Position paper 7 see below - Essay Example

Allowing Targeted Killing of Terrorist by the United s Allowing Targeted Killing of Terrorist by the United s Concerns on whether United States should be allowed to kill terrorist suspects in foreign countries have become a matter of discussion, in question, the killing of innocent people in the course. In war, the death of innocent civilians, though awful, is acceptable as a consequence. Targeted killing, in this case of the terrorist suspect, raises the question of whether terrorism is addressed as a crime or war.

Use of deadly forces against people violates both domestic and international laws meant to protect human rights (Currier, 2015). It is the right of every suspect to be convicted before being declared guilty. The action to be taken should be determined by a court of law. Killing without trial is only allowed in incidences self-defense or as a necessity to save more lives. That said target killing of terrorists, in my opinion, is an immediate necessity executed with the aim of saving more lives.

Therefore, the United States should be allowed to continue killing terrorist based on their intelligence. The benefit of targeted killing is that, unlike an arrest operation, there are fewer risks. For example, in U.S, targeted killing are mostly executed using an automated drone craft. According to Becker and Shane (2012), among the counterterrorism tactic applicable, targeted killing has proved to be the most effective in the prevention of terror attacks. A targeted killing meant to kill a leader of a terrorist organization disrupts terrorist organization’s plans to a point of collapsing.

For example, killing the Gaza military commander, Salah Shehadeh, prevented six terror attacks he planned to execute in Israel. Base on the outcome of targeted killing Obama’s regime has embraced the tactic as the most effective approach to eradication Al-Qaeda and Taliban members Afghanistan-Pakistan border. However, United States need make targeted killing acceptable in other countries by justifying the tactic. For instance, United States should not engage enforcement operations in a foreign country without their knowledge.

Doing so is a violation of peaceful relations and international norms (Taylor, 2013). The government should come up with a set of norms that support targeted killing but upholds and acknowledge the principles of peace. Additionally, the collateral damage that comes with targeted killing need to be considered. Regardless the fear of an attack plot advancing following delays to counterattack, consideration should be given to damage expected. The government need to form policies that validate all operations involved in executing a targeted killing attack.

The approval of a targeted killing operation should only be a top-level government official based on intelligence on the target (Schelling, 2015). For instance, the government must provide evidence implicating or showing that the target is associated with the act of terrorism. Secondly, the plan must put into consideration time, place, means, collateral damages, and the political consequences expected. Thirdly, the extent of the force used in targeted killing should be regulated to avoid the used of weapons of mass detraction.

Fourthly, the target must be involved in ongoing plans of attack. Finally, the targeted killing should only be carried if there is no sensible possibility of arrest the target. In conclusion, international human rights laws, as well as, the domestic law do not reject the application of deadly force towards people who are a threat to the security of the national. For instance, in response to the Israel killing Salah Shehadeh, The Human Rights Committee said that a state is justified to use deadly force after exhausting all other measures.

Additionally, no such operations should be executed for the purpose of revenge or retribution. ReferencesBecker J. and Shane Scott. (2012). Secret ‘Kill List’ Proves a Test of Obama’s Principles and Will. Retrieved From Http://Www.Nytimes.Com/2012/05/29/World/Obamas-Leadership-In-War-On-Al-Qaeda.Html?_R=0Schelling C. Thomas. (2015). Countering the Changing Threat of International Terrorism. Report of the National Commission on Terrorism. Retrieved from http://fas.org/irp/threat/commission.

htmlCurrier Cora. (2015). Cia Director Describes How The U.S. Outsources Terror Interrogations. Retrieved from https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/03/13/cia-director-explains-u-s-outsources-terror-interrogations/Taylor Guy. (2013). Intelligence Warily Watches For Threats To U.S. Now That 87 Nations Possess Drones. Retrieved from http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/nov/10/skys-the-limit-for-wide-wild-world-of-drones/?page=all