Killing One's Neighbours
If a neighbour, a few doors down from me was abusing his wife and children I would be morally obligated to call the police. If I knew that he was threatening them with serious harm or perhaps even death, I would need to intervene if I could be sure that I would not make the situation worse. If other neighbours were feeling threatened I would need to do what I could to protect them including offering them shelter. BUT if I went out and bought a state-of-the-art sniper rifle, planned how I could ensure that I knew where he was and then fired at him, not caring how many others I killed - I would be charged and convicted of first-degree murder. In some parts of the western world, including various states in the USA, I would face execution. In our civil society, no matter what the justification is - an individual cannot decide to execute someone.
In my younger years, it used to be a popular past time at parties to debate whether or not, if one could travel back in time, to do so to assassinate Hitler before he authorized the murder of six million people of the Jewish faith. It has always seemed to me that perhaps the answer is yes - but only if the time-traveller came back and was prepared to stand trial for murder and only if there was proof that there was no other way to stop Hitler or that senseless slaughter.
When Trump ordered the assignation of Soleimani, the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) Quds Force, he did so because he had been told that he was a "bad" man. Trump ordered the death of a person citing wrongdoings in the past and possible risks in the future. All of those who carried out the assignation would say that they were just following orders.
Soleimani may have been a terrible man, he may have been the devil incarnate. I don't know. It is clear that he may have been the key architect of many of the disruptive conflicts in the region. He may have been directly responsible for the deaths of countless Iranians. However, it is perhaps just as likely that he thought that what he had done was morally right - that he was only ensuring his country remained safe, protected from the interference of other countries. He might have even argued that he was only carrying out the orders of his leaders. We just do not know - and we never will. He was never tried or convicted in a world court for any of his crimes.
The west has for well over a hundred years interfered and manipulated the affairs of the Middle East. It has created countries, over-thrown legitimate rulers, robbed it of its resources and supported armed conflict on all sides in a relentless pursuit of the oil so desperately needed to maintain its capitalist growth. To suggest that the west is the illegitimate parents of the sorts of activities that Soleimani undertook would not be an exaggeration.
When there is retaliation - and how can there not be - the US will cry foul. They will say that any attempt on the part of Iran to "payback" is further proof as to how bad, how dangerous the Iranian government is. Any sneak attack on American lives or property will just be proof that "they" are all terrorists.
In a world where one power is allowed to use high tech weapons to kill those he does not agree with while no other country has the right to defend itself against the US's interest - we should all be afraid.
If a neighbour, a few doors down from me was abusing his wife and children I would be morally obligated to call the police. If I knew that he was threatening them with serious harm or perhaps even death, I would need to intervene if I could be sure that I would not make the situation worse. If other neighbours were feeling threatened I would need to do what I could to protect them including offering them shelter. BUT if I went out and bought a state-of-the-art sniper rifle, planned how I could ensure that I knew where he was and then fired at him, not caring how many others I killed - I would be charged and convicted of first-degree murder. In some parts of the western world, including various states in the USA, I would face execution. In our civil society, no matter what the justification is - an individual cannot decide to execute someone.
In my younger years, it used to be a popular past time at parties to debate whether or not, if one could travel back in time, to do so to assassinate Hitler before he authorized the murder of six million people of the Jewish faith. It has always seemed to me that perhaps the answer is yes - but only if the time-traveller came back and was prepared to stand trial for murder and only if there was proof that there was no other way to stop Hitler or that senseless slaughter.
When Trump ordered the assignation of Soleimani, the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) Quds Force, he did so because he had been told that he was a "bad" man. Trump ordered the death of a person citing wrongdoings in the past and possible risks in the future. All of those who carried out the assignation would say that they were just following orders.
Soleimani may have been a terrible man, he may have been the devil incarnate. I don't know. It is clear that he may have been the key architect of many of the disruptive conflicts in the region. He may have been directly responsible for the deaths of countless Iranians. However, it is perhaps just as likely that he thought that what he had done was morally right - that he was only ensuring his country remained safe, protected from the interference of other countries. He might have even argued that he was only carrying out the orders of his leaders. We just do not know - and we never will. He was never tried or convicted in a world court for any of his crimes.
The west has for well over a hundred years interfered and manipulated the affairs of the Middle East. It has created countries, over-thrown legitimate rulers, robbed it of its resources and supported armed conflict on all sides in a relentless pursuit of the oil so desperately needed to maintain its capitalist growth. To suggest that the west is the illegitimate parents of the sorts of activities that Soleimani undertook would not be an exaggeration.
When there is retaliation - and how can there not be - the US will cry foul. They will say that any attempt on the part of Iran to "payback" is further proof as to how bad, how dangerous the Iranian government is. Any sneak attack on American lives or property will just be proof that "they" are all terrorists.
In a world where one power is allowed to use high tech weapons to kill those he does not agree with while no other country has the right to defend itself against the US's interest - we should all be afraid.
No comments:
Post a Comment