Comments on: REVISITING ASSASSINATION? http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/revisiting_assassination/ Online Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs Sun, 21 Mar 2010 00:22:27 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Kelli http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/revisiting_assassination/comment-page-1/#comment-1610 Kelli Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000 /?p=1830#comment-1610 I too read Ms Slaughter's piece and, have to say, was left speechless by the argument. On the one hand, I respected her boldness: there's no messing around here with fancy diplo-speak. Kill the tyrants. Simple enough. On the other hand, who the f*** does she think she is? I am personally opposed to the death penalty, because I question the moral basis upon which it rests. Can even a representative democracy take the life of a citizen? On a practical level, I just don't think good but flawed systems of justice and retribution can be relied upon 100% of the time, and if it's not absolutely reliable it cannot be done. Sure, I'd be willing to pull the switch on the DC snipers, but those kind of cases are few and far between and we can't rest an entire justice system upon them, however much we might want to. So, if the state, which I recognize and have a say (however small) about the composition of, lacks the authority to slay vicious criminals, where on earth would the UN derive such power? What would the bar be for a death penalty? Would a panel of experts devise a calculus of misery or tyranny, into which "raw data" would be fed on a continuous basis by UN bureaucrats, until a red ball descends and the hit squad is despatched? Would a certain number of people need to be killed, or a percentage of the population? What sort of proof would be accepted? Could you kill rulers who are just plain incompetent or corrupt? How about Mugabe? Does it count if you just bankrupt a once-prosperous land, kill opponents and slowly starve rival groups? Are we going to get a pre-crime unit that will predict when things are going on a downward spiral, or do we have to wait for the body count to rise? Really, this proposal is too stupid to be entertained, especially in the aftermath of the UN debacle of the past 6 months. But tell us what you really think, right? I too read Ms Slaughter's piece and, have to say, was left speechless by the argument. On the one hand, I respected her boldness: there's no messing around here with fancy diplo-speak. Kill the tyrants. Simple enough. On the other hand, who the f*** does she think she is? I am personally opposed to the death penalty, because I question the moral basis upon which it rests. Can even a representative democracy take the life of a citizen? On a practical level, I just don't think good but flawed systems of justice and retribution can be relied upon 100% of the time, and if it's not absolutely reliable it cannot be done. Sure, I'd be willing to pull the switch on the DC snipers, but those kind of cases are few and far between and we can't rest an entire justice system upon them, however much we might want to.

So, if the state, which I recognize and have a say (however small) about the composition of, lacks the authority to slay vicious criminals, where on earth would the UN derive such power? What would the bar be for a death penalty? Would a panel of experts devise a calculus of misery or tyranny, into which "raw data" would be fed on a continuous basis by UN bureaucrats, until a red ball descends and the hit squad is despatched? Would a certain number of people need to be killed, or a percentage of the population? What sort of proof would be accepted? Could you kill rulers who are just plain incompetent or corrupt? How about Mugabe? Does it count if you just bankrupt a once-prosperous land, kill opponents and slowly starve rival groups? Are we going to get a pre-crime unit that will predict when things are going on a downward spiral, or do we have to wait for the body count to rise?

Really, this proposal is too stupid to be entertained, especially in the aftermath of the UN debacle of the past 6 months.

But tell us what you really think, right?

]]> By: James Joyner http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/revisiting_assassination/comment-page-1/#comment-1611 James Joyner Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000 /?p=1830#comment-1611 Kelli, All legitimate concerns. But, remember, she is proposing this as an alternative to war. In wars, of course, hundreds if not thousands die. And the same people/bodies/institutions that would make the decision to "take out" a bad guy are the same ones who decide to initiate war. So it's the same problems multiplied by factors of 100s or 1000s. --- Kelli,

All legitimate concerns. But, remember, she is proposing this as an alternative to war. In wars, of course, hundreds if not thousands die. And the same people/bodies/institutions that would make the decision to "take out" a bad guy are the same ones who decide to initiate war. So it's the same problems multiplied by factors of 100s or 1000s.

---

]]>