Poll: Should U.S. law be changed to allow the assassination of hostile foreign leaders?

[Dysfunctional]

I saw this one on CNN, and I decided to see what the result is on the forums

Right now on CNN 69% say yes and 31% say no

I'm curious what the resutls here will be

[EDIT] Ok, the last choice is mine. Eh. Sue me!!! [/EDIT]

 

[Yeeny]

YES! Instead of killing the people, lets just take out the mofo's that did the deed.

 

[brandonl]

Agreed

 

[Geforcekj]

allow the assassination? wtf....you can't do that

 

[MF1]

NO.

 

[Murphyrulez]

What do you mean : wtf you can't do that..??

Why can't you? What is wrong with wiping evil off that face of the earth? Or would you like to go in with a search warrant and handcuff them and take them to court and let them sit in jail for 10 years while they appeal and waste 4 million dollars of our money? Yeah that sounds like a good idea. Then we can kill them in the gas chamber.

Same result. Bad guy dead. 1st option, you save 4 million dollars and 10 years, AND you lessen the suffering the poor terrorist has to endure, since he is dead from a quick double tap. 2nd option, you get to feel all warm and fuzzy inside because you did the "right" thing.

Wake up.

Paul

 

[MustangSVT]

if there is a person who can decide ALL the rights from wrong, then yes.. until than.. No.

 

[Static911]

assassination is a very strong word. I would have to say "no."

static911

 

[Nevo]

Actually, it's not even a law. It's an Executive Order.

Executive Order 11905 prohibits assassinations by US government organizations. Put in place by Gerald Ford in 1976.



<< (g) Prohibition of Assassination. No employee of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, political assassination. >>



Executive order 12333 clarifies it.

To the best of my knowledge, all that is needed to lift an Executive Order is the word of the President.

 

[Dysfunctional]

<< 2nd option, you get to feel all warm and fuzzy inside because you did the "right" thing. >>


lol. I like that. haha

I agree they should be put to "sleep"...and I agree with your motives....but I don't think it would be 10 years. I think it would be more like a life-sentence, in which case it wastes even more of our money

 

[SpongeBob]

Most terrorists usually have a significant following. Simply taking out the head will not accomplish much, because another member of the organization will simply take over. That is where the quandry lies. What is an effective way to take out a terrorist group?

 

[Dysfunctional]

<< allow the assassination? wtf....you can't do that >>


Shall I change it to execution?

 

[iamwiz82]

i would tend to believe that the US has indeed done it before, and will continue to do it. Not everything done is sanctioned.

 

[Geforcekj]

I can't believe that there is a law on this subject...

You can't pass a law that allows you to assassinate someone.

Well just so you know there is a little known law up here in Canada that allows us to speed in foreign countires and well ther is nothing they can do about it...cause well its the law...

 

[Dysfunctional]

<< You can't pass a law that allows you to assassinate someone. >>


someone is terrorists.....we can execute people here for killing people, so why couldn't we execute someone in a different country (provided the country is on our side) that wages war on the U.S.? Would you rather they go to jail and just waste our money, or would you rather just get rid of them? (after interogation and all)

 

[Yeeny]

I am against killing anyone, but look at the options. If we could take out the people who start this before they rose to power like Osama did, then we wouldn't have to go into places like Afghanistan to kill the innocents. We would have shot down the airplanes filled with innocent people to save the thousands more inside the buildings, so why is it morally ok to shoot down innocents to save the lives of many more, but killing the leaders of hate groups such as terrorists is morally wrong?

 

[Dysfunctional]

<< so why is it morally ok to shoot down innocents to save the lives of many more, but killing the leaders of hate groups such as terrorists is morally wrong? >>


i agree....so why is it wrong?

 

[PG]

I forget who, but a guy on the news said that this law could be bypassed if we declare war on that country.
In other words, this law does not matter. We can get around it.

 

[Dysfunctional]

<< I forget who, but a guy on the news said that this law could be bypassed if we declare war on that country.
In other words, this law does not matter. We can get around it. >>


hmm......does anyone have a link where it says this?