so imminent threat doesnt mean imminent.
There's a difference between someone who is actively taking up arms and someone who HAS done something.
I see it as extremely unconstitutional and should be fought against on every level.
Yes....as I said, the definition of imminent is hazy. They want to define it as an overall threat. Like, we're at war with AQ (undeclared, non-conventional), so we can hit their soldiers with impunity.
If you're born in the US, leave to join a group that wants to destroy us, I'm not big on extending them Constitutional protections.
Also, there's a practical aspect to consider. How do you bring them to justice? Do you try and go in, kill the 5 or so non-citizens, and attempt to take the one citizen alive? This is just one scenario to consider.