Unapologetic insolence from an aging subversive

Unapologetic insolence from an aging subversive

Monday, 20 January 2020

Playing God


The targeted assassination of Qasem Soleimani is only the latest in a long line of ex-judicial killings carried out by the USA, Israel, and many other countries. The fact that it was drone facilitated is also nothing new.

Wikipedia reveals the Israelis as the most prolific users of targeted killings, listing 29 since 1972, but they're certainly not the only state using the strategy.

The most well-known of the Israeli attacks is Operation Wrath of God, avenging the Munich Olympic terrorist atrocity, although the Israeli catalogue includes targeting a wide range of individuals across a number of countries, including Malta, Jordan, Lebanon, Tunisia, and Malaysia.

The Israelis have used a wide variety of methods, ranging from airstrikes, Apache helicopter-launched missiles, electrocution and shootings. Collateral damage, on the shape of civilians in the wrong place at the wrong time, is also not unusual.

These assassinations as carried out by Mossad have become almost commonplace.

Next in line in terms of the frequency of these killings is the USA.

The War on Terror was used by both the Bush and Obama Administrations to justify targeted killings, and the Trump Administration has followed suit.

The most famous of these assassinations carried out by the USA was that of Osama Bin Laden in 2011, but there have been a succession, including most recently that of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi al-Qurashi, the leader of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.

The Intercept ran an interesting expose of US drone operations on its website recently.

Other regimes, including North Korea, Iran, and Russia have used targeted killings. The Russian speciality is poisoning. The North Koreans are more creative.

Perhaps, gentle reader, I'm squeamish, but I have deep reservations about any strategy of targeted assassinations, however noble the motive.


Extra judicial killings have no place in international law, and despite the fact that many countries, including the USA, scorn the notion of the rule of law applying internationally and universally, it is a noble concept worthy of recognition.

Without it, the powerful can basically do what they like.

Then there is the issue of innocents being caught up in these attacks. 

I can acknowledge that these killings target the worst of the worst, but even the most notorious NAZIs were given the privilege of trials.


When you think about it, this use of technology is something entirely new.

With all the power of artificial intelligence unleashed, nobody on God's good earth, no matter where they live, or their race or nationality, is safe.

God does not live in the White House, the Knesset or the Islamic Consultative Assembly, nor, as far as I know, does He have a squadron of Raptors handy.


13 comments:

William the Younger said...

Warfare has moved on since the days of Vietnam. Active targeting of the leaders of the enemy leads to fewer civilian casualties and is better than troops v troops.
Cut off the head of the snake and the snake dies.

Anonymous said...

God lives with the Clintons. Ask Epstein.

ahhstrewth said...

"Without it, the powerful can basically do what they like...."
Hmm...maybe the Western drone response/ retribution is determined by the fact that the Mo retards that take great delight in killing their own kind when Western targets are in short supply.
I am generally against killing humans for any reason but as the Mo retards have a kill rate often in the hundreds, a solitary assassination of a terrorist leader barely registers with me - except on the disappointment index.
One modern fighter cost 1/2 a billion dollars these days and a pilot costs millions to train and and several more to remain in readiness state.
A Predator drone costs about 3-5 million dollars.
Air Forces should be scrapped and squadrons - many squadrons - of drones utilised.

1735099 said...

As I recall, the most egregious episodes of mass murder in the 20th century took place in nominally Christian countries (Germany and the USSR).
"Mo retards"
The use of this terminology indicates bigotry and ignorance.

Anonymous said...

Strange reply Robert. Who was talking about mass murders of the scale you point to in your reply, and why restrict it to 20th century. Chinese and Cambodian numbers are interesting if you look at the bigger picture. As a Socialist who votes Green you are very restrictive/selective. The terminology used by It'struth may be a bit rough but you probably will deny using derogatory terms like "slope" and "nog" in your younger days. A character assessment probably isn't very fruitful in picking apart another persons perceptions.

Anonymous said...

Even amongst your elite groups condescension would hardly be considered a positive trait, Bob.

1735099 said...

A character assessment probably isn't very fruitful in picking apart another persons perceptions.

There's a clear difference between perception and ignorance.

Anonymous said...

Shallow response Robert. You did not respond to the bulk of what was put. Your perception of the commenter is drawn from your previously held beliefs and not so much from the information that he put forward. You believe his language should be curtailed and resort to insults to silence him, all the while attempting to shift the topic to that of mass murders by those not included in the original topic or even time frame. Very disappointing from a friend of Cav's.

1735099 said...

It’s pretty simple.
Anybody that uses a put down label for a person with a disability as an insult is, by definition, an ignorant coward.

Anonymous said...

So you don't see bigotry, ignorance and cowardice as disabilies, obviously. Just insults to throw around at will, or in this case, ahhstrewth.

1735099 said...

So you don't see bigotry, ignorance and cowardice as disabilies, (sic).

No, because they're not.
They're either behaviours or attitudes.

Anonymous said...

I tend to see unpopular "behaviours or attitudes" as disabilities. They can keep the person afflicted from achieving full potential. In making your judgement, you have used language that indicates that you share the flaws that you accuse ahhstrewth of.

Anonymous said...

What on earth does "Playing God" mean in the context of warfare - that God selectively kills and mankind doing the same are playing at being God?
There is so much more to the God of the Bible that your restrictive use of God as a killer smacks of a desperate attempt to find a headline.

Blog archive