Go Darke

Light thinks it travels faster than anything but it is wrong. No matter how fast light travels, it finds the darkness has always got there first, and is waiting for it

Libertarianism

Black like our helicopters

Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is dead. (Admittedly he has been ‘dead’ before) Not that I’m punting any conspiracy theory nonsense. I should probably also say right near the beginning that I’m glad he’s dead. I mean if I had to pick an emotional response to such an event. He was, by any metric, a massive turd who is responsible for incalculable suffering and misery. Good riddance.

Which brings me, I suppose, to my gripe of the moment. Assassinations. Of which I am not a fan. And yes, I realize the pie-chart of things I am against if overwhelmingly colored in favor of all things anti… while the things that I am ‘for’ occupy only a tiny sliver of tincture.

Lets circle back for a second to Obama and Osama Bin Laden. From all accounts Osama could have been captured… but the intention was always to express his frontal cortex onto the opposing wall with extreme prejudice. Ethically… that doesn’t sit well with me. If Osama had burst out of his bedroom AKSU in hand, by all means expedite his wishes to investigate the afterlife. But enemies should always be given quarter.

I mean I get the overwhelming complexity and difficulty in having to capture someone of that caliber alive, not to mention imprison them, have a trial (where someone would have to defend them) and then potentially execute them. But… I think the mission parameters should always be to try and take them alive. Once you dip a toe into the murky world of extra-judicious killings… well… this just seems like shaky ground to be moralizing from. After all the western world, and the United States in particular is supposed to be paragon of Western* values (is there even such a thing… maybe I’m just being insanely naive)

*Lots of people may argue this to be Judeo-Christian values… in which case extra-judicious killings are definitely frowned upon. But you know, apparently you can interpret these things differently. I obviously favor western ideals like human rights and the pursuit of individual liberty and freedom (and therefore by association non-aggression)

In any event. I’m glad I am not in a position of leadership where I have to make decisions where one may have to trade lives in order to stand on principle. After all how any commandos lives should be sacrificed in order to take someone like al-Baghdadi or Bin Laden alive?

Of course, from what I understand al-Baghdadi detonated a suicide vest inside a tunnel with three of his children while being chased by dogs. (which are very different circumstances)

Of course my first thought was… damn… I hope the dogs are okay. WHY IS NO ONE MENTIONING WHAT HAPPENED TO THE DOGS?

BUT… I don’t think the intention was ever to take al-Baghdadi alive.

And then the Trump creep show that followed…. well… the less I say about that the better…

As usual I don’t have any solutions. I’m just waffling. Maybe not even coherently.

Postscript

I think if the post-event press conference had gone something along the lines of…

We launched an operation to capture Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in Syria 12hrs ago. Our intention was to capture him alive and return him to the International criminal court* for crimes against humanity. Unfortunately during the operation Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi detonated a explosive device and was killed.

*Even though I think this is a gutless and totally useless organization I think there would have to be some level of globalism when dealing with someone who has killed and maimed citizens from many nations.

… I would have felt better about the whole thing.

Anways, this is not what we got.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.