# Law Against Assassination of Hostile Foreign Leaders **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [September 16, 2001, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/law-against-assassination-of-hostile-foreign-leaders/82033 "2001-09-16T23:31:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2001, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/law-against-assassination-of-hostile-foreign-leaders/82033/1 "2001-09-16T23:31:41Z")
This may turn out to be a Great Debate, who knows. If so, moderators, feel free to move it (as if you needed my permission ;)). I looked there first and this doesn’t seem to be being discussed there yet, so… > [@](#): > > Secretary of State Colin Powell said Sunday the Bush administration has not ruled out rescinding a 1976 executive order that bans the United States from involvement in assassinations around the world. “We’re examining everything,” Powell told CNN. They’re conducting an online poll asking, **“Should U.S. law be changed to allow the assassination of hostile foreign leaders?”** [here](http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/gen.america.under.attack/). (Well, at least they were a minute ago, because I just took it. Now it’s a poll about what you’re going to do when the stock market opens on Monday. Ah well, even more reason to poll people here, I guess. Perhaps they’re rotating them and it will be available again later.) You can read the full story [here](http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/gen.powell.cia/). [The results](http://www.cnn.com/POLL/results/1657461.content.html) as of now are 216,968 (71%) in favor and 90,095 (29%) opposed. How would you vote, and why? * * * Jeg elsker dig, Thomas ---
**Author:** ![capacitor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e47774/32.png) [@capacitor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/capacitor)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2001, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/law-against-assassination-of-hostile-foreign-leaders/82033/2 "2001-09-16T23:36:09Z")
No, because it would make the president of this country fair game as well. JFK’s assassination is still sometimes seen as Castro’s revenge. ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2001, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/law-against-assassination-of-hostile-foreign-leaders/82033/3 "2001-09-16T23:59:09Z")
Also, just FYI, anyone interested in really having their opinion heard on this issue need only [click here](http://www.house.gov/writerep/) to contact your Representative in Congress - (especially if you don’t know who your Representative is. That website allows you to enter your State and Zip Code to find out), or [here](http://www.senate.gov/contacting/index_by_state.cfm) to contact your Senate Representatives. P.S. to the non-American Dopers: I’d be very interested to know how the rest of the world views the U.S. as possible assassins, as well. ---
**Author:** ![Scotticher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9c0ed/32.png) [@Scotticher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scotticher)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2001, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/law-against-assassination-of-hostile-foreign-leaders/82033/4 "2001-09-17T00:08:17Z")
I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, if it is clearly proven that Bin Laden is responsible for this atrocity, assasination would hopefully prevent more innocent people from being killed. On the other hand, it is really important to me that we not become that which we abhor. Which in this case is a terrorist. So I guess that for me to say yes, I would need for Bin Laden to have been tried in an international court of law and have been convicted in absentia. But that would be better than finding and trying him, because it is clear to me that many innocent lives are going to be lost in finding and arresting him. If it can even be done. As to what **capacitor** said, I think that the President is already most certainly a target of assassination by terrorist groups. The only question is whether our doing this (assassination) would justify to some people having it be done to _us._ It is a very difficult question. I don’t know the answer. I just hope that the people running this country can make the right decision…I wouldn’t want their job for ANYTHING. ---
**Author:** ![Chanteuse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9de053/32.png) [@Chanteuse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chanteuse)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2001, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/law-against-assassination-of-hostile-foreign-leaders/82033/5 "2001-09-17T00:56:48Z")
As I heard someone say on the news, it’s absurd that we will bomb a country and end up killing civilians, but we won’t take out the leader of the group. ---
**Author:** ![RoboDude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bbe5ce/32.png) [@RoboDude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RoboDude)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2001, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/law-against-assassination-of-hostile-foreign-leaders/82033/6 "2001-09-17T01:05:22Z")
> [@](#): > > So I guess that for me to say yes, I would need for Bin Laden to have been tried in an international court of law and have been convicted in absentia. But that would be better than finding and trying him, because it is clear to me that many innocent lives are going to be lost in finding and arresting him. If it can even be done. Wouldn’t we still have to find him in order to punish him? Convicting him with no possibility of actually passing sentence is pretty much the same as never trying him. ---
