Quote Originally Posted by rory_20_uk View Post
A lot of what the clandestine services do is legal and was sanctioned I think it was in the '70s the USA stopped doing assassinations. What's changed? They've changed the terms, not the actions.

Completely different in what way, exactly? In the case of the Armed forces, people are killed indiscriminately. For a war to be legal this has to be under a law. In the latter one person is killed under a law. And in most wars tens of thousands of people end up dead at the very least. Even if most didn't do the killing, someone did.

If it is the problem a civillian is doing the executions, then by all means get a member of the Armed Forces to do it if that makes all the difference.

The problem as I see it is that you specifically have to ask someone to be the executioner. As PVC says most soldiers (before modern training) avoided or fired because they were in a situation where it was shoot or be shot. Humans do not kill each other easily when they can look each other in the eyes. This means that if you find someone who wants to be an executioner it is probable that it would be the same kind of person who was to be executed, except one's pleasure in killing is state sanctioned while the other's is not.

It is all so fine and dandy when it is someone else who do the dirty work and you do not see the result of your decisions first hand.

If you insist on having the death penalty then it should be as with the Starks in Game of Thrones, the one who passes the verdict should also swing the blade.