When do assassinations of bad guys ever change anything?

Was anyone so stupid as to actually believe a show trial and
eliminating Saddam could cause utopia to break out in Iraq? Another
bloody dictator will take over as soon as we pull the troops, whether
that's in 50 days or 50 years. The only difference is the new one
will be an ally with Iran.

The book _Hitler's Willing Executioners_ pointed out over a decade ago
that Hitler had widespread support. Assassinate Hitler and another
genocidal leader would have done the exact same thing.

Nietzsche knew what would happen before Hitler was even born.

You can argue assassinating good guys like Lincoln, JFK, MLK or Rabin
makes things worse, but there is no reason to believe the converse is
true.

Society benefits by preventing assassinations. That's why we have
the
Secret Service, FBI and BATF. To keep gun nuts from popping off
gummint officials.

Bret Cahill wrote:

We took out Hitler and that's why Germany is a democracy now and and
ally. man are you dumb.

The military took out Hitler.

Assassinations had nothing to do with it.

Bret Cahill

Bret Cahill wrote:

Individualist ownership of guns and assassinations had nothing to do
with it.

Get it?

Bret Cahill

On Sep 1, 8:29 am, Bret Cahill aol.com> wrote:

Huey Long, de facto dictator of Louisiana, exercising supreme
executive power in that State even as a Senator, who associated
with extreme rightists such as Father Coughlin while bottom-fishing
with socialist rhetoric, and who was called a fascist by FDR, was
assassinated by a guy who was on his enemies list, and who he
was allegedly going to destroy with allegations of being part black.

One less demogogue to take advantage of the Depression.

Next question.

Stalin may have been assassinated by Kruschev and Beria
with poison. Result: a million less murders a year.

On Sep 1, 10:26 am, Shrikeb...@gmail.com wrote:

After all, the public sector is much better at killing, ain't it?

You know, this brings up your claim that in stateless societies
men are just as likely to be murdered (and it primarily is men
who are murdered in stateless societies -- particularly over
mates) than under the State. Nozick already pointed out
to us, though, that the worst case of the State is worse than
the the worst case of anarchy. Just look at the worst cases
of the State, and it will be clear that if such massive death
took place before the arrival of the State, the species wouldn't
have survived long enough to create the State.

Bret Cahill wrote:

Individual ownership of guns would have stopped the genocide
If they had been owned by those being killed

What is the world does individual ownership of guns have to do with
assassinations ?

On Sep 1, 11:23 am, Rodney Long charter.net> wrote:

Cahill is very worried about Stalin or Hitler types being
assassinated, because, as he put it, "protecting dictators
is more important than protecting ourselves from dictators."

On Mon, 1 Sep 2008 08:29:29 -0700 (PDT), Bret Cahill
aol.com> wrote: