I should like to see the basis for a legal argument that an incursion into neutral or allied territory can be rendered lawful by the ground of national self defence. I cannot construct any analogue in private law. I can appreciate that an incursion into the territory of an enemy can be lawful on such ground.

Then there is the separate question of whether killing ObL was an act of national self defence. Certainly my impression at the time of the killing was that he was more figurehead than anything else - a politician rather than a combatant. If we get told the truth about the contents of his hard drives it may become clear whether he was a field commander in chief - which would justify his killing if all else was in order.

I remain concerned about the propriety of killing anyone based on information found from torture - and the US claims that what the rest of the world can see is torture but they call "enhanced interrogation" was essential to enabling the killing.

Unconditionally approving what the US government and military did here makes the US government and military more dangerous to the rest of the world.