« Unequal Lives | Main | What Are They Justified to Do, Then? »
January 18, 2006
Who's Number Two
The arguments that defend the missile strike in Pakistan, which killed at least 18 civilians, seem to center around the idea that it would be a "regrettable" but worthwile result if Ayman Al-Zawahiri was killed in the process.
Here's a pretty succint explanation why I think that line of reasoning is wrong (even at its face value):
Posted by zeynep at January 18, 2006 09:27 AM
Comments
In other news today, Indian government officials have expressed regret over the loss of innocent life after their missile strike on the US House of Representatives. Two hundred fifty-four members of Conmgress and a school group from Boise, Idaho, were among the dead.
"We had good intelligence that the former CEO of Union Carbide was in the building," said a government spokesperson. "This man is wanted in India for the deaths of thousands killed by poisonous gas in the city of Bhopal, and he has been in hiding ever since he was indicted. It would have been far more regrettable to have let him get away."
Posted by: Michael Steinberg at January 18, 2006 09:44 AM
Michael, that was a great analogy!
Posted by: The Rambling Taoist at January 18, 2006 06:30 PM
``Who are you? I am the new number 2. Who is number 1? You are number 6.''
The Prisoner, intro sequence.
Nice point about the Bhopal disaster. The U.S. does not abide by the rules of conduct it requires of other countries. Try telling that you're special and the rules don't apply to you when the Highway Patrol car pulls you over for speeding.
Posted by: Paul Lyon at January 19, 2006 03:17 AM
Good Bhopal link. Except in that case, their explanation would be a lot more acceptable, and, well I should probably stop there.
See, the neat thing is that apparently we now have a usable equation for these kinds of events. Eighteen citizens equal one Al-Qaeda top guy. So that's the standard. Now, if the next time they kill 19 folks and no Al-Qaeda peeps, THEN we have a right to complain, because they've f--ked the equation. See how nicely that works out?
Posted by: catherine at January 19, 2006 06:54 PM