|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
 Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2010 3:56 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Target strategical assassinations against combatants is a necessary strategy given that the top leaders of Al-Qaeda and the Taliban live in Pakistan. It is the only way to get to them. It is never ok to assassinate American citizens. The assignation program probably could use more oversight, but as long as it is done carefully and sparingly it fits the reality of the situation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Capo wrote: |
Let me pose the question another way.
Is it OK to assassinate Biun Laden?
Would it be OK to assassinate Bin Laden if he was an American? |
So you're going to create a rule based on an exceptional case? If I were the President, and OBL were American, I'd have him assassinated, sure, if that were the only way to "get" him. But who cares? He's the special exception. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Capo
Joined: 09 Sep 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2010 4:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Leon wrote: |
| Target strategical assassinations against combatants is a necessary strategy given that the top leaders of Al-Qaeda and the Taliban live in Pakistan. It is the only way to get to them. It is never ok to assassinate American citizens. The assignation program probably could use more oversight, but as long as it is done carefully and sparingly it fits the reality of the situation. |
So if the 'combatants' were American it is never OK to assinate them? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Capo
Joined: 09 Sep 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2010 4:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| Capo wrote: |
Let me pose the question another way.
Is it OK to assassinate Biun Laden?
Would it be OK to assassinate Bin Laden if he was an American? |
So you're going to create a rule based on an exceptional case? If I were the President, and OBL were American, I'd have him assassinated, sure, if that were the only way to "get" him. But who cares? He's the special exception. |
I thought that is the point of assassination to use in exception circumstances, not to use it willy nilly to silence anyone they don't like. Nationality should not be an issue. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2010 4:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| El Exigente wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| El Exigente wrote: |
[q
We are talking about the American government that should not have the authority to kill American citizens. See how that works? No country should be able to kill its own citizens.
|
So if we have bank robbers who take a bunch of customers hostage and who state that they will shoot one every so often if their demands are not met, the government should not have a SWAT team standing by ready to move in and save the hostages' lives?
We should just let them walk away with all the money and kill as many hostages as they like...because "no country should be able to kill its own citizens".  |
My vote for non-sequitur of the month.  |
Let me fix your reply for you. It should read " TUM made a very good point which I can not counter so I'll just call it a 'non-sequitur'...despite not knowing what that is." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2010 5:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Capo wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| Target strategical assassinations against combatants is a necessary strategy given that the top leaders of Al-Qaeda and the Taliban live in Pakistan. It is the only way to get to them. It is never ok to assassinate American citizens. The assignation program probably could use more oversight, but as long as it is done carefully and sparingly it fits the reality of the situation. |
So if the 'combatants' were American it is never OK to assinate them? |
Exactly. Americans have rights that enemy combatants don't. If an American is actively fighting against American forces, then yes obviously they are a fair target. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Capo wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| Capo wrote: |
Let me pose the question another way.
Is it OK to assassinate Biun Laden?
Would it be OK to assassinate Bin Laden if he was an American? |
So you're going to create a rule based on an exceptional case? If I were the President, and OBL were American, I'd have him assassinated, sure, if that were the only way to "get" him. But who cares? He's the special exception. |
I thought that is the point of assassination to use in exception circumstances, not to use it willy nilly to silence anyone they don't like. Nationality should not be an issue. |
It would be better to have a firm "No" for assassinations. Then, in the case of rare exceptions, as in the case with ticking time bombs, almost everyone would ignore the one transgression. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2010 7:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| Capo wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| Capo wrote: |
Let me pose the question another way.
Is it OK to assassinate Biun Laden?
Would it be OK to assassinate Bin Laden if he was an American? |
So you're going to create a rule based on an exceptional case? If I were the President, and OBL were American, I'd have him assassinated, sure, if that were the only way to "get" him. But who cares? He's the special exception. |
I thought that is the point of assassination to use in exception circumstances, not to use it willy nilly to silence anyone they don't like. Nationality should not be an issue. |
It would be better to have a firm "No" for assassinations. Then, in the case of rare exceptions, as in the case with ticking time bombs, almost everyone would ignore the one transgression. |
Except for political opponents who might seek impeachment of the President for breaking a law. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2010 7:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| Capo wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| Capo wrote: |
Let me pose the question another way.
