Assassination

[Ryanamur]

Originally posted by 250: someday, we gonna have a DNA nuclear bomb the way it works is: find the genetic code of that particular person's DNA, and the bomb only kills the person with that type of DNA...

Yes, but to get his DNA, you need a piece of him. Why not kill him when you get the piece?


------------------
If I am because I think, then, if I talk without thinking, I'm not really talking! Am I?

[Diogenes Of Pumpkintown]

Originally posted by Belecthor: The only correction I would make is the myth about leaders "in the old days" leading from the front. Leaders who did this typically didn't live very long. Of the military leaders who I personally consider to be the Great Captains of history(Alexander, Hannibal, Caesar, Frederick, Gustavus Adolphus, Napoleon), NONE were so foolhardy as to lead from the front.

I was guilty of generalizing, yes.

However, there is a good deal of truth in the generalization.

By "olden" times, I meant pre-modern, before the rise of nationalism and the industrial age and powerful modern nation-states on the European model (including the US, since we derived most of our law from the English model). So, I won't speak for Napoleon and Frederick, but Alexander was reknowned for his personal bravery in battle. So were Hannibal and Caesar (though perhaps less on the model of personal prowess than Alexander) Troops of the time expected no less. Heroic example from the top down was incredibly important for the morale of the troops, and could make the difference in the outcome of a battle. Successful commanders were keenly aware of the need for it.

In any case, such bravery on the part of leaders is not limited to the past either. In the American Civil War, for example, many of the best commanders (as in those that were successful in achieving decisively favorable results) were those that made exceptional examples of personal bravery under fire, inspriring their men on to victory by such means. Many of them were of course killed. This holds true in any war you could name.

That is the point of such bravery on the part of leadership -- the willingness to sacrifice the leader's own life, if necessary, for the greater good.

And though I was generalizing, it does seem to me that such sentiment on the part of our leaders is less common than it should be, and probably less common than it was in older times, especially the further back you go into history, including up to when our ancestors hunted and roamed as wild and free barbarians.

Footnote 1:
Diogenes wishes that we still hunted and roamed as wild and free barbarians

[Tancred]

Assassination has the potential to be the ultimate tool of oppression if misused. If we open the floodgates on this, we'll just be opening the door to a world of paranoia and shadows.

[Silver Cheetah]

Originally posted by Tancred: Assassination has the potential to be the ultimate tool of oppression if misused. If we open the floodgates on this, we'll just be opening the door to a world of paranoia and shadows.

Ultimate tool of oppression - no not really. It kills less people than war does. Although you do run the risk of hitting on the right ones...... We aren't talking about a head of state in this particular case - this is an individual terrorist. Although personally, I would rather see him prosecuted in a court of law, if he could be got hold of.



------------------

[Tancred]

Originally posted by Silver Cheetah: Ultimate tool of oppression - no not really. It kills less people than war does. Although you do run the risk of hitting on the right ones...... We aren't talking about a head of state in this particular case - this is an individual terrorist. Although personally, I would rather see him prosecuted in a court of law, if he could be got hold of.

It kills less people than war does... yes. But least - at the VERY least - War, in all its' horror, makes people think 'This is terrible. We shall make sure this never happens again.'. We see the horror, and hopefully - dear god, i hope - we will learn some day.
A world of peace established by assassination would be a terrible thing; a state where the pinpoint and secret killing of those who do not agree with it is the foundation of the government would hold its' power through terror. Any voices who oppose anything that government might do - bam. As long as the government stays enlightened and benevolent - fine. But what government does?