Assassinate Terrorists, Australian 'ex-diplomat'.

Duncan Campbell, a former Australian ambassador to Rome and Vienna and once a deputy head of the Department of Foreign Affairs, says targeting and eliminating known terrorists is more efficient and costs fewer lives than waging conventional war.

A policy of state-sponsored assassinations might be more morally justified than taking part in poorly thought-through military actions in Iraq and Afghanistan, which inevitably inflict casualties on innocents, he argues. Mr Campbell told the Herald that someone like Abu Bakar Bashir, said to be the spiritual head of Jemaah Islamiah, could present a legitimate target for a state-sanctioned but "deniable" poisoning attempt.

"Can you imagine how easy it ought to be in a prison such as the one Bashir is in, to persuade someone for a lump of money to doctor his rice? That wouldn't involve Australian hands at all, except perhaps the passing by someone to someone of a little lump of chemicals of some sort. "

Article
Ukraine deja vu

To make public this opinion by an 'ex-diplomat' is just stupid and a publicity stunt.

Sanc'.

Sorry, about all the bolded text...it wasn't me

Sanc'.

P.S: D'oh, it was me.

[edit on 18-12-2004 by sanctum]

I wouldn't put anything past the Howard administration, least of all this. The fact is that Abu Bakar Bashir has been a thorn in Howard's side for along time. However, there is a bigger question to be considered: How can the Australian government publicly condemn terrorism, while engaging in its own brand of terrorism against those it considers enemies of Australia? Is not state-sponsored terrorism still terrorism, and is it perhaps worse than other kinds of terrorism, since we expect our publicly elected officials to conform to a higher standard than we hold others too.

Zapata, thats all well and good, but it seems that terrorist simply ignore our "higher standards." Matter of fact, they seem to use our "higher standards" against us.

IMHO, sometimes to get the 'message/point' across, would it be safe to say that if a terrorist or terrorist organization knew that they would be targeted and/or prone to a like response, as they so give with their terorists acts, would that act as a deterent to the terrorist? Maybe, maybe not, but resorting to methods that they will comprehend and understand is sometimes the only alternative, "higher standards" aside. This is like a bully who keeps beating your butt everyday. You know that you can kick his butt, but because your mother taught you "higher standards" (to not fight, blah, blah.) you withhold. The bully laughs and keeps taking advantage of kicking your "higher standards" butt, until one day, you wake up and say "enough is enough," and you kick his butt. The bully seldom to none has little to do with you after. Seems the bully got the "message/point," in that, he realized that if he continues with such acts against you, there is a chance that he will be the one getting his butt kicked, and not you.




seekerof

[edit on 19-12-2004 by Seekerof]

Not only has Bashir been a thorn in Howard's side, from memory he was a
thorn in Suharto's side as well.
While taking out the Bully is a logical step to take, and I agree Seekerof there does come a time to say enough is enough.
I would be a little concerned about the ramifications of assasinating Bashir,
it could well inflame these people even more, where we come to the point
of seeing attacks here on the streets of Australia. The other side of the
coin of this argument of course is that, if we don't rid the world of him,
we could see attacks anyway. Damned if you Do Damned if you Don't.

To make public this opinion by an 'ex-diplomat' is just stupid and a publicity stunt.

Yes maybe, or is it just that people are sick of this whole sorry mess, and
as Seekerof says, time to stand up and say enough is enough, although as I said before assassination may not be the sensible solution.

How can the Australian government publicly condemn terrorism, while engaging in its own brand of terrorism against those it considers enemies of Australia

Sorry, but I find that a curious statement.

Originally posted by Seekerof
Zapata, thats all well and good, but it seems that terrorist simply ignore our "higher standards." Matter of fact, they seem to use our "higher standards" against us.

agreed. However, at this time, Abu Bakar Bashir has not been found guilty of engaging in terrorist actions against Australia and Australian citizens in anything resembling a fair trial. Are we then to skip the pleasantries of this man's indelible human rights and move right along to the execution?