The Easy Position

The easy position to take with respect to trying to kill Zawahiri is the one the Pakistani government has chosen - if the attack is successful, they take partial credit, if the attack unsuccessful, they blame the US. People protest that we are killing innocents, etc.

Well, I certainly don't like the idea of indiscriminate bombs with collateral damage, nor do I like the idea of targeted assassinations. However, we all know that terrorists hide within civilian population precisely because we abhor killing innocents (and they do not).

Because of that, we should NOT have a blanket policy AGAINST killing innocents, that we need to balance the quality of intelligence against the number of innocents and so forth. From ever indication I've seen, we seem to keep civilian casualties to a minimum and thus, I do not have a fear that we are over bombing innocents. I think our intelligence is generally bad (compared to say Israeli intelligence in the killing of Hamas leaders), and that IS tied to how often we ought to try such things.

The other thing I've become comfortable admitting is that with respect to Al Queda, targeted assassinations are legitimate (and likely the morally correct thing to do, given the alternatives). In a war, it is obviously beneficial to kill the enemies leadership and that's precisely what we are trying to do.

A friend of mine snickered yesterday at my hope that we killed Zawahiri...the implication that it is inhumane to wish death upon someone else. Such hope about the world is a luxury I don't think we have, nor truly have ever had, that we should be strong enough to recognize an enemy when there is one, and likewise fair enough to recognize who isn't.