Remember this man:
Nope, that isn’t Sauroman, but rather the vile sewer trout Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, a man whose evil was neither fictional nor banal. He was the leader of Hamas, and responsible for who knows how many deaths in the Middle East.
I say was, because now he is nothing more than a stain on a road somewhere in the Middle East after a successful rocket attack by the IDF (nice shooting, lads- ED.).
Not surprisingly, the usual suspects are all upset:
European Union Foreign Policy Chief Javier Solana also condemned what he called the extra-judicial killing as
Chris in TX
Speaking for a lefty, I think his death is “justified” in the sense that he is a bad person and deserves death for his crimes. So in a moral sense, essentially.
In terms of the practical effects of his death, I’m not sure. Perhaps in this case “justified” is not the right word. Something along the lines of “is this a good idea?” would be a better test.
It seems to me (admittedly ingnorant) that he was more or less not running the day to day operations, so his death will cause little, if any, positive effects by decreasing suicide bombing.
Similarly, it seems as though Hamas has found yet another excuse to margianalize the “moderates” (term used loosely) that would be willing to make peace.
So I think the ultimate question here is not whether it was justified (which I think any reasonable person would) or whether it was a good idea.
As for the Europeans, it saddens me that they would say stuff like that. They are on the wrong side of this as they frequently are regarding Israel. Alas.
HH
Eric Alterman could barely bring himself to register approval of the fact that he was killed…
Chris in TX
And if one believes his line of reasoning (as I’m sure he does), why should he be jumping up and down?
What is wrong with not being overjoyed that even more Palestinians are radicalized and there will almost certainly be a lot of retaliatory suicide bombings? And that the cause of these things was of, at best, marginable benefit to Israel?
I don’t see anything wrong in thinking that the bad things described above are not worth the death of a relatively impotent, if extremely evil, old man.
Now, I’m sure you can find fault in his reasoning, but I don’t see how jumping on him, or anyone discussing the practical effects of this, for not being sufficiently happy for your tastes is at all conducive to the debate.
Kimmitt
I kind of wish the Israelis hadn’t killed six bystanders in the attack. I’m not sorry to see the guy go or anything, but I’m not precisely sure what the folks near him did to deserve assassination.
I mean, other than be near the guy at precisely the wrong moment. Guilt by association, I guess, with the speediest conceivable trial, conviction, and execution.
Jack Sparks
Kimmitt, this will sound callous, but I think standing around Yassin when he’s outside (or inside, for that matter), falls under the doctrine of “assumption of the risk.”
ape
oh dear me. can cole explain what he means by describing Jack Straw as one of the ‘usual suspects’. perhaps in the context of this article from the National Review: command-post.org/oped/2_archives/009791.html
With-us-or-against-us fever seems to have struck pretty fiercely around this area. I think its incurable.. but just in case not.. does it occur to any of you that you might be experiencing difficulties knowing who your friends are? Is criticism really that dangerous?
John Cole
Ape-
Feel free to check my archives. While I was with Jack Straw in Iraq, he has consistently been wrong, IMHO, in regards to terrorism and Israel.
CadillaqJaq
Perhaps the killing of Yassin MAY trouble the mind of his successor, newly named today, and he will be forced to stay constantly alert [and keep a good supply of “Depends” on hand too].
Toren
Actually, despite all the claims and worries to the contrary, targeted killings of the Hamas leadership have *always* resulted in a reduction in terrorist attacks:
thatliberalmedia.com/archives/001725.html#001725
Guess they didn’t get the liberal talking points memo.