Is it OK to assassinate Biun Laden?
Would it be OK to assassinate Bin Laden if he was an American? |
So you're going to create a rule based on an exceptional case? If I were the President, and OBL were American, I'd have him assassinated, sure, if that were the only way to "get" him. But who cares? He's the special exception. |
I thought that is the point of assassination to use in exception circumstances, not to use it willy nilly to silence anyone they don't like. Nationality should not be an issue. |
It would be better to have a firm "No" for assassinations. Then, in the case of rare exceptions, as in the case with ticking time bombs, almost everyone would ignore the one transgression. |
Except for political opponents who might seek impeachment of the President for breaking a law. |
In an actual ticking time bomb situation, I cannot imagine the protected public condoning such opportunism. Again, it would have to be a real ticking time bomb scenario. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2010 4:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| Capo wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| Capo wrote: |
Let me pose the question another way.
Is it OK to assassinate Biun Laden?
Would it be OK to assassinate Bin Laden if he was an American? |
So you're going to create a rule based on an exceptional case? If I were the President, and OBL were American, I'd have him assassinated, sure, if that were the only way to "get" him. But who cares? He's the special exception. |
I thought that is the point of assassination to use in exception circumstances, not to use it willy nilly to silence anyone they don't like. Nationality should not be an issue. |
It would be better to have a firm "No" for assassinations. Then, in the case of rare exceptions, as in the case with ticking time bombs, almost everyone would ignore the one transgression. |
Except for political opponents who might seek impeachment of the President for breaking a law. |
In an actual ticking time bomb situation, I cannot imagine the protected public condoning such opportunism. Again, it would have to be a real ticking time bomb scenario. |
America is, and should be, a country of laws. It is either always legal or never legal. Procedures should be put into place that account for this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2010 6:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Leon wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| Capo wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| Capo wrote: |
Let me pose the question another way.
Is it OK to assassinate Biun Laden?
Would it be OK to assassinate Bin Laden if he was an American? |
So you're going to create a rule based on an exceptional case? If I were the President, and OBL were American, I'd have him assassinated, sure, if that were the only way to "get" him. But who cares? He's the special exception. |
I thought that is the point of assassination to use in exception circumstances, not to use it willy nilly to silence anyone they don't like. Nationality should not be an issue. |
It would be better to have a firm "No" for assassinations. Then, in the case of rare exceptions, as in the case with ticking time bombs, almost everyone would ignore the one transgression. |
Except for political opponents who might seek impeachment of the President for breaking a law. |
In an actual ticking time bomb situation, I cannot imagine the protected public condoning such opportunism. Again, it would have to be a real ticking time bomb scenario. |
America is, and should be, a country of laws. It is either always legal or never legal. Procedures should be put into place that account for this. |
I don't understand. Are you arguing we should create an assassination exception? I'm not.
Look, every time we have this discussion, should the US be able to apply extraordinary techniques, I say no. Except in extraordinary circumstances. Should exceptions be written into the law? Unnecessary. If you do write it, lawyers will always be arguing towards the exception, and there's a risk of diluting the law. Whereas if its an actual ticking time bomb scenario, very few will, after the specter of an averted nuclear holocaust, sit there advocating punishment and say, "But America is, and should be, a country of laws!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2010 7:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| Capo wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| Capo wrote: |
Let me pose the question another way.
Is it OK to assassinate Biun Laden?
Would it be OK to assassinate Bin Laden if he was an American? |
So you're going to create a rule based on an exceptional case? If I were the President, and OBL were American, I'd have him assassinated, sure, if that were the only way to "get" him. But who cares? He's the special exception. |
I thought that is the point of assassination to use in exception circumstances, not to use it willy nilly to silence anyone they don't like. Nationality should not be an issue. |
Your argument is that we should outlaw it, but be ready to break our own law? Sorry if I don't find your logic convincing. I think assignations in Pakistan are a good thing, but there needs to be lots of oversight.
