Should the US assassinate suspected terrorists in foreign countries?
The United States began using drones to conduct targeted killings in the wake of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. President George W. Bush authorized dozens of drone strikes against terrorism suspects , and President Barack Obama continued this practice and actually expanded the use of drones. Drones use continued under President Trump and President Biden. Drones were used in areas of war, such as Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya and also against terrorist suspects found in countries such as Pakistan, Somalia and Libya.
@ISIDEWITH8yrs8Y
Yes
@9FQW25DRepublican12mos12MO
It’s none of Americas business if there’s a threat to any other country or even for the US miles away. Assassinating someone who’s not attacking US citizens outside the US or in the US is unacceptable and the foreign countries should deal with it.
@9FLPZHC12mos12MO
The United States should not get involved in another country's domestic affairs. Keeping them out is our affair, but tracking them down and killing them is overreach.
@9FQ2P9WRepublican12mos12MO
We came up with rights because we are all human and we should keep the rules the same for everyone in our country and not discriminate.
@9FRVB2K12mos12MO
The assassination of someone in a Foreign can bring a lot of bad to the United States, and even war. This can result in bad blood between countries and even hurt those we are allied with.
@ISIDEWITH8yrs8Y
No
@9FJ94FYLibertarian12mos12MO
If they are proven to be a danger to the citizens of the united states, then why wait for people to die before taking action?
if we just go assassinate any and all suspected terrorists, we will find ourselves in a problem of eventually killing an innocent civilian.
@9GL829211mos11MO
Your life is something that should never be threatened, regardless of whether or not you are a US citizen. If we are granted life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, then others around the world should too.
@9FQ2P9WRepublican12mos12MO
We all have natural rights and everyone is human and we shouldn't change the rules of our country for one person.
@ISIDEWITH8yrs8Y
Yes, but only if there is undeniable evidence they are planning to attack our country
Top Disagreement
There was "undeniable evidence" that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. There was "undeniable evidence" that Iraqi soldiers were throwing babies out of incubators in Kuwait. The propaganda arm of the U.S. government is very good at manufacturing atrocities to justify war, and very good at sweeping it under the rug shortly after the lie has been exposed.
@9GDNDF8Constitution11mos11MO
If whether or not the atrocity happened is debatable, the U.S. government should speak to the Iraqi government about this issue and come out with a solution.
@9GX5C6Y10mos10MO
Killing them wont achieve anything as they may be attached to bigger conflicts that we would lose information on if they’re gone
@9GVZM28Libertarian10mos10MO
Sometimes you have to take the chance. Sometimes its unsafe to not take the chance. It's better safe than sorry. There has to be enough evidence but not too little.
@9GRCHDQ11mos11MO
There should constantly be police ready to be available nearby the school in case of an attack. Many deaths occur in school shootings due to the late response of reinforcement.
@ISIDEWITH8yrs8Y
No, they should be captured and given a fair trial
@9FM8H7J 12mos12MO
They are terrorists. They know what they got into, and they deserve harsh punishment for conducting such actions. Being strict will allow an example to be set.
@9FPY3FN12mos12MO
Unless the activities of foreign threats directly impact American operations abroad, or our defined international allies, there should be no direct involvement by any other country without explicit request or reason.
@9F9JJ2L1yr1Y
If they did a horrific act like terrorism or genocide they should be eliminated on they spot, just like there victims
@9GN3DK511mos11MO
My position of "No, they should be captured and given a fair trial" on foreign assassination is based on several key principles, such as the importance of adhering to international law, protecting human rights, and ensuring a fair and just legal process for all individuals. Here's some context and additional information to support this position:
1. International Law: The United Nations Charter and various international treaties, such as the Geneva Conventions, establish legal frameworks governing armed conflict and the treatment of individuals during armed conflicts. These inter… Read more
@ISIDEWITH8yrs8Y
Yes, but only if there is undeniable evidence they have committed an attack against our country
@9FQ5ZLJ12mos12MO
If there is not something done about them and we allow them to just go through with their attack, we are allowing innocent lives to be a stake. Either way, it will end in blood, it is just a matter of taking one life to save multiple, or letting that one life go on and losing multiple more.
@ISIDEWITH8yrs8Y
No, capture, interrogate, and imprison them instead
@9FLB4D412mos12MO
If it is found that a suspected terrorist is undeniably planning to attack our country Neutralising that target could dissuade future terrorists from attempting an attack.
@9FVYL3512mos12MO
No, I do not believe that should be done unless we receive more information of taking down the enemy.
@9GCMZV511mos11MO
If they are a suspect terrorist with a bad past, capturing and imprisoning might not be enough to prevent an attack.
@8LXGL9PIndependent4yrs4Y
Yes, if either undeniable evidence of a planned or past attack is attained.
@9GLVJ4S11mos11MO
Yes, but only with Congressional approval and only if there is undeniable evidence of a past or impending attack.
@ISIDEWITH10mos10MO
How do you perceive the balance between a government's duty to protect its citizens and the rights of individuals in other nations?
Protection of citizen is paramount and their protection should be highest on governments priority list
@9H8GTQV10mos10MO
The balance between a government's duty to protect its citizens and the rights of individuals in other nations is a complex and nuanced ethical and legal challenge. The concept of "Foreign Assassination" raises ethical, moral, and legal questions that touch on principles of national security, human rights, and international law.
@9H8GRJT10mos10MO
The rights of individuals in other nations is tilted more.
@9TGQ5ZD7 days7D
I think in different nations it can't be any better than the U.S
@ISIDEWITH10mos10MO
Can the intent to prevent potential threats justify the actions of countries taking the law into their own hands?
@9H99RBKIndependent10mos10MO
depends but the same time they need to take it to there own hands if needed to and for the justify actions and reasons not normal one serious ones
@9H8F3HH10mos10MO
yes it can becuase if the united states has a suspicion to suspect any possible assassins then the president can give orders to kill anyone that is taking actions against assassination.
Everyone deserves a fair trial before having their life taken away.
@9D8TB681yr1Y
Yes and drug and slave traffickers
@9FCNKDJ1yr1Y
USA should stay with in USA when it comes down too criminal actions. Terrorists from other nations should be treated as if a War criminal.
While I understand your sentiment, it's important to note that terrorism is a global issue, not confined to any one country. Take for example, the 9/11 attacks in 2001. It was an act committed by terrorists from abroad, causing destruction in the USA. In response, international cooperation was crucial in the pursuit of those responsible. Treating terrorists merely as war criminals might not be sufficient as it doesn't address the root causes of terrorism. In your opinion, what could be a more effective global strategy to combat terrorism?
@ISIDEWITH10mos10MO
How would you feel if a foreign country carried out a secret mission on your homeland's soil without permission?
@ISIDEWITH10mos10MO
Do you believe there's a moral difference between direct military action and covert operations in foreign lands, and why?
@9H8DRXYPeace and Freedom10mos10MO
Yes there is. Not only do covert operations allow the government to do as they please without oversight, they also undermine our relationship with foreign allies or potential allies.
@ISIDEWITH10mos10MO
What are the potential long-term implications for a country's image when it is known to carry out covert operations abroad?
@9H8J8TLRepublican10mos10MO
i think that when a country assasinates someone who might have been a public figure or even a hero to someone elses eyes. it reflects on us and can ultimatley backfire and is why we need to run fair trials.
It can make a country look harsh or tarnish their reputations
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