**Author:** ![capacitor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e47774/32.png) [@capacitor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/capacitor)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2001, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/law-against-assassination-of-hostile-foreign-leaders/82033/7 "2001-09-17T01:14:48Z")
What it does do it gives the free world the legal authorization to capture him and put him on record. ---
**Author:** ![Drastic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Drastic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drastic)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2001, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/law-against-assassination-of-hostile-foreign-leaders/82033/8 "2001-09-17T01:48:48Z")
God forbid the president be a target. It’s much safer for any random citizen to be a target. Rescind it. ---
**Author:** ![freshmeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c4cdca/32.png) [@freshmeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/freshmeat)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2001, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/law-against-assassination-of-hostile-foreign-leaders/82033/9 "2001-09-17T01:51:48Z")
Universally endorsing such behavior would be irresponsible. To do so under a given set of pre-determined circumstances is a wise decision (IMO). FM ---
**Author:** ![jk1245](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/49beb7/32.png) [@jk1245](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jk1245)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2001, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/law-against-assassination-of-hostile-foreign-leaders/82033/10 "2001-09-17T03:03:04Z")
Today on some news talk show (they’re all blurring together now), VP Cheney said that this is not only an option, but may be possible to do w/o rescinding the order. Of course, IANAL, and I haven’t read the order, but my bet would be that it states that the US or its operatives may not assassinate _government officials_ bin Laden, of course, is not a gov official. In this case, I would think it’s justified. I’m still not sure it’s the best course of action, though. Seems making him a martyr would only lead to more acts committed in his name. IMHO, a better fate would be rotting away in a supermax prison with no contact wth the outside world. Then at age 80 he can look back on his wasted life and on his precious movement that he almost single-handedly destroyed and decide if it was worth it. ---
**Author:** ![gryphil](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e68b1a/32.png) [@gryphil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gryphil)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2001, 6:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/law-against-assassination-of-hostile-foreign-leaders/82033/11 "2001-09-17T06:48:12Z")
how about allowing assassinations but only after some kind of congressional proccess similar to decalring war… ---
**Author:** ![Chas.E](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e99b99/32.png) [@Chas.E](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chas.E)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2001, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/law-against-assassination-of-hostile-foreign-leaders/82033/12 "2001-09-17T17:43:02Z")
Assassination isn’t illegal, it is merely prohibited by Executive Order 12333. [http://www.cia.gov/cia/information/eo12333.html#2.11](http://www.cia.gov/cia/information/eo12333.html#2.11) > [@](#): > > 2.11 Prohibition on Assassination. No person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassination. > > 2.12 Indirect Participation. No agency of the Intelligence Community shall participate in or request any person to undertake activities forbidden by this Order. Note that this executive order can be repealed with the stroke of a pen by El Presidente Jorge Bush. ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ecccb3/32.png) [@Lord\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Jim)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2001, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/law-against-assassination-of-hostile-foreign-leaders/82033/13 "2001-09-17T22:17:51Z")
I’ve been thinking about this question for quite a while now. I don’t think I’ve really come up with an answer. Like many, I’d prefer a targeted assassination over bomb and missile strikes that kills a lot of innocent people. However, thinking beyond the current crisis, would we have assassins spread around the globe waiting for the order to kill even before we are thinking of using other deadly force? Also, is it our right to topple governments because we don’t like them? Sanctions are to try to convince the people to rise up against their government, but with assassinations, we are taking in our own hands. Also, what do our allies think of us allowing assassinations? Our enemies have few qualms about assassinations, but our friends might. But, would it send a message to the governments that are harboring terrorist that we are serious? This is a simplistic overview of my thoughts. I suppose I’m for rescinding the order until it causes a problem. Jim ---
**Author:** ![Chas.E](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e99b99/32.png) [@Chas.E](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chas.E)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2001, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/law-against-assassination-of-hostile-foreign-leaders/82033/14 "2001-09-18T01:22:48Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by JimB \* > \*\*Also, is it our right to topple governments because we don’t like them? \*\* Only if it is our OWN government. Check it out, it’s in the Declaration of Independence. The rejection of assassination is one of the few reasons the US can claim the moral high ground in international politics. For us to rescind this policy will make us as bad as the terrorists, we will become murderers for political causes. The difference is only in quantity, not quality. ---
