|
|
Post by Brian the Flying Penguin on Jul 16, 2005 14:32:05 GMT -5
I am making this thread to discuss causality. I will try to keep it more theoretical than practical, but if it degenerates into an argument between hershey and me, well, you've been warned.
Situation:
The Prime Minister of Switzerland decides that it is in the interest of Switzerland to have President Bush killed. Swiss law enables him to do this, so he would not be breaking Swiss law. Money is drawn from general taxation, paid into by all Swiss adults. An assassin not otherwise affiliated with the Swiss government (let us say from South Africa) is hired, travels to the US and kills the President. He is then arrested.
Against whom should the US retaliate? The assassin who actually killed the President? The Prime Minister who arranged the killing? The people of Switzerland who funded the assassin? The South African government for not keeping track of their dangerous citizens?
What do you think?
|
|
Hershey
S.P.A.C.E. Ensign
Posts: 21
|
Post by Hershey on Jul 16, 2005 16:45:59 GMT -5
As I repeatedly stressed in the other thread, I don't think the public should be drawn into matters like this. They paid their taxes but at the end of the day they have to... they may not have known where it was going to be spent and even if some did, any retaliatory action taken against them wouldn't distinguish between the supporters of the assassination and the opposed or ignorant.
If the Assassin was a free agent I wouldn't let any blame fall on South Africa for the hit.
Don't worry, these are just my views and since this is a theoretical discussion I'm not going to get wound up over it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brian the Flying Penguin on Jul 16, 2005 17:05:25 GMT -5
What if, although they didn't know about this particular assassination, the people of Switzerland knew that their Prime Minister had this power?
|
|
Hershey
S.P.A.C.E. Ensign
Posts: 21
|
Post by Hershey on Jul 16, 2005 18:42:34 GMT -5
Well, anyone has the power to hire an assassin. Lots of old laws have no meaning in modern society and can be abused. Such a law may exist for use in dire circumstances such as taking out ruthless dictators e.g. pol pot... power is often abused. Taking the UK as a prime example, a great deal of the general public are ignorant of many of the laws of the state. As before you can't distinguish and so I wouldn't take action against them.
What are your views on the situation?
|
|
|
|
Post by Brian the Flying Penguin on Jul 17, 2005 5:22:10 GMT -5
Why should I give my final opinion if you haven't?
;D
The arguments below are Sophilistic in nature and do not necessarily represent my views on the matter.
Not only did the people of Switzerland pay their taxes, but they okayed the laws and elected someone of such moral conscience that he would use them against another head of state. They chose en mass to put him in a position where he could order President Bush killed. Being citizens of a neutral country they also benefit from having a peaceful world (that is to say, ones in which international wars are not being fought). They gain materially from the assassination. They may also, being liberal Europeans, say that Bush is a bad person for allowing all of those Texans to be executed during his time as governor, quite aside from his war record.
|
|
Hershey
S.P.A.C.E. Ensign
Posts: 21
|
Post by Hershey on Jul 17, 2005 19:49:42 GMT -5
That's a bit of a pedantic view. How are they to know about his morality? He is elected for providing the most popular policies and no head of state can get away with saying "If you vote for me I promise to kill Bush". Like a terrorist, racist/prejudiced person the arguement that you have presented generalises all of the public. They may agree with the killing, but they didn't actually perform or order it. I wouldn't order hundred of people to be killed due because they may have done something anyway, I believe in innocence until proven guilty.
How does the Swiss neutrality mean they will benefit from Bush's death materially?
|
|
|
|
Post by Brian the Flying Penguin on Jul 18, 2005 5:21:54 GMT -5
Excuse me? How am I like a racist person?
This is not a real example, obviously. It is possible that the Swiss could benefit from being able to trade with the places on Bushes hit list, in much the same way as France and Russia gained from being able to trade with Iraq.
How is that a pedantic view? The point of this thread is that all parties had some part in the decision making process. No, the people of Switzerland did not en mass demand Bushes death. They merely created the circumstances where their Prime Minister could make such arrangements.
|
|
Hershey
S.P.A.C.E. Ensign
Posts: 21
|
Post by Hershey on Jul 18, 2005 7:01:19 GMT -5
I said the argument was flawed like that of racist persons. You said it was just advocating a view and not necessarily representative of your own opinions. The reason I say that is because it is a hasty generalisation, that a few people represent the whole population.
If the laws already existed and the public are not mind readers then anyone they elected could have taken that course of action. Did everyone know that Blair was going to lead us into an illegal war? No. He didn’t respond to the publics negative view of the war and as the leader he should be the one to take responsibility, he should at least have resigned and maybe even been arrested for war crimes. The only way they public could be safe from repercussions, with that argument, is if no one voted, or we had a dictatorship or an anarchic world.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brian the Flying Penguin on Jul 20, 2005 4:28:51 GMT -5
My understanding of racism is that negative stereotypes are attached without any actual experience of those behaviours in the targeted groups. If all white Europeans were lazy, it wouldn't be racist to say that all white Europeans were lazy, for example.
To be Prime Minister he would have to have secured the support of a significant minority, if not an outright majority. Does your belief that the people of Switzerland are not responsible for the assassination rest on the fact that they didn't know about it, however they might feel about it in theory?
|
|
