A question of ethics.

Ok, I was watching a video done by Walid Shoebat, and had a thought. For the uninitiated, Walid's main 'thing' is, he believes that Islam, an it's coming Mahdi, is the biblical Anti-Christ. Check out his videos online, if interested in the subject. Pretty compelling stuff.

But... that's not really the point. The point was, an ethical quandary. First, I have to say that the idea of using evil to combat evil is not an original one, but one I find to be interesting. Assuming you could obtain target intel, would it then be 'wrong' to pay organized crime, like the Mexican Cartels, to take care of the problem? Could that be an acceptable solution for our political leaders? Would it even work? It gives me chills.

reply to post by Chronogoblin


I don't think it is feasible for a couple of reasons (both of which are simply uneducated guesses on my part). First, I am not sure how much reach the Mexican Cartel actually has, but I hazard a guess that their 'pull' in Middle Eastern countries (where I am just Assuming you are talking about) is minimal and limited. I say limited because if they have contacts 'over there', I suspect they are related to their profit margin in the drug industry.

The second reason is that I think that 'hiring' them to handle US problems in the Middle East would put a strain on the (assumed) existing business relationship. That would again affect the profit margins of both the Cartel and the US.

As for the idea itself, of hiring one bad guy to deal with another, I see no problem with it.

reply to post by Chronogoblin


It's too late. There's already speculation that the cartels are in the employ of Islamic radical groups using them to smuggle across our border.

The cartels will work for whomever has the most money, and there is far more oil and drug money than there ever could be tax (or Fed printed funny) money.

reply to post by Chronogoblin


If you KNOW that a person will commit an atrocity, an act of evil against humanity and you know this without doubt then you must use any means necessary to stop that person.

That said, what if the Mahdi is already here, in a position of absolute power, with command over armies?

In that case maybe you should convert, fall to your knees and begin praying.

reply to post by Chronogoblin


"would it work?"
First of all, this has nothing to do with the ethical question.

Furthermore, religion wraps relative ethics around it's central theology. In many cases, any sort of atrocity can be justified by theology.

"Kill 'em all and let God sort it out" is an American chestnut.

That's what's so awesome about religion. You can judge other people and even kill them and wash it all clean with theology. There are no absolute ethical limits when you are in the domain of religion.

reply to post by InverseLookingGlass


That sort of reasoning is not unique to religion.

People who have any kind of cause they believe in will use it to justify mass murder. Look around at the causes of the world form creating Utopia (or the Workers' paradise) to saving Gaia, people will openly talk about or even move on to committing murder in the name of their cause.

reply to post by MojaveBurning


I didn't consider the problem of reach. Having thought only of how interesting it would be to point one terroristic organization against another. Consider it more of a 'Deadliest Warrior' thing then. I suppose ethics then has no real place, so I'll just drop that issue.

reply to post by ketsuko


I suppose great minds think alike. Not TOO surprised to hear that. Thanks.

ausername
reply to post by Chronogoblin

 

If you KNOW that a person will commit an atrocity, an act of evil against humanity and you know this without doubt then you must use any means necessary to stop that person.

That said, what if the Mahdi is already here, in a position of absolute power, with command over armies?

In that case maybe you should convert, fall to your knees and begin praying.

That entity/position doesn't yet exist. Thankfully. Thinking of our current POTUS, are we? I don't think that's his job. I think his job is to make us weak, which he's doing quite well. His handlers will reward him well when his term is through, if they don't hang him out to dry first.