Why can't we just assassinate nasty world leaders?

[cags]

Everytime I see photos of blown up children I go crazy. I know we have laws against assassinating people, but why. Is it better to kills thousands of children just to stop one man.

I just don't understand,

[buzzard]

1. It is not really about getting rid of the leaders. n/t

[toymachines]

3. thats the catch

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[toymachines]

4. hahaha

very true

[Clark2008]

5. Heh... I was about to make this point.

If the world body politic agreed that we could start shooting nasty leaders, Bush probably would be at the top of more than half the countries in this world's lists.

[illflem]

6. Sometimes the next guy in line is worse

Excellent example is Cheney

[gordianot]

8. LOL.....and what comes after Cheney may be even worse still.

This is what you call built in job security.

[renegade000]

7. a regime

is much more than one man

[LostInAnomie]

9. If we break that rule, then other countries will as well...

... and no matter how good the Secret Service is the President is one of the most public politicians in the world and would be an easy target.

We don't want to get that ball rolling.

[genius]

10. What if they start first?

[LostInAnomie]

12. At present, I would shed no tears.

But if it were 10 or so years ago it would suck.

[w13rd0]

13. Perhaps you forget shock & awe...

...and our attempts to target Saddam specifically, even going so far as to bomb a market of civilians to hit that one man. We've already gotten that ball rolling I'm sorry to say...

[John_H]

11. because we'd go through presidents like Chimp goes through campaign cash.

The nast leaders still alive might say, "Hmmmm, I get them before they get me." Not a wise policy, as JFK may or may not agree.