Nimh. That analogy was purely to show the possibility that vigilantism could be a good thing. Yours amply demonstrates that it could be a bad thing. In fact, it may, and probably is, usually be a bad thing... but that doesn't mean it's always a bad thing. As far as accuracy in Iraq, mine wasn't intended to be... and yours ignores the fact that the cops wouldn't be doing any of that stuff if the four guys weren't holding him for them. They had been ignoring the guy's crimes for years. Plus, they weren't compensating the 4 guys for holding the guy, while expecting them to hold him for as long as they wished. :wink: ). I'm not copping to that amended analogy either! :wink:
Here's an old clipping from an earlier war:
Quote:July 20,1944
Hitler survives assassination attempt
Adolf Hitler has escaped death after a bomb exploded at 1242 local time at his headquarters in Rastenberg, East Prussia.
The German News Agency broke the news from Hitler's headquarters, known as the "wolf's lair", his command post for the Eastern Front.
A senior officer, Colonel Claus Schenk von Stauffenberg, has been blamed for planting the bomb at a meeting at which Hitler and other senior members of the General Staff were present.
Stauffenberg, like Rommel, wanted Hitler killed so that the war could be prosecuted more effectively towards victory, holding (reasonably) that Hitler's decisions were likely to result in Germany losing the war.
Two questions arise from this example. Was Stauffenberg acting as a 'patriot' seeking victory for Germany?
Second, what if Stauffenberg's intent had been to kill Hitler, assume power, and then end a war that was surely heading towards defeat, thus saving many German lives? Would that be a patriotic act?
Was he a traitor or a patriot to Germany in the first case? Hm... Wasn't he a Nazi? Didn't that override nationality at the time? He would have been a traitor to his party if he had succeeded in killing in such a manner. Arrest and try Hitler, perhaps then he would be a patriot to the party, but clandestine murder is a sneaky traitorous act... Jmo, fwiw.
) if the porale officer ordered an arrest warrant, would he then be able to turn judge and jurry on his own and put the poralee into jail witout any kind of due process? I don't think he could therefore it is still exactly like the case of George Bush and UN resolutions. Even if felt that those there were deciding on the poralee's guilt were not carrying out the process adequately; he still could not on his own put the poralee behind bars. Even if he felt that those that were deciding on his guilt were just standing around and letting him get away with violating his porale, he still has no authority to take matters into his own hands and become judge and jurry of not only the poralee but the people judging the poralee. And this is how it is still not like that movie of accused regardless of politics, we are talking about rules and processes and laws here and we always have been.
Oh the link is also interesting just for re-reading how McGentrix back then claimed "France was helping Saddam move his WMD's to Syria while stonewalling the US proposed resolution in the UN".
