Is it Legal to Murder women and children w/. discrimination, as opposed to indiscriminately

Recently, two Elite members, Dr. Big Al (enthusiastic interpreter of the theorem of oil spill age dating) and Dr. Georgette (convinced interpreter of dirt aging theorem) both submitted unsuccessful prize contest entries, hoping to identify the United States War Cabinet Secretary who proclaimed: "Sometimes men need to die, willingly" to protect the homeland.

So, in the spirit of this Season of Peace and Goodwill to all men, and Nobel Prizes, accolades will be showered upon any Elite Member who can identify the legal theory our current Chief Executive is relying upon for immunity from criminal prosecution for authorizing more than 4o predator drone strikes inside of Pakistan in 2009, almost one per week of his Presidency. These unannounced, silent (until the bombs explode) attacks have been deemed to constitute unlawful summary executions of merely alleged criminals (and regrettably of wives, mothers, grandmothers, children, neighbors and other innocent bystanders) by a goodly number of international law scholars, and other liberal panty waists.

Accordingly, please submit no more than two answers, as the first one will be disregarded anyway, unless it reads word for word: " in prosecuting a lawful war of national defense, the killing of innocent civilians in the course of the killing of enemy combatants is a legal act."

Accordingly, should the President fully embrace his Justice Department's return to the pre-911 national policy of responding to Radical Islamic attacks on Americans as merely criminal offenses, he best be very vigilant regarding any anti-American views held by future appointees to the World Criminal Court in the Hague. As the Fort Hood murderer's prosecution by Court Martial shows, not even admitted mass murders can be summarily executed, except when killed on a wartime battlefield. Just saying....