A License to Kill: Ninja 3

It is impossible to universally state whether it is right or wrong to kill a person, there will never be a defiant answer. Focusing on the death of Bin Laden, leader of Al Qaida – the extremist group who were accountable for the London bombings and 9/11, his killing was somewhat inevitable and has made the world that little bit safer.

As many of you will know, Bin Laden was the worlds most wanted, sought after terrorists. On May 2nd he was killed by US forces in Pakistan during an operation ordered by the US government.

He was responsible for killing thousands of innocent people by devising unlawful attacks and programming their execution. He left behind friends and families of loved ones and spurred on a worldwide man hunt for his capture. So when intelligence finally provide information of his whereabouts, it was in interest to the whole world the he was found and killed.

We will never know the ins and outs of the operation other than he was killed. Of course for the troops involved, it could well have been a case of kill or be killed yourself. I do believe it was the right thing to do, his killing was a minor event compared to the worldwide masscures he helped create through his terrorist actions.

(N.B: These viewpoints expressed are not necessarily my own)

Thank you for taking the time to hear me out. Please feel free to add your thoughts in the comments section below. If you agree with my views then please vote for me in the poll on the right hand side of this page.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Ninja 3.

4 comments on “A License to Kill: Ninja 3

  1. Maria Pavlova says:

    This topic is a way too controversial…first it would be good to define “terrorism” because what is seen as terrorism by one might be an action of defense according to somebody else…It’s all a matter of propaganda. What I’m trying to say is that the concept of whether killing is good or wrong depends on the point of view and the circumstances, i.e. one’s ethics, values which of course are based on the socio-economic/ political and historical background…So, that’s not the best place to discuss it – too :much writing) but good effort, well done πŸ™‚

  2. Marc Allen says:

    This is more a response to the above commenter – I think they need to think a little more about subjects in hand before leaving such ill advice to others.

    As I am sure you are aware, you cannot offer a dictionary definition of the word “Terrorism” as one does not exist! There is no unifying ‘tick sheet’ of what makes someone a terrorist one moment and a freedom fighter or revolutionary the next.

    As Bruce Hoffman (Director of the Center for Peace and Security Studies at Georgetown University’s Walsh School of Foreign Service and a specialist in the study of terrorism and counter-insurgency.)has noted:

    “terrorism is a pejorative term. It is a word with intrinsically negative connotations that is generally applied to one’s enemies and opponents, or to those with whom one disagrees and would otherwise prefer to ignore. (…) Hence the decision to call someone or label some organization ‘terrorist’ becomes almost unavoidably subjective, depending largely on whether one sympathizes with or opposes the person/group/cause concerned. If one identifies with the victim of the violence, for example, then the act is terrorism. If, however, one identifies with the perpetrator, the violent act is regarded in a more sympathetic, if not positive (or, at the worst, an ambivalent) light; and it is not terrorism”

    With this in mind it is VERY safe to say the acts initiated by Osama Bin Laden were atrocious acts of terrorism. I deem it not only completely unethical, unpatriotic and outrageous that someone could sympathise for either sheer debate, to be patronising or worse still – because they actually believe it was justified.

    Consider the feelings of someone who has been affected by terrorist activity in the UK. How do you know someone reading this doesn’t have family members or friends who died because of it? Still not convinced?

    As someone who has worked closely with very sensitive issues (Rape crisis center) I think you should personally have a little more respect for how other people may take your comments. What you have said is the same as arguing “Well, rape is okay depending on your perspective – you just have to define rape!”

    It hits home a little more then – Before writing something off as “a matter or propaganda” maybe you should look at things from a different perspective – ‘Framing’ I believe it was called, as you probably learned in the 1st year.

  3. Luke Gardner says:

    BOOM

  4. ninjapr says:

    Firstly thank you guys for your comments! It is great to see so many of you interacting with Ninja PR! Indeed this is a very controversial subject and that is the point of blogging – to be controversial!

    I find the first comment rather patronising. This blog is not defining what something means but discussing the way you perceive things and of course you can agree or disagree with the comments but actually commenting on the blogs content is irrelevant. I’m not discussing what terrorism is but simply explaining one view on the Osama Bin Laden killing issue. I agree with Marc who explains Terrorism is such a broad word that lacks an actual definition.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s