Morally it can be a Grey area and mostly depends on the theoretical leader in question. Sure you could arrest the insurgent leader with a penchant for bombing malls. But if he gets out and starts bombing malls again. Did you really solve anything?
In the case of say The Civil Disobedience type of “Insurgent”. Their antics are usually an inconvenience or annoying. Assassinating him you can easily make the argument as being morally reprehensible.
From a strictly pragmatic perspective. Though there’s nothing particularly wrong with the CIAs report. Brutally honest and direct. Which is highly unusual for them.
Sometimes the best decision for people long term isn’t always going to be the most “Moral” one. Sometimes someone will need to dirty their hands so the rest of us can keep theirs clean and judge them for having the Gaul to dirty those hands.
As to how I should feel? Well I suppose I’d feel the whole thing a dreadful affair. Perhaps wonder who in power I pissed off enough that they’d sign an order for my death. Then probably make peace with my God. I’d like to think I’d go down swinging. But I couldn’t rightly say.
The tactics though are in use today whether you like it or not. By people and Governments of all stripes and moral alignments and regardless of the laws on the books. About the only real thing you can hope for is those in the positions to make those decisions. Are making the decisions for the right reasons and not selfish gain. That and I suppose that you don’t end up on a kill list.
World isn’t perfect. If it was we wouldn’t be in this mess in the first place. And such reports wouldn’t even be a thing.
We don’t get to choose the World we live in. But we do get to choose how we live in it. Instead of being concerned with the fear of it potentially being used on you. Instead ask yourself.
“How can I help create a world where such decisions are no longer necessary? “
Really wasn’t factoring in the CIA. But more so making a general commentary on the nature of leadership and the necessity of hard decisions and that sometimes those decisions by virtue of the difficulty wouldn’t be “morally clean”.
It turned towards assassination mostly because that’s what the document involved. But the point stands mostly as a general one. Hard Choices need to be made. And sometimes you need to set aside morals to make the best ones.
Heavy is the head that bears the Crown. Heavier still is the heart of the wearer.
And to your point though. The CIA will likely do whatever they think is best for “Their Empire.” Only thing we know with certainty. That Empire doesn’t involve the American people.
Morally it can be a Grey area and mostly depends on the theoretical leader in question. Sure you could arrest the insurgent leader with a penchant for bombing malls. But if he gets out and starts bombing malls again. Did you really solve anything?
In the case of say The Civil Disobedience type of “Insurgent”. Their antics are usually an inconvenience or annoying. Assassinating him you can easily make the argument as being morally reprehensible.
From a strictly pragmatic perspective. Though there’s nothing particularly wrong with the CIAs report. Brutally honest and direct. Which is highly unusual for them.
Sometimes the best decision for people long term isn’t always going to be the most “Moral” one. Sometimes someone will need to dirty their hands so the rest of us can keep theirs clean and judge them for having the Gaul to dirty those hands.
...what if they employed the same tactics on you or me?
As to how I should feel? Well I suppose I’d feel the whole thing a dreadful affair. Perhaps wonder who in power I pissed off enough that they’d sign an order for my death. Then probably make peace with my God. I’d like to think I’d go down swinging. But I couldn’t rightly say.
The tactics though are in use today whether you like it or not. By people and Governments of all stripes and moral alignments and regardless of the laws on the books. About the only real thing you can hope for is those in the positions to make those decisions. Are making the decisions for the right reasons and not selfish gain. That and I suppose that you don’t end up on a kill list.
World isn’t perfect. If it was we wouldn’t be in this mess in the first place. And such reports wouldn’t even be a thing.
We don’t get to choose the World we live in. But we do get to choose how we live in it. Instead of being concerned with the fear of it potentially being used on you. Instead ask yourself.
“How can I help create a world where such decisions are no longer necessary? “
Then go out and do it.
...valid observation, nicely stated and framed....
... the CIA will do what is right for the Empire....
...doggy winks...
Really wasn’t factoring in the CIA. But more so making a general commentary on the nature of leadership and the necessity of hard decisions and that sometimes those decisions by virtue of the difficulty wouldn’t be “morally clean”.
It turned towards assassination mostly because that’s what the document involved. But the point stands mostly as a general one. Hard Choices need to be made. And sometimes you need to set aside morals to make the best ones.
Heavy is the head that bears the Crown. Heavier still is the heart of the wearer.
And to your point though. The CIA will likely do whatever they think is best for “Their Empire.” Only thing we know with certainty. That Empire doesn’t involve the American people.