Tyrannicide

I personally thought before reading these articles that tyrannicide was very much so a justifiable act. My thought process as discussed in the first article was cut the head off and the body will follow in suit leading to the demise of tyranny in that country. However, after reading these articles I discovered that actually killing a tyrant is not always what is best for a nation as well as what constitutes the justifiable murder of a Tyrant leader. In my opinion, as mentioned in the readings, the only way that tyrannicide is justifiable is if it is sure to bring positive results to that nation. It is not justifiable if it is being conducted to seek vengeance. The reason being killing a tyrant can bring uncertainty into those countries making them even worse than before. Sadly, what often happens is their successor is even more extreme in their beliefs. 

This unfortunately holds true in Iraq with the falling of Saddam Hussein. It has been shown that in Iraq after Hussein’s end in power brought total chaos and anarchy has taken over the country. In the moments after his death 75 Iraqii people were killed in which Sunni’s were targeting and murdering Shiite’s. Thirteen years later the country is in even worse condition. Millions of people became refugees, a new terrorist organization called the Islamic state was founded, and the Shiite theocracy now had control over the Iraqi government. Thus proving how tyrannicide is not always the best option for a country’s success. 

Bardenwerper, Will. “Saddam Hussein’s Death Was Supposed to Mark a ‘New Era’ for Iraq. It Didn’t Last Five Minutes.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 30 Dec. 2016, https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/12/30/his-death-was-supposed-to-mark-a-new-era-for-iraq-ten-years-late-sadaam-hussein-haunts-me/.