Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
19. Perhaps, but NONE are assassinations of American officials.
Wed May 3, 2017, 02:27 PM
May 2017

Btw, the point of all this is really that American officials don't assassinate each other in our advanced democracy and also that leaders of advanced nations simply do not assassinate each others' officials.

Probably not just because diplomacy has very well developed procedures that offer far better alternatives, and not just for moral and ethical reasons, but also in part for the same reasons it was once simply unthinkable for officers to order troops to aim at their counterparts, or for them to treat captured officers as anything but gentlemen deserving of special courtesy. But in any case, this prohibition is extremely well embedded in the cultures of all advances nations, and probably many others.

A murderous autocrat like Putin might enjoy thumbing his nose at other nations by assassinating Russians overseas and thus pushing way beyond the accepted behaviors of nations, but he would risk losing everything if he dared such an unthinkable aggression.

I enjoy good political thrillers, in print and film, but this kind of thing is mostly just enjoyable fiction, not reality. Of course, the bizarre, amoral, unstable, amateurs who used Rump to get "inside," might be capable of anything. But if they did indulge, it would only speed their transfer from the national scene to federal penitentiaries.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»AP SOURCE: YATES TO TESTI...»Reply #19