Approving Assassination of Leaders Under Extreme Circumstances

At the risk of sounding naive: I agree with this (with reservations). In centralized covernments, a military confrontation has comparitively low cost to leadership – an explicit threat of assasination for non-compliance under extreme circumstances could have a better effect than economic sanctions or even a military intervention. A military intervention that places lives at risk (either that of soldiers or civilians) should be a tool of last resort after the leadership refuses to comply even given threat of physical extermination. I acknowledge that this is an extreme position, but the context in which this applies is also extreme… and, with respect to Libya, I think we have long ago crossed the threshold of “reasonable”.

If the situation becomes extreme enough that the civilized world decides to intervene, it should use all tools available to miminize loss of life.