@ossobuco,
ossobuco wrote:
I agree with you that that's possible, but I don't know enough about the actuality and have read too many novels. In real life, I've no idea. Thus I wouldn't preclude it as a scenario.
After all, we have single or multiple actors here in the US working out their obsessive gripes.
But who could get ahold of polonium? That, I estimate, narrows it way down.
I would say that the Israelis are the most likely suspects (your point about polonium access), but there has to be more proof before a title, like this thread has, is anything other than prejudice.
It's not even a sure thing that he was poisoned with polonium.
The topic of assassination has been discussed in other threads, and my view has been consistent: I don't, at all, see it as a some sort of horrifically immoral tactic.
Arafat proved time and time again that he was a very dangerous enemy of Israel and it's people. He also proved time after time that be believed terrorist murder was a legitimate tactic.
In any conflict between two large groups it makes perfect sense to take out the leaders. If they are murderous animals, then justice is served as a secondary goal. Considering the caterwauling of Israel's critics about perceived heavy-handed retailiatory strike against Palestinian terrorists that lead to civilian deaths, one would think they would applaud the precision strike of assassination with poison.
The leader dies and without any innocent collateral deaths.
Arafat was directly responsible for a great number of deaths, including those of Palestinians. That Israel was forced to treat him like the head of state of a peaceful neighboring country is utterly absurd.
The people who give the orders for killing are not only not immune to retribution, but are perfectly sensible targets. Taking them out with a polonium tipped dart is far more "civilized" than carpet bombing the street on which they live or destroying their armies and/or nations.
