Killing Kaddafy - Was it Ethical?

See http://www.thejewishweek.com/features/hammerman_ethics/killing_kaddafy

Q - Was it ethical to kill Muammar Kaddafy and Osama bin Laden on the spot, apparently in cold blood, rather than arrest them and bring them to trial? Didn’t it work for Iraq to try Saddam Hussein?

A – Yes, it was ethical to kill them right then and there.

It would have been nice to bring both to trial, but in both cases, it would also have been impractical and dangerous. The trial of Saddam Hussein proved cathartic to the Iraqi people and a boost to the nascent Iraqi justice system. But in Baghdad the Americans kept watch over the prisoner and the process to keep nefarious parties at bay. Such was not the case in Libya, where Kaddafy’s compatriots were still fighting to the finish on the day he was killed. Meanwhile, bin Laden’s buddies would have gone to great lengths to disrupt a trial, likely killing, maiming and kidnapping many along the way. Who knows what his Pakistani protectors would have done.

Think about it. If one Israeli soldier was traded for a thousand unknown terrorists, how many innocents would have been kidnapped to exchange for these prize prisoners?

Since the Shalit deal, in fact, some Israelis have argued for capital punishment for terrorists. They argue that imprisonment is hardly an impediment these days, given the current “rate of exchange” of a thousand to one. But the Israeli judiciary’s dedication to due process and the lack of capital punishment should not give too much comfort to those bent on terror – because Israeli drones are not nearly so charitable, and its security services have ways of making ticking-bomb terrorists disappear. The “ticking bomb” ethical scenario has been used to justify targeted killings and torture. This approach provides ample deterrence. Still, it is comforting to know that once terrorists are taken prisoner, Israel follows the norms of civilized nations ruled by law and protects the rights of prisoners to be kept alive and given a fair trial (with one controversial exception – the Bus 300 affair in 1984).

Gone are the days of Nuremberg Trial; those postwar proceedings neatly closed the door on a genocidal era that had commenced with the racist laws enacted in the same city just over a decade before. Perfectly symmetrical – what began in Nuremburg ended there. There was no such tidy culmination for families of the victims of 9/11 or Lockerbie, with no trial for the ringleaders. But the facts of those crimes were incontrovertible long before the prime perpetrators were killed, the guilt long since proven, confessed and even boasted, without need of a trial. History will be the ultimate judge of Kaddafy and bin laden. No jury is necessary.

Killing those two likely saved many lives, so on utilitarian grounds alone these were defensible acts, especially in wartime. That Kaddafy and bin Laden were also monsters responsible for the deaths of thousands only serves to further justify their treatment. They needed to be eliminated and buried in secrecy, so that they and their movements might be simultaneously snuffed out.

Parsha Packet on bin Laden / Emor / Mother's Day / Israel

See these parsha packets distributed at services on Emor, the question of celebrating the death of bin Laden, Mother's Day and for this evening, Israel's Independence Day:

- Songs and Poetry for Yom Ha'atzmaut and Kabbalat Shabbat

- Emor packet, bin Laden

Is it Right to Celebrate Bin-Laden's Death? (Hammerman on Ethics)

Is it Right to Celebrate Bin-Laden's Death?

Q - The killing of Osama bin-Laden sent Americans out into the streets in spontaneous celebration. I saw the raucous scene outside the White House and it made me uncomfortable. Isn't it against Jewish practice to rejoice at the downfall of your enemies?

A - You're right. This topic has been the subject of much chatter in rabbinic circles this week and the Washington Post "On Faith" blog featured a wide array of responses from several faith traditions .

We were all happy, but in some places it looked like joyous celebrants were morphing into soccer hooligans. When I first heard the great news, my initial impulse was to pop the cork, but then I remembered all those drops of wine at the Seder, spilled ostensibly to temper our joy at the deaths of our Egyptian tormentors. The cork stayed on.

We read in Proverbs, "Do not rejoice when your enemy falls, and let not your heart be glad when he stumbles." (24:17). But elsewhere in the same book (11:10) we read, "When the wicked perish, there is joy." So is it OK to be happy, and if so, how?

Go to the next verse and you'll see the answer: "By the blessing of the upright a city is exalted." In other words, the true source of our joy is not simply the fall of a terrorist, but that, in our dogged pursuit of OBL, we never lowered ourselves to his level. We stayed morally upright. We pursued justice, justly.

That is precisely why President Obama made the correct ethical choice in not releasing the photos of the mutilated bin-Laden. All human beings are created in God's image and to parade a corpse, any corpse, before gawkers is undignified (which is why Jews never have open caskets). And triumphantly displaying this week's grizzly photos to the world would have lowered us to the level of those who murdered Daniel Pearl.

Yesterday I was speaking with David Meltzer, Senior Vice President of the American Red Cross, and he said that when imprisoned Middle Eastern terrorists are asked what caused their radicalization, the answer often given is "Abu Ghraib." That rare incidence when America stooped to the level of its enemies has cost us dearly. People expect more of us, and all that separates America - and Israel - from its enemies is that both nations cling tenaciously to that shaky ledge attached to the moral high ground. If we let go, we fall very far, very fast. Instead, it is best to follow the advice of the Quran (yes the Quran), "Repel the bad with something better."

The Hebrew word "simcha" means happiness, but there are ways to express "simcha" other than chugging a six pack and then standing outside the White House chanting "USA! USA!" A while back there was an interesting archaeological find in Elephantine, Egypt, a simple real estate contract from an ancient Jewish community, written in Hebrew. It read: "Upon prompt payment I deed you this land." And then a phrase that intrigued the scholars: "This simcha with joy, love, and happiness." They did a close comparative study of other documents and concluded that the meaning of simcha here is not joy, per se, but acceptance.

So yes, be happy, but it's possible to express it in ways unimaginable following a Red Sox - Yankees game. This victory is too incomplete, and the repercussions too unpredictable, to warrant a jig in Times Square. It's possible to be happy and reflective at the same time.

Right now, the best way to celebrate this victory is the way we've have done it for millennia. Go to your local synagogue and say a prayer of thanks. That's what I'll be doing.

Rabbi Joshua Hammerman is spiritual leader of Temple Beth El in Stamford, CT. Read more Hammerman on Ethics here. Read his blog here