**Author:** ![CrankyAsAnOldMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crankyasanoldman/32/11670_2.png) [@CrankyAsAnOldMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CrankyAsAnOldMan)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2001, 1:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/law-against-assassination-of-hostile-foreign-leaders/82033/15 "2001-09-18T01:41:08Z")
I guess it’s because killing a leader would plunge a country into god knows what, destabilizing everything. If every leader is fair game, then we’ve got a hell of an unstable global political environment. On the other hand, I think about when Kings used to ride to war. Would leaders be so quick to send troops and commit military actions if THEIR ass was first in line, instead of the lives of faceless thousands? As Mayflower said…It is disturbing to think that because we’re unwilling to punish the leader of a country, the person absolutely responsibly for political decisions we object to, we instead find it more “moral” to drop bombs on people who had very little to do with what we object to. It’s maddening. Along similar lines, if the terrorists were so damn pissed off about something our government did, go after the damned people responsible! Kill the all the senators who voted for the last Israeli aid package, if that’s your beef. Leave the people in the trade center alone. Okay, I didn’t mean they should kill anyone, certainly not our elected leaders. I just mean it’s perverse that the people who died, as in many acts of war, didn’t have much to do with the people who pissed the enemy off. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2001, 3:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/law-against-assassination-of-hostile-foreign-leaders/82033/16 "2001-09-18T03:55:05Z")
I think not. Assassination _may_ work when you are trying to destabilize a government that is top-heavy with power, but it cannot work with a religious organization with members spread throughout the world, especially when the leader has already picked out four or five different people to succeed him. Can you say _martyr_? Can you say _massive retaliation throughout the world by people unafraid to die for their cause_? I knew you could. ---
**Author:** ![Rossarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/3e96dc/32.png) [@Rossarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rossarian)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2001, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/law-against-assassination-of-hostile-foreign-leaders/82033/17 "2001-09-18T04:04:25Z")
I don’t think we should. I also don’t think it applies to bin Laden anyway. He’s not a leader of a nation and he declared war on us. He seems like a “soldier” to me. And therefore a legitimate target. But rescinding that order would just look bad. ---
**Author:** ![even\_sven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dfb087/32.png) [@even\_sven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/even_sven)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2001, 5:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/law-against-assassination-of-hostile-foreign-leaders/82033/18 "2001-09-18T05:28:01Z")
We don’t assassinate because in order to have diplomatic relations, we need governments. Even if they are governments that we don’t like, it is in the best interest of the world that people with whom we can deal with through diplomatic channels be in power. Beyond, that, people have an inherent right to self-government. If we don’t dig that government, we can commit to war. War is terrible, but assassinations can be even worse. At least war ensures that a nation is fully committed to it’s cause, and that it’s actions are scrutiable to the international public. If we just covertly offed everyone we didn’t like, there would be no international accoutablity, and chaos would soon reign. ---
**Author:** ![betenoir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/258eb7/32.png) [@betenoir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/betenoir)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2001, 6:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/law-against-assassination-of-hostile-foreign-leaders/82033/19 "2001-09-18T06:10:24Z")
Yeah but…everybody who’s talking about how we have no right to overthrow governments or destabilize countries is missing the point (also aready made) that Bin Ladan is not the leader of any country or part of any government. In fact, from what I’ve just heard about it, the orginal order was specifically regarding assasination of “heads of state”. Bin Laden in NOT a head of any State. That said, the order has subsequently been interpreted broadly, and expanded to include all forms of assasination- and I would suppose include the kind of leader bin Laden is. But it would not take a recinding of the entire order (or a feild day on soveriegn goverments) if we wanted to go after bin Laden. THAT said, how much good would it actually do us, I wonder? From what I’ve heard about what we know of his operation (and mostly I’ve heard we don’t know nearly enough) he’s more of a nexus and organiser (and financer) of many anti-American than the Furhur behind it all. getting rid of him would distrupt the system for a time, but would it destroy the web? Or, to go with another image, if we lop off one bin Laden, would three grow back in his place? ---
**Author:** ![Tony\_Montana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/278dde/32.png) [@Tony\_Montana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tony_Montana)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2001, 6:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/law-against-assassination-of-hostile-foreign-leaders/82033/20 "2001-09-19T06:07:10Z")
earlier today former prez clinton belched something to the effect that this doesnt apply since bin ladan is not a head of state, he’s a terrorist. and we would be gunning for him…😃 😃 😃 [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/law-against-assassination-of-hostile-foreign-leaders/82033.md?page=2)