Can Assassination Be Moral?

The above picture is of a group that represents Hezbollah. The organization was founded in approximately 1982-1985 by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. The group was originally funded and backed by Iran as a contingent of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. Hezbollah is a political, military and religious organization in Lebanon. The majority of members are Shia muslims and along with the establishment of an Islamic government in Lebanon, they call for the destruction of Israel.

The group has grown from a single military force to having control of radio stations, providing social reform programs and seats in the Lebanese government. They claim that Israel is ulitmately an unlawful entity and should not exist.

The picture above should bring back memories of Anti-Semitism in Eastern Europe, especially in Germany. Hezbollah is described by many as a terrorist organization with an agenda to completely destroy all Israelis.

Tuesday night, Imad Mughniyeh, a top leader of Hezbollah was killed in a car bombing in Damascus. No one has claimed reponsibility for the bombing as of yet, but some Syrian officials are claiming that it is the work of Israel. Obviously Syria, who is aligned with countries, like Iran, and organizations, like Hamas, would blaim Israel. Israel is the enemy and to be blamed for everything in the eyes of these fundamentalists.

Could Israel be innoncent? Could one who is sick of watching these terrorist organizations, like Hezbollah, have lashed out in an act of vigilantism. These two explanations do seem possible. On the other hand if it was Israel or another country who assassinated this man; was the action morally justified?

One can think of many examples where an assassination would have eliminated much of the world's suffering. For example, could have the assassinations of people like: Adolf Hitler, Idi Amin Dada, Joseph Stalin led to less suffering in the world? Assassination is NOT the way to solve any problems, but in hindsight would the world have been inflicted by less suffering? We have the ability to view these examples because they are in the past, but could it have helped? I think assassination is not warranted and is a horrible policy, but it brings an important moral question to light. If a person is known to be a terrorist or one who has caused harm, what type of justice should they dealt?

There are a few questions one must ask themselves. Did this man really pose a threat to the ones around him? Was he really a leader of a terrorist oragnization? If the perpatrator was Arab, Syrian, or affiliated with a group ither than Israel, would the truth ever come out? The counrty of Syria is going to accuse their most hated enemy and escapegoat, the Israelis. Justice cannot be served in this fashion. The facts need to be weighed and justice should be served in an even handed attempt to stop terrorism in its tracks. Terrorism is the enemy.

The killing of "innoncent" people is where we need to focus our attention. Think about this question; would you be angry at the death of the person who raped your mother? Would you be mad that the person who slayed your brother, was found dead? This man was known to kill in cold blood. He led an organization that takes part in horrible terrorist actions. This type of evidence needs to be reviewed.

The political and religious rhetoric of one counrty to another needs to stop. Terrorism is a global problem and needs to be dealt with by the global communtiy.