The Fleet Admiral is dying of a mysterious illness. It transpires that "'...the fat Eart'ho...'" (p. 207), i.e., van Rijn, squats like an evil genius behind the sequence of events that has led to the illness. If van Rijn were your enemy and become your prisoner, then the most advisable action, from a pragmatic point of view, would be to kill him outright. The same applies to Flandry. However, since I would regard summary execution of a prisoner as immoral, I would have to take my chances. Such a dangerous prisoner would no doubt escape and wreak havoc, using intelligence gathered during his imprisonment.
4 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
Absolutely! Old Nick and Dominic Flandry would be very, very dangerous enemies and risky for any captors to keep alive. Since I share your scruples about summarily executing prisoners, I too would have to take my chances. Unless, of course, I could pass such hot potatoes along to someone else!
Hmmm, that was another cliche I used! (Smiles)
Ad astra! Sean
Personal scruples don't count when 'raison d'etat' come into the picture, because it's not a matter of you and one other person. The collectivity and its interests are in danger.
If you have a position of authority, you're not entitled to endanger those under your care and to whom you owe a duty because of personal considerations. It's as immoral as taking a bribe, and as self-indulgent.
"Duty, heavier than mountains; death, lighter than a feather."
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
You are right. When it comes to the interests and safety of the state, personal scruples should not be allowed to get in the way.
Ad astra! Sean
We have to draw a line somewhere, though. I disagree with Intelligence services using torture, for example.
Post a Comment