Reprisal

[truelies]

Is it moral for a Government to deter Terrorism by carrying out a policy of executing the extended families of those caught engaging in terrorist acts? I would suggest that before answering that the respondent imagine the Terror campaign being carried out against his/her own community by that group of people the respondent most detests.

[Alonzo Fyfe]

Originally posted by truelies
Is it moral for a Government to deter Terrorism by carrying out a policy of executing the extended families of those caught engaging in terrorist acts? I would suggest that before answering that the respondent imagine the Terror campaign being carried out against his/her own community by that group of people the respondent most detests.

You're asking me if I and my parents can be legitimately executed because my stupid brother -- who I never liked anyway -- decides to take up terrorism?

What is the moral difference between this, and a bunch of terrorists taking hostages, threatening to kill them unless the government gives in to their demands?

I see none.

Punishment is for the guilty, never for the innocent.

[Epizoicism]

This question is interesting once you abandon the silly moral arguments. Now, in order to set this as a rule, the potential damage would have to be huge, and the certainty significant, as well as some inclination as to the chances of success.

But there's a bigger issue than the potential victims in an isolated example: such a rule would remove a good deal of incentive to move to the country, and would likely strengthen domestic terrorism by sewing distrust, and hatred for the government, and therefore cooperation against it, all the while not doing much at all to dissuade foreign terrorism.

Really though, the argument against it is very empirical in nature. We've seen that people don't react kindly to this sort of behaviour.

[Gothic_J]

my question would be, does it work as a deterrant? there is no use in applying it if it just worsens the situation.

[truelies]

Originally posted by Gothic_J
my question would be, does it work as a deterrant? there is no use in applying it if it just worsens the situation.

If you look at the history of executing hostages to control a population the results are very mixed. The Soviets conducted brutal reprisals against the Afgan civilian population and utterly failed to maintain control. On the otherhand a Policy of maximum brutality at the beginning of the occupation of Eastern Europe at the end of WW2 kept that population cowed until the 1990's when it started to become clear that they no longer were prepared to do whatever it took to stay in control. Cruelty can work very well in the short term to keep a Western (or other comfort accustomed) population subjugated (stunned by contact with unaccustomed brutality) but in time anger and thirst for revenge will overcome fear, IMHO.