Thank you for the kind words. In answer to your questions.

from sw
1. Are you sure that "Handbook on the Law of Naval Operations" applied to this mission? Does the law follow the people (SEALs) or does the location of action determine the governing law?
In default of having the actual "mission order" (more than one document, I'd expect; and a bunch of annexes) and the subsidiary "commander's guidance and intent", we of lower pay grades have to be satisfied with what we can reach: Laws of War as accepted by the US; 2001 AUMF as interpreted (primarily by the DC Circuit); JCS SROEs (the unclassified open-source); and the respective service handbooks on Operational Law (Navy being as good as any under the present circumstances).

from sw
2. I'm lazy. Could you throw up the definitions of "lawful combatant" and and "unlawful combatant" as used in the AUMF?
I'm not lazy, but I am busy. So, negat. I'm not asking for "sir, I'll find out, sir"; but I do request the "I'll find out" from you.

I've many posts dealing with the AUMF and its relevance to "kill or capture" missions - all of the Gitmo detainments are based on the same basic legal analysis. Start with this post in War Crimes, Gitmo Update, and read through all the court opinions I cite, as you move to the end of the page.

Then, after understanding the Laws of War as decided by the DC Circuit, do an SWC Advanced Search on AUMF (as key word) and jmm99 (as member). I got 77 posts just now.

You'll learn nothing if I feed you a bowl of Pablum (my baby food; it's awful). My purpose here is not to display my own knowledge (such as it is or is not), but to educate others. Do some work.

Now, I have to run and have a PM conversation with a friend.

Regards

Mike