Maybe things could have been handled differently. Not every thought experiment can be as fundamentally important as last week's. Take this one for example.
---------------------------------------------------
The president lowered his voice and said, "What you are suggesting is illegal."
"Yes indeed, Mr. President," replied the general. "But you have to ask yourself how best to protect the lives of your citizens. The situation is simple: Tatum is determined both to mount a campaign of ethnic cleansing in his own country and to launch military attacks on us. Our intelligence tells us that he is almost alone in this view and that if we were to take him out, he would be replaced by the far more moderate Nesta."
"Yes, but you talk about us taking him out. Assassination of a foreign leader is contrary to international law."
The general sighed. "But Mr. President, you must see how simple your choice is. One bullet, followed by a few more as security services clean up afterwards, will be enough to avert a widespread massacre and probable war. I know you don't want the blood of a foreign leader on your hands, but would you prefer to be drowning in the blood of thousands of his, and your own, people?"
Baggini, J., The Pig That Wants to Be Eaten, 2005, p. 190.
---------------------------------------------------
What do you think? When is morality above the law? Could assassination ever be justified?
---------------------------------------------------
The president lowered his voice and said, "What you are suggesting is illegal."
"Yes indeed, Mr. President," replied the general. "But you have to ask yourself how best to protect the lives of your citizens. The situation is simple: Tatum is determined both to mount a campaign of ethnic cleansing in his own country and to launch military attacks on us. Our intelligence tells us that he is almost alone in this view and that if we were to take him out, he would be replaced by the far more moderate Nesta."
"Yes, but you talk about us taking him out. Assassination of a foreign leader is contrary to international law."
The general sighed. "But Mr. President, you must see how simple your choice is. One bullet, followed by a few more as security services clean up afterwards, will be enough to avert a widespread massacre and probable war. I know you don't want the blood of a foreign leader on your hands, but would you prefer to be drowning in the blood of thousands of his, and your own, people?"
Baggini, J., The Pig That Wants to Be Eaten, 2005, p. 190.
---------------------------------------------------
What do you think? When is morality above the law? Could assassination ever be justified?
