Just-cause theorists grant only the just warrior the right to kill

Evidence

But the offensive is also and perhaps above all pushing into the field of legal theory. “Warfare without risk,” in which the drone is probably the most effective instrument, critically undermines the meta-legal principles that underpin the right to kill in war. Against a background of fundamental destabilization such as this, formulas for redefining a sovereign power over life and death are being introduced. The aim is to accommodate the right to “targeted assassination” even if, in the process, the rights typically associated with being in armed conflict go up in smoke. — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 128 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: The combatant-to-militant shift expands the right to kill indefinitely; Unilateral drone killing makes the legal right to kill merely formal. — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 525; Radical protection from death transforms war into one-sided slaughter or hunting (+2 more)

Related

• Unilateral drone killing makes the legal right to kill merely formal. (similarity 0.91)
• Risk-free warfare erodes the legal principles justifying the right to kill in war. (similarity 0.89)
• Accepted zero-risk killing would collapse just war theory (similarity 0.87)
• Drone warfare leaves the mutual right to kill formally intact but substantively empty. (similarity 0.86)
• The drone made warfare absolutely unilateral, killing without risk of being killed (similarity 0.85)
• Just-war theorists reject prioritizing own soldiers’ safety over enemy civilians’ safety. (similarity 0.84)
• The combatant-to-militant shift expands the right to kill indefinitely (similarity 0.84)
• Legal immunity for wartime killing presupposes that the right to kill is mutual. (similarity 0.84)
• Outlawed combatants lose all incentive to obey war’s rules (similarity 0.84)
• Radical protection from death transforms war into one-sided slaughter or hunting (similarity 0.83)
• Some advocates propose a new legal regime of unconstrained lethal self-defense (similarity 0.83)
• Laws of war should grant equal right to fight, not equal arms (similarity 0.83)
• A legal hybrid of war and policing grants a global license to kill (similarity 0.83)
• Armed drones make killing a priori one-directional, converting combat into slaughter. (similarity 0.82)
• Remote killing free from retaliation creates a moral hazard problem (similarity 0.82)

Broader Connections

• Risk-free warfare erodes the legal principles justifying the right to kill in war. #expands (0.60) — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 128
• Radical protection from death transforms war into one-sided slaughter or hunting #expands (0.55)
• Unilateral drone killing makes the legal right to kill merely formal. #expands (0.50) — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 525
• Remote killing free from retaliation creates a moral hazard problem #expands (0.50)