in a bad position, even going as far as initiating war with other countries.

I believe that allowing foreign assassinations opens a dangerous precedent, allowing the us to murder whoever they want by calling them a terrorist

I do not believe it is right for a country to inflict its own will on another country just for its own gain.

Without proper evidence, it is pointless to raise the rates of assassinations done by our country. We spend plenty on military intelligence, effort, and weaponry.

what counts as a terrorist? someone who attacks america, or someone who's part of an actual terrorist group

If we do not remove these people, what's the chance of a suicide bombing happening, another 9/11, another Afghanistan issue. IF someone is seen as a threat they just got to go, that's how it is.

We do not have a right to play judge, jury and executioner at anytime. Especially when its not even in our own country.

You can't charge a crime or kill someone for being suspected of doing the crime in the future. doesn't make sense to me

unless you have concrete, solid evidence that someone IS a terrorist, no action should be taken. not if their suspected, if they ARE.

When discussing foreign assassination, it's crucial to consider the ethical implications and potential consequences. It might be helpful to research different perspectives and gather evidence to support your argument. We also want to focus on promoting understanding.

No, they shouldnt. France has No right to assasianate possible Terrrorists in other countries. Let that country deal with their own people.

The U.S. is the only country I know that openly assassinates Foreign leaders. i.e. Sadam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden.

In my view, we need to stop meddling in other's wars. If American troops are harmed, it's a different story. WE went to the middle east, they didn't come to us.

Every human has its right to live. Even if they have committed a serious crime, they should be punished in a different way.

We assassinate people not for the liberty or freedom of those countries, but simply to expand US Imperialism.

what counts as a terrorist someone who attacks america, or someone who's part of an actual terrorist group

They are still human! Obviously, we should take action, but that action should not be killing. Even torture is better than that. Instead, they should be in prison.

Assassination on foreign soil would be a breech of international sovereignty, and as we are the protectors of the rules-based international order, it is our obligation as Americans to ensure we lead by example unless no other option presents itself.

Terrorists also target allied countries, killing them is doing a service to the world not only americans.

Suspected terrorists pose a threat to our society and have the potential to harm people around them. They must be assassinated before they commit more crimes that would seriously hurt other people, including themselves.

that you're condoning non-justified actions against foreign people and can risk the idea of a political/or public issue.

I am in the middle because they can save others but many innocent citizens from other countries can be killed for your peace.

They might not be what we think they are. Everyone should have the right to a fair trial in court simply because of this. You might kill an innocent civilian or something, and then you have to put in all of the effort to retry and cover it up, and that's not mentioning the how inhumane it is.

You shouldn't just assassinate people if they are only a suspect. You don't know if they are actually guilty.

Yes, they should put an end to any suspects just to make sure there is a chance where nothing will happen.

Our nation should not be going and killing people, regardless who they are, in other countries. They have their own governments and military for a reason.

If people like Osama get to kill thousands and get to live the rest of his life we live in a bad world.

The country we reside in is based on the concept of freedom and rights of human kind. If you agree to remove those rights from others it undermines your own value.

Violates the Checks and Balances system. The President and his administration needs a variety of opinions before making such a delicate action, which could send the country into a fatal, nuclear war.

It is so wrong to say such things; how could they be a suspect, by their race, or their clothing? Will it not make every foreigner who looks like them suspicious?