Question Assassination

[xane]

In light of the recent "hit" on a terrorist leader in Dubai, what is the future for assassinations ?

Assassination has often been ruled out as morally and diplomatically wrong, the US explicitly outlawed it back in the 70's, nevertheless, taking out terrorist leaders using the "death by Hellfire" (*) method has been an effective tactic, largely because the restrictions on assassination only apply to recognised state leaders, which doesn't include terrorists, as self declared non-state entities.

The problem with missile attacks is they are indiscriminate, often taking out innocent bystanders, sometimes civilians, whereas a classic "hit" as demonstrated in Dubai, is more effective. Perhaps Tom Clancy or John Le Carre style counter-terrorist actions should be promoted ?

* AIM-114 Hellfire missile, launched from a Helicopter or Drone.

 

[Ch3tan]

I think it's incredibly naive to think it's not common practise already. I doubt it's ever gone out of fashion.

 

[Gumbo]

The Israeli's are big fans of it and really quite good at it. It shows that two can definitely play at the instilling fear in the enemy game.

 

[Roo Stercogburn]

Anyone seen Jup lately?

 

[Jupitus]

 

[Mabs]

i dont have a prob with it tbh. that serb leader whose name im not even going to try to spell, is in the hague being tried. expected to take... 3+ YEARS.
whose paying for that ?
hes guilty, its just a show of justice, someone just shoot him already, and save us they money.
as to general assassinations, go for it tbh, speeds up the process . fuck your international law

 

[Embattle]

The Israeli's are big fans of it and really quite good at it. It shows that two can definitely play at the instilling fear in the enemy game.

Yeah instead of justice sanctioned death penalty they've got state sanctioned assassination.

 

[Raven]

Some people believe the government got away with it a few years ago on UK soil...

 

[Roo Stercogburn]

Some people believe the government got away with it a few years ago on UK soil...

I don't think killing off David Tennant as Dr. Who counts mate.

 

[xane]

The point I was trying to make is why, when there doesn't seem to be a problem with assassination by remotely controlled drone firing missile, just do it the "Dubai" method, that would prevent needless bystander deaths, it all amounts to the same thing.

 

[DaGaffer]

The point I was trying to make is why, when there doesn't seem to be a problem with assassination by remotely controlled drone firing missile, just do it the "Dubai" method, that would prevent needless bystander deaths, it all amounts to the same thing.

Well, a lot of people think there is a problem with Drone assassinations, and not just because of bystander deaths; but if the Americans have decided that flying around Pakistan and taking out "insurgents" from an office in Pennsylvania is OK, and the nuclear-armed Pakistanis aren't objecting, then the drone method would seem a lot safer (from a US perspective), and probably cheaper, than having a bunch of CIA guys traipsing around the Hindu Kush. The Israelis chose the method they did becuase the guy they wanted was holed up in Dubai, and people would probably object a wee bit if they'd seen a Predator flying past the Burj 'Al Arab, but if their target had stayed in Beirut, they certainly would have used a drone. Its just horses for courses. Of course, knowing the Israelis, if they had a drone that could reach the Emirates, they wouldn't let a little thing like world opinion stop them anyway.

 

[Mabs]

seems the israelies have upgraded their "4 men and a rug" team somewhat

doesnt mossad and the israeli goverment kind of have the same system as kgb and the soviet government tho ? ie: you dont have to work for us to get a job there, but it helps ?

 

[old.user4556]

Nothing will ever rival the Kennedy assasination imo, I find it quite disturbing in its nature.

 

[old.Tohtori]

I don't think killing off David Tennant as Dr. Who counts mate.

Heretic

 

[Shagrat]

I dont think assassination has ever "gone out of fashion" as a tactic tbh, regardless of what politicians have said.

 

[SilverHood]

I think it's always come down to the points:
What do do you stand to gain.
What do you stand to lose.

Israel already seems themselves standing alone. If the middle eastern states should invade, it's unlikely anyone will come to their aid. In that respect, they have nothing to lose by upsetting the Brits, French or Irish. The only country that matters is the USA, who pretty much fund the Israeli government.

In terms of upsetting their neighbors, they could hardly do much worse. Antisemitism is a way of life in middle eastern countries and has been so for centuries.

What do they gain? Disrupting the flow of arms to Hamas? is that a worthwhile any damage in relations? Israel obviously thought so. You will notice the US has been totally quiet on the issue.

Of course, if the British government were caught assassinating someone in a neighbor country, the outcry would be immense. The difference being that Britain's neighbors are democracies who we mostly get along with, where Israeli's neighbours are dictatorships that dont really look to fondly upon them.

 

[Jiggs]

Of course, if the British government were caught assassinating someone in a neighbor country, the outcry would be immense.

Hmm, what do you think the British Special Forces do!?

 

[Roo Stercogburn]

Hmm, what do you think the British Special Forces do!?

<looks out window>

Currently they're shopping at Asda.