Quote:
Originally posted by Diogenes Of Pumpkintown:
The general feeling on assassination as a method of taking out terrorists and especially their leaders seems to be that it is somehow more immoral than more traditional methods, like waging war.
|
Diogones, you make some good points and I agree with much of what you say. But....
Assassination yes. I see the argument for it, and prefer it to other forms of attack which almost inevitably involve the slaughter of civilians, but I do see the problem as regards the creation of martyrs. (There is also the problem of replacing a 'known' quantity with an unknown quantity, when the person to be assassinated is a ruler. Or even if he isn't, come to that.)
Would it be too difficult to, rather than assassinate, to get an elite corps to get the person out, and then hold a (probably closed) legal trial? I would say this is something that we really do need to start looking at the level of the international community.
There seem to be oodles of tyrants and dictators around who wouldn't know what a human right was if it hit them slap in the face. These people, who not only are free to exploit, torture and kill their own people whenever it suits them, are also major loose cannon when it comes to threatening neighboring and other regions of the world. It is they, NOT their people, who need to be put out of action, but it is important that justice is seen to be done.
Of course, there is the problem of who replaces these people. Where the rightful or legally elected ruler or leader has been overthrown and is in prison, then that person could perhaps be put back - when this option doesn't exist - then what? Elections should be held, but very many countries do not have the system in place to do this. Otherwise, all that would happen is that one of the ruler's accolytes, possibly no better than he is, would take power. Another alternative is a bloody coup which would kill yet more civilians. (All this would require careful consideration by an international body.....)
There are large numbers of displaced people currently roaming around the world, traumatised by what they have undergone in their home countries. Others have not suffered directly, but have left before something happens to them. At this point, we HAVE to address the refugee problem, which is growing to astronomical proportions, and which is affecting all of us. It's a wakeup call if ever there was one. What better way to respond than for the international community to take steps which would allow people to feel and be safe in their own home countries?
I would like to see us take the first steps towards a peace keeping body WITH TEETH. The goal would be, eventually, to eliminate non human rights respecting regimes, and replace them with democratically elected leaders, or at the least, (in those parts of the world where democratic elections just would not be acceptable) leaders prepared to respect certain basic and fundamental human rights (including the right of women not to be treated as 'property' rather than individuals with rights.)
Another first step - and a crucial one - IS TO STOP SELLING ARMS TO DODGY REGIMES! This arms selling puts us in a crap position both morally and practically, and to my mind, is the result of stupid, profit driven short termism. We've been burnt by it many times and no doubt will be again.
I am against imposing full out sanctions against countries with dictator led regimes. That is a step to nowhere, and actually damages our cause. Arms sanctions certainly should be imposed, but not of food, medicines, and the other basic necessities of life. These just make the populace hungry, ill, and in no state to resist the blandishments and propoganda of their leaders, who then start blaming the West for all their ills. (The West has played its part, but let that go here, for now..... ) So let's impose arms sanctions and sanctions on other materials which are necessary to warfare and repression of peoples. (and let us make the penalties to companies and individuals breaking those sanctions PAINFUL AND CRIPPLING. Let us STOP them doing business, and put their chief executives in JAIL.)
In Britain, there are companies that sell torture instruments. Who are buying these things? Regimes around the world. This is SICK and this trade should be outlawed.
There are no easy answers, are there? But I think when we talk in terms of relations between the peoples of the world, the profit motive HAS to start coming second. Basic human rights HAVE to come first, every time. (Just to bring the profit motive into it - because as someone is bound to remark, you don't get nothing done without a dollar incentive - if we don't, then the results are going to COST us dearly, both in terms of money, and of our own freedom.
------------------
[This message has been edited by Silver Cheetah (edited 09-20-2001).]