It would be better to have a firm "No" for assassinations. Then, in the case of rare exceptions, as in the case with ticking time bombs, almost everyone would ignore the one transgression. |
Except for political opponents who might seek impeachment of the President for breaking a law. |
In an actual ticking time bomb situation, I cannot imagine the protected public condoning such opportunism. Again, it would have to be a real ticking time bomb scenario. |
America is, and should be, a country of laws. It is either always legal or never legal. Procedures should be put into place that account for this. |
I don't understand. Are you arguing we should create an assassination exception? I'm not.
Look, every time we have this discussion, should the US be able to apply extraordinary techniques, I say no. Except in extraordinary circumstances. Should exceptions be written into the law? Unnecessary. If you do write it, lawyers will always be arguing towards the exception, and there's a risk of diluting the law. Whereas if its an actual ticking time bomb scenario, very few will, after the specter of an averted nuclear holocaust, sit there advocating punishment and say, "But America is, and should be, a country of laws!" |
you are saying we should make a law, but then break it? Why make it illegal in the first place? I say that some assignations are good, especially when they are in places like Pakistan where military action isn't possible. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2010 8:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Leon wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| Capo wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| Capo wrote: |
Let me pose the question another way.
Is it OK to assassinate Biun Laden?
Would it be OK to assassinate Bin Laden if he was an American? |
So you're going to create a rule based on an exceptional case? If I were the President, and OBL were American, I'd have him assassinated, sure, if that were the only way to "get" him. But who cares? He's the special exception. |
I thought that is the point of assassination to use in exception circumstances, not to use it willy nilly to silence anyone they don't like. Nationality should not be an issue. |
Your argument is that we should outlaw it, but be ready to break our own law? Sorry if I don't find your logic convincing. I think assignations in Pakistan are a good thing, but there needs to be lots of oversight.
It would be better to have a firm "No" for assassinations. Then, in the case of rare exceptions, as in the case with ticking time bombs, almost everyone would ignore the one transgression. |
Except for political opponents who might seek impeachment of the President for breaking a law. |
In an actual ticking time bomb situation, I cannot imagine the protected public condoning such opportunism. Again, it would have to be a real ticking time bomb scenario. |
America is, and should be, a country of laws. It is either always legal or never legal. Procedures should be put into place that account for this. |
I don't understand. Are you arguing we should create an assassination exception? I'm not.
Look, every time we have this discussion, should the US be able to apply extraordinary techniques, I say no. Except in extraordinary circumstances. Should exceptions be written into the law? Unnecessary. If you do write it, lawyers will always be arguing towards the exception, and there's a risk of diluting the law. Whereas if its an actual ticking time bomb scenario, very few will, after the specter of an averted nuclear holocaust, sit there advocating punishment and say, "But America is, and should be, a country of laws!" |
you are saying we should make a law, but then break it? Why make it illegal in the first place? I say that some assignations are good, especially when they are in places like Pakistan where military action isn't possible. |
Wait a minute. I just realized. Sometimes police officers should enter people's homes without warrants. Maybe we should write that into the Constitution? Its not like we can trust judges to create exceptions or recognize exigent circumstances.
As for Pakistan, I doubt the American military is assassinating American citizens there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Capo
Joined: 09 Sep 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2010 7:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| Capo wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| Capo wrote: |
Let me pose the question another way.
Is it OK to assassinate Biun Laden?
Would it be OK to assassinate Bin Laden if he was an American? |
So you're going to create a rule based on an exceptional case? If I were the President, and OBL were American, I'd have him assassinated, sure, if that were the only way to "get" him. But who cares? He's the special exception. |
I thought that is the point of assassination to use in exception circumstances, not to use it willy nilly to silence anyone they don't like. Nationality should not be an issue. |
Your argument is that we should outlaw it, but be ready to break our own law? Sorry if I don't find your logic convincing. I think assignations in Pakistan are a good thing, but there needs to be lots of oversight.
It would be better to have a firm "No" for assassinations. Then, in the case of rare exceptions, as in the case with ticking time bombs, almost everyone would ignore the one transgression. |
Except for political opponents who might seek impeachment of the President for breaking a law. |
In an actual ticking time bomb situation, I cannot imagine the protected public condoning such opportunism. Again, it would have to be a real ticking time bomb scenario. |
America is, and should be, a country of laws. It is either always legal or never legal. Procedures should be put into place that account for this. |
I don't understand. Are you arguing we should create an assassination exception? I'm not.
Look, every time we have this discussion, should the US be able to apply extraordinary techniques, I say no. Except in extraordinary circumstances. Should exceptions be written into the law? Unnecessary. If you do write it, lawyers will always be arguing towards the exception, and there's a risk of diluting the law. Whereas if its an actual ticking time bomb scenario, very few will, after the specter of an averted nuclear holocaust, sit there advocating punishment and say, "But America is, and should be, a country of laws!" |
you are saying we should make a law, but then break it? Why make it illegal in the first place? I say that some assignations are good, especially when they are in places like Pakistan where military action isn't possible. |
Wait a minute. I just realized. Sometimes police officers should enter people's homes without warrants. Maybe we should write that into the Constitution? Its not like we can trust judges to create exceptions or recognize exigent circumstances.
As for Pakistan, I doubt the American military is assassinating American citizens there. |
Again, why does it matter if they are American or not? If it is right to do the drone attack or whatever then fair enough.
You are basically saying you don't value a persons life unless they are American, which is part of the reason America is bogged down in the middle east! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2010 3:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Capo wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| Capo wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| Capo wrote: |
Let me pose the question another way.
Is it OK to assassinate Biun Laden?
Would it be OK to assassinate Bin Laden if he was an American? |
So you're going to create a rule based on an exceptional case? If I were the President, and OBL were American, I'd have him assassinated, sure, if that were the only way to "get" him. But who cares? He's the special exception. |
I thought that is the point of assassination to use in exception circumstances, not to use it willy nilly to silence anyone they don't like. Nationality should not be an issue. |
Your argument is that we should outlaw it, but be ready to break our own law? Sorry if I don't find your logic convincing. I think assignations in Pakistan are a good thing, but there needs to be lots of oversight.
It would be better to have a firm "No" for assassinations. Then, in the case of rare exceptions, as in the case with ticking time bombs, almost everyone would ignore the one transgression. |
Except for political opponents who might seek impeachment of the President for breaking a law. |
In an actual ticking time bomb situation, I cannot imagine the protected public condoning such opportunism. Again, it would have to be a real ticking time bomb scenario. |
America is, and should be, a country of laws. It is either always legal or never legal. Procedures should be put into place that account for this. |
I don't understand. Are you arguing we should create an assassination exception? I'm not.
Look, every time we have this discussion, should the US be able to apply extraordinary techniques, I say no. Except in extraordinary circumstances. Should exceptions be written into the law? Unnecessary. If you do write it, lawyers will always be arguing towards the exception, and there's a risk of diluting the law. Whereas if its an actual ticking time bomb scenario, very few will, after the specter of an averted nuclear holocaust, sit there advocating punishment and say, "But America is, and should be, a country of laws!" |
you are saying we should make a law, but then break it? Why make it illegal in the first place? I say that some assignations are good, especially when they are in places like Pakistan where military action isn't possible. |
Wait a minute. I just realized. Sometimes police officers should enter people's homes without warrants. Maybe we should write that into the Constitution? Its not like we can trust judges to create exceptions or recognize exigent circumstances.
As for Pakistan, I doubt the American military is assassinating American citizens there. |
Again, why does it matter if they are American or not? If it is right to do the drone attack or whatever then fair enough.
You are basically saying you don't value a persons life unless they are American, which is part of the reason America is bogged down in the middle east! |
No, but the American government has certain obligations to American citizens than it has to enemy combatants, as does every government to its own citizens